identifier
stringlengths 1
43
| dataset
stringclasses 3
values | question
stringclasses 4
values | rank
int64 0
99
| url
stringlengths 14
1.88k
| read_more_link
stringclasses 1
value | language
stringclasses 1
value | title
stringlengths 0
200
| top_image
stringlengths 0
125k
| meta_img
stringlengths 0
125k
| images
listlengths 0
18.2k
| movies
listlengths 0
484
| keywords
listlengths 0
0
| meta_keywords
listlengths 1
48.5k
| tags
null | authors
listlengths 0
10
| publish_date
stringlengths 19
32
⌀ | summary
stringclasses 1
value | meta_description
stringlengths 0
258k
| meta_lang
stringclasses 68
values | meta_favicon
stringlengths 0
20.2k
| meta_site_name
stringlengths 0
641
| canonical_link
stringlengths 9
1.88k
⌀ | text
stringlengths 0
100k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 95
|
https://rmhc.org/
|
en
|
Ronald McDonald House Charities
|
[
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=988961451439449&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://px.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=1765562&fmt=gif",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Project/RMHC/Common/rmhc-logo.svg?iar=0&hash=9A6AD3716A64C32FD2D77F19EE605912",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Project/RMHC/Common/heart-small-outline.svg?iar=0&hash=5EAD25F7A81318513534476786843BA2",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Project/RMHC/Common/rmhc-logo.svg?iar=0&hash=9A6AD3716A64C32FD2D77F19EE605912",
"https://rmhc.org/Content/images/svg/search.svg",
"https://rmhc.org/Content/images/svg/search.svg",
"https://rmhc.org/Content/images/svg/search.svg",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Project/RMHC/Common/heart-small-outline.svg?iar=0&hash=5EAD25F7A81318513534476786843BA2",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Palimore-Family-story/50-Years-RMHC_Homepage-Header_2880x1280.png?h=1280&iar=0&w=2880&hash=452E6BB232D341E671B5015E857F1D0B",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/locations-96-new.png?h=96&iar=0&w=96&hash=8B3846D9339E855562AD3A944788C058",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/families-96-new.png?h=96&iar=0&w=96&hash=5CF8E0B82A3E47911784183A6171FE22",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/home-overview-icon-3.svg?iar=0&hash=E59926AF2A613054152B9CF83C8CD430",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Full---1180x52088.png?h=1040&iar=0&w=2360&hash=62A66922E24E6916A5872B7973A571B6",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Medium-Red--845x4481x13.png?h=754&iar=0&w=1692&hash=EFFED2F1F329696B57B131D9B3931E2F",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Medium-Blue845x4481x.png?h=754&iar=0&w=1692&hash=F3D90C0E943DF31F8B68137287201DAD",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Medium-Yellow845x4481x.png?h=754&iar=0&w=1692&hash=D5E2DC9DE08A05E30BBE9DDBB165F6F5",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Panel-2-Image.png?h=256&iar=0&w=360&hash=F67BE89EA788E5FD8819C601C155B400",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Panel-3-Image.png?h=256&iar=0&w=360&hash=3ECDF79184422FF494B18460506604F8",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/HomepageMap/Panel-4-Image.png?h=256&iar=0&w=360&hash=6273909B691B6B0AE0929CFEF84BA39D",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/Tiny-Images/home-promotion-1.png?h=1040&iar=0&w=2880&hash=EB83ED189053DBAB30342C8BA4E231A9",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Promotion-Block/herat-small-outline.svg?iar=0&hash=F85A685228655D9C6FC306CA733D9034",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/home-feature-1.gif",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/home-feature-1.gif",
"https://rmhc.org/content/images/svg/arrow-left.svg",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/About-Us/our-history/FamilyRoom-carousel-June.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=CC6ECBFFAEC9CEBD8E6ED28CB9BDC8FD",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/About-Us/our-history/corp-partner-carousel-June.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=B5BA6C6D0F44D3BDDDFBDB5E8F7CC07E",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/family-rooms-bring-peace/volunteers-carousel-May_480x300.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=D2485E7AAA2C7D6D422F4AF662DE3DC9",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/nourishing-body-and-souls/ORIGINAL-RMHC-Upper-Midwest.jpeg?h=466&iar=0&w=749&hash=5E064191480EE8F4ADBC4470A02122ED",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/About-Us/our-history/AR-Beacon-of-Light_480x300.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=58EE14DAB846827BB55647E90AB4B1FC",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/houses-spark-movement/Chicago_House_480x300.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=489DF3ED43108E0A8065F49939DAD36F",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/celebrate-rmhc-poland/Basia--FamResized.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=829B0B8003CCF782F82E34F97A7A109C",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/Vogelsinger-Family-Story/MicrosoftTeams-image.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=81ED0C91378784C59C75273674E6B528",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/Leah-and-Claire-Story/Leah_Claire_Gallery_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=BB0CB66C2E8A554CF93E20E49A19B272",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/Lederhausen-Family/Lederhausen_480x300.png?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=DE4B9C5642A7FFCEE18883CF1AA20A79",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Media-Center/KatieFitzgeraldCEO.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=274&hash=44C2B7341BEBF26B263325F76EA8FAC0",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Dr-Audrey-Evans/AudreyEvans_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=F221ECBCE7B11E3897FBEE6FA413B93F",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Sustainability/sustainability_preview_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=101CDACBAD1CA8423A99ADDD89DF6499",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/supporting-refugee-families/RMHCMadison_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=BEF81C94C33BEA2C7F3E71793102A517",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/Jupiter-family/robinson_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=FB258F5597FA68912A50BB5793638806",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/About-Us/Thank-you-suppliers/supplier_partners_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=AC8621E4D78D147F677B490476DA8633",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/Brown-peete-family/Brown_Peete_family_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=CE18AE7105D2FB937A68B035C3FD6A58",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Palimore-Family-story/palimore_preview_480x300.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=F290E5805983314CE697C56B5568C396",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/terry-family-story/terry-family-preview.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=C406D222A5A2E7D934C2BB806A8A439B",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/brum-lyford_540x720.jpg?h=540&iar=0&w=720&hash=9377C523848A96CA570DE9FB0FB57375",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Volunteer-Daisy/volunteer-daisy-preview.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=78DE7C546D2981825875A1F91879BC11",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/Cargill-Preview.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=E992BB580B39982147125D3E55346479",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/McBride_Preview.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=709CE32FE0E39B08BEE8D357F28407EB",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Our-Corporate-Partners/Supplier-partner-2021/hi--res-RMHC_Venezuela_CRM_preview.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=53064F9F3EEC88592F0BB9916BAE0B61",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/Aramark.jpg?h=327&iar=0&w=697&hash=89BE6FAC23DB227437DFFD3D4D6B8CD7",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/MMThompson.jpg?h=300&iar=0&w=480&hash=F54113777E03B3B291E7B3E27EAA3ED8",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/2021-leadership-plan/2021_plan_thumb.jpg?h=342&iar=0&w=512&hash=1511F9AF82FA2436F7BE1308F28A763C",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Family-Stories/Jao-Family/122b5c7d-66d6-46c1-ba49-30ee8d35a1a9.png?h=179&iar=0&w=300&hash=1167AD00C8E45FB8E3A724CB4FEA0DD0",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Vasco-Family/vasco_articlepreview.png?h=224&iar=0&w=376&hash=926131C43450D8A58914E73051224E6B",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Jolivard-Family/jolivard_articlepreview.png?h=224&iar=0&w=376&hash=87CCB15CEDF44D14F564FAC85E7F477A",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Ledvina-Family/ledvina_articlepreview.png?h=224&iar=0&w=376&hash=0E29BEC5D0925C9C783F2E35BB6B0D1B",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Homepage/article_preview_news.png?h=224&iar=0&w=376&hash=225CDEAE39CF12772493D75931266B8E",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Burrell-Family/burrell_articlepreview.png?h=224&iar=0&w=376&hash=25C28FCBAB8420AD83618C08C3CFE6FF",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/De-Araujo-Moeira-Family/dearaujomoreira_article_preview.png?h=224&iar=0&w=376&hash=646490D9FE8CE927C9C9CE7DD504C84A",
"https://rmhc.org/content/images/svg/arrow-right.svg",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Announcement-Bar/host-a-fundraiser.svg?iar=0&hash=C2E0CCB467E3F5B0F4934E1E128B8FB6",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Project/RMHC/Common/heart-small-outline.svg?iar=0&hash=5EAD25F7A81318513534476786843BA2",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-facebook.svg?iar=0&hash=F7BFCBC04621917B8BB23BFF10DE500A",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-facebook-hover.svg?iar=0&hash=889DF6FCB33E599F9E13680F487529E7",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-instagram.svg?iar=0&hash=F03D39D2A1C28827E410B4F1BC316A79",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-instagram-hover.svg?iar=0&hash=589530DB46A6078E6F97978F15B04D83",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-linkedin.svg?iar=0&hash=EC68929D9B5474774551C44A2047B895",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-linkedin-hover.svg?iar=0&hash=741DC02E79E2AA2A94C830BF2609D3E8",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-youtube.svg?iar=0&hash=148DDA27D3975AA3CDC50C7325F8A0E9",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC/Social-Media-Follow/icons-social-handdrawn-youtube-hover.svg?iar=0&hash=DF9A937AF0AF4ADE900CFEF04043B1E4",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Project/RMHC/Common/heart-small-outline.svg?iar=0&hash=5EAD25F7A81318513534476786843BA2",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Logos/AccreditedCharity-ReverseWhite-Horizontal-URL-(1).png?h=87&iar=0&w=190&hash=DB62D1701370FD0CDD4F35F876BC3E94",
"https://rmhc.org/-/media/Feature/RMHC-Production-Images/Logos/Four-Star-Rating-Badge---Full-Color.png?h=100&iar=0&w=100&hash=B02092F914FF52E5A981AFD0D8ABF92A"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Ronald McDonald House Charities: a nonprofit family & children's charity dedicated to supporting families with sick children in their time of need.
|
en
|
https://rmhc.org/
|
Families have a peaceful place to decompress right in the hospital.
Corporate Partner employees help support RMHC families worldwide.
RMHC volunteers are essential to helping strengthen families.
“The meals nourished our souls in the way only food prepared with love can.”
Some Ronald McDonald House programs include a special guiding light for families.
The Marinos dreamed of a space in Chicago where parents could stay knowing their child was nearby.
“…time is the most important factor when it comes to health! That’s why preventive care is so important!”
“RMHC will always hold a place in our hearts...”
While their treatments lead both their families to the same city, RMHC led Leah and Claire to the friendship they both needed.
Supporting RMHC for 30+ years
Ronald McDonald House Charities (RMHC) Announces Katie Fitzgerald as New President and CEO
Celebrating Dr. Audrey Evans and her legacy.
RMHC is committed to making family-centered spaces more sustainable for generations to come.
“Having already endured trauma during the evacuation from Afghanistan, keeping the families together was our top priority.”
“The Ronald McDonald House was extraordinary. The staff was extremely kind and it truly is a home away from home.”
These partners and their consistent steadfast support is essential to our ability to help families around the world feel at home…even when they can’t be.
“It was great to all be together when my brother was sick. When we visited him at the hospital, he was always smiling and happy to see us.”
“RMHC helps keep families together and feel supported throughout their journey.”
“Sophia and Yuri found a community of support in other families going through similar situations.”
“It was such a relief because the girls were very compromised in the beginning and it just allowed us to focus on them.”
“The smiles on their faces were priceless and motivated me to continue volunteering.”
“We are grateful to be able to count committed partners like Cargill®.”
“When Juliana was hospitalized, we could rest knowing we were just steps away from her hospital bed thanks to RMHC.”
"Thankfully, our valued partners recognize that now more than ever, the RMHC system is reliant on their support."
“Aramark’s generous donation is helping RMHC families during this challenging time.”
“Ray Kroc Heritage Society donors continue the legacy of Ray Kroc, in whose memory RMHC was founded.”
“I am honored to be entrusted with leadership of this truly superb organization.”
"I have to be here by her side."
“We found more than a roof over our head, we found our family."
“This is more than a place to sleep and eat…a place to be supported together.”
“The reason I run for Team RMHC…”
Ronald McDonald House Charities President and CEO Sheila Musolino Announces Retirement.
“The gift of being together just makes you feel like you’re going to be okay.”
“We found comfort in spending time with family and newfound friends.”
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 36
|
https://warthunder.com/en/news/8919-development-dutch-and-belgian-aircraft-are-joining-the-french-tree-en
|
en
|
[Development] Dutch and Belgian Aircraft are Joining the French Tree!
|
[
"https://mc.yandex.ru/watch/21262261",
"https://warthunder.com/en/news/NGUyMTcyM/WU1OTlkOT?_1723552309",
"https://warthunder.com/i/bg-fon/site_theme_seek_and_destroy_desert_warrior.webp?v=b5632172",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2024/5_May/Benelux/460x259_01_mirage_5ba_8513f50574e6b39e8d8a9943cae672a3.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2024/5_May/Benelux/460x259_02_mirage_5ba_a2155f43445cc0ce7cb73943f4b5b189.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2024/5_May/Benelux/460_04_fokker_g1a_eca41153596d7e36a364b388739aa997.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2024/5_May/Benelux/460_02_fokker_g1a_e8ad292d3eeb3c209d7c8165e0a1a8b8.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2022_Anons/Aircraft/_thumbs/280x157/anons_378_f_14a_iriaf_733fb66aea9f45c41e632bd592e1bb3a_280x157_ee1c8ff87418ebb035726f35dbbbfbc1.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2022_Anons/Navy/_thumbs/280x157/anons_378_it_albatros_class_f544_7fc09fcea903e9b3e071b5910a851323_280x157_9069e6f9d94b34c54f9bb3f8eb8c7b60.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2022_Anons/Ground/_thumbs/280x157/anons_378_il_sholef_7cf0c44815e44c61134d07024e152a91_280x157_5c0813c4759e30517c2f27383f774e05.jpg",
"https://staticfiles.warthunder.com/upload/image/0_2022_Anons/Aircraft/_thumbs/280x157/anons_378_pbm_5a_87e1d67cd458a8fe6c1859a4ae960f1b_280x157_beb36583a671071119b1576c0072a2a9.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Play for free with friends in the most realistic online game
|
en
|
https://warthunder.com/i/favicons/favicon.ico
|
https://warthunder.com/en/news/8919-development-dutch-and-belgian-aircraft-are-joining-the-french-tree-en
|
The Belgian Air Force was officially formed in 1946, but operated as a branch of the Belgian Army as early as 1909! Despite this early formation, Belgium had a relatively small air force during the First World War due to a general lack of available aircraft, despite this though the small force boasted several aces.
During the outbreak of the Second World War, Belgium was similarly equipped with only a small force of older designs, which couldn’t stand up to the far more numerous Luftwaffe fighters. Despite the surrender on May 28th 1940, a small group of Belgian pilots in exile operated with the RAF, flying Spitfires and Typhoons.
Into the jet age, Belgium flew a variety of famous examples throughout the years, and currently operate several variants of the much loved F-16, as well as brand-new F-35.
Similarly to Belgium, the Royal Netherlands Air Force was formed in 1953, but operated as a branch of the army from 1913. As the Netherlands remained neutral during the First World War their air activity during this time was primarily spent on training and the general growth of the air branch.
During the German invasion of the Netherlands in the Second World War, the Royal Netherlands Air Force was overwhelmed by the superior numbers of the Luftwaffe, losing all of their combat aircraft and the vast majority of their pilots as well. A number of Dutch pilots escaped however, and flew in RAF and RAAF service until the end of the War. Pilots of the Dutch colonies in the East Indies actively resisted the Japanese air force, and then continued fighting as part of the Australian Air Force.
After the Royal Netherlands Air Force was officially founded, the ranks of their service aircraft were filled with a wide variety of American and British planes, with their types upgrading and improving over time to suit modern requirements.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 37
|
https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_bases/leeuwarden.htm
|
en
|
Air Forces Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmacht)
|
[
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_head.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_logo.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Netherlands",
"Dutch",
"air",
"force",
"RNLAF",
"Nederland",
"Luchtmacht",
"Royal",
"Koninklijke",
"NATO",
"Europe",
"Leeuwarden",
"Twenthe",
"Volkel",
"military",
"aviation",
"air arm",
"armed",
"forces",
"F-16",
"NF-5",
"C-130",
"KDC-10",
"Fokker",
"Cougar",
"Chinook",
"BO-105",
"F-35",
"JSF",
"aircraft",
"milavia"
] | null |
[
"Niels Hillebrand"
] | null |
Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) with information, history, airbases, inventory and dedicated picture gallery.
| null |
Airbases/Stations: Leeuwarden AB
Leeuwarden air base is located in the northern province of Friesland, as the name suggests the base is in close proximity to the provinces capital city of Leeuwarden. The airbases history can be traced back to 1938 when the glider field was officially opened as Leeuwarden airfield. In those years, the field was primarily used by the KLM airlines until the German invasion in May 1940. The Germans quickly recognized the fields strategic location and transformed the basic field into a proper fighter base for the Luftwaffe. After having been abandoned and mostly demolished by the Germans in September 1944, the base was rebuilt and officially named Vliegbasis Leeuwarden (Leeuwarden airbase) in 1949. Concurrently Leeuwarden became the home of the RNLAFs first jet fighter, the Gloster Meteor. By 1956 it was joined by the Hawker Hunter. These early jets were flown by 324, 325, and 326 Squadron. When in 1964 the new F-104 Starfighter arrived at Leeuwarden, the historically significant 322 and 323 squadrons (former RAF squadron numbers for the Dutch squadrons flying with the RAF during the 2nd World War) were re-established to fly the 104. Besides the fighter-jets, Leeuwarden became the home of the air forces sole SAR unit, 303 Squadron. The unit was established at Soesterberg airbase, but moved in 1977 to Leeuwarden because of the bases close proximity to the weapon ranges on the northern islands.
In 1979, the first two F-16s arrived at Leeuwarden to start the replacement of the F-104. 322 Squadron became the first operational F-16 squadron of the RNLAF in October 1980, 323 Squadron followed one year later. In late 1993, the SAR unit received its first AB-412SP to replace the Alouette III, becoming fully operational in May 1994 with three helicopters of the new type. In addition to the traditional SAR and Tactical Air Rescue tasks, the unit also provides transportation of patients from the island to the mainlands hospitals.
Leeuwarden air base is home to the Future Weapon Instructor Training (FWIT) course for the EPAF nations that are participating in the F-16 Mid-Life Upgrade program. Leeuwarden also hosts exercise Frisian Flag, a large scale annual flying exercise which has seen the participation of many European air forces, even including Finland, and also the US Navy and USAF attended some editions.
In close proximity to the North Sea and the Vliehors weapons range, Leeuwarden air base probably has a secure future as RNLAF fighter base and will welcome the F-35 Lightning II in a few years as the fifth fighter type to be based there in its history.
|
|||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 62
|
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng%3Fi%3D001-122255
|
en
|
European Court of Human Rights
|
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/images/Icons/ECHRfavicon.ico
|
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/images/Icons/ECHRfavicon.ico
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The HUDOC database provides access to the case-law of the Court (Grand Chamber, Chamber and Committee judgments and decisions, communicated cases, advisory opinions and legal summaries from the Case-Law Information Note), the European Commission of Human Rights (decisions and reports) and the Committee of Ministers (resolutions)
|
/images/Icons/ECHRfavicon.ico
| null | |||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 96
|
https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/denmark/
|
en
|
The World Factbook
|
[
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/e3d00f514ec94f9307d0ec06c5a7ea65/be79d/DA_003_large.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/e3d00f514ec94f9307d0ec06c5a7ea65/be79d/DA_003_large.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/041c62d3d4b748f4550d576057b0f611/b72f6/DA-flag.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/041c62d3d4b748f4550d576057b0f611/b72f6/DA-flag.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/0738d1b38f1a7fe427fb89d49d1787ce/94c48/DA-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/0738d1b38f1a7fe427fb89d49d1787ce/94c48/DA-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/60dc9799525b6052e987425e45980332/c4029/DA-locator-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/60dc9799525b6052e987425e45980332/c4029/DA-locator-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/fa649a07677e3a9551916a3d86d76d59/7afa1/DA_area.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/fa649a07677e3a9551916a3d86d76d59/7afa1/DA_area.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/8cbe8c1baea70e5977d8fbc1727e7797/15d60/DA_popgraph2023.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/8cbe8c1baea70e5977d8fbc1727e7797/15d60/DA_popgraph2023.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
/the-world-factbook/favicon-32x32.png?v=c3853bf09f084a8b1f66c6c2685054a1
| null |
Demographic profile
Modern immigration to Denmark began in the 1960s and 1970s, although immigration, primarily from the Nordic countries and Western Europe, has earlier roots. Dutch migrants came in the 16th century and Germans in the 18th, in both cases to work in agriculture. Between the late 19th century and World War I, Denmark absorbed unskilled Polish, German, and Swedish labor migrants in significant numbers, sometimes at the request of the Danish Government. Between the two World Wars, Denmark received many Eastern European, Jewish, and German migrants. It wasnât until after World War II, that refugees began seeking sanctuary in Demark, including a large number of German refugees and later Hungarians, Czechs, and Polish Jews. Denmark also imported foreign labor during the 1960s, mainly from Turkey, the former Yugoslavia, and Pakistan. Although the âguest workerâ program was halted in 1973, immigrants continued to arrive to be reunited with family members who were already in Denmark as refugees or as guest workers. Non-European refugees came from Chile, Uganda, and Vietnam. In the 1990s, Denmark began receiving migrants and refugees from new places, including Russia, Hungary, Bosnia, Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon. Despite raising more restrictions on immigration, in the 2000s, Denmark continued to receive asylum seekers, particularly from Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and the former Yugoslavia, as well as labor migrants from new EU member states.Â
In more recent years, Denmark has severely limited its refugee intake, aiming to accept as few refugees outside of the UN resettlement program as possible. In the mid-2010s, Denmark passed legislation enabling it to withdraw temporary protective status as soon as conditions in the home country, as determined by Denmark, have improved. This policy has lead Denmark, to deem Damascus and other areas in Syria safe for return, making it the only country in Europe to do so. Consequently, some Syrian refugees have had their residency status revoked, and they are detained in deportation centers because Denmark does not have diplomatic relations with Syria and, therefore, cannot send them back. Copenhagen hopes its stricter policies will discourage asylum seekers, particularly those from non-Western countries.
Flag description
red with a white cross that extends to the edges of the flag; the vertical part of the cross is shifted to the hoist side; the banner is referred to as the Dannebrog (Danish flag) and is one of the oldest national flags in the world; traditions as to the origin of the flag design vary, but the best known is a legend that the banner fell from the sky during an early-13th century battle; caught up by the Danish king before it ever touched the earth, this heavenly talisman inspired the royal army to victory; in actuality, the flag may derive from a crusade banner or ensign
note: the shifted cross design element was subsequently adopted by the other Nordic countries of Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden, as well as by the Faroe Islands
Telecommunication systems
general assessment: Denmark has one of the highest broadband subscription rates globally, with a near universal availability of super-fast connections; extensive cable and DSL infrastructure has been supported by a progressive regulatory regime which has encouraged operator access to both copper and fiber networks; fiber networks have a fast-growing footprint, while a number of community and metropolitan schemes have supplemented their own commitments to build out fiber nationally; a number of wholesale fiber schemes have also added to the wider availability of fiber broadband; the reach of LTE infrastructure is comprehensive, while the Mobile Network Operators by mid-2021 had also provided about 90% population coverage with 5G; services based on 5G were initially launched using trial 3.5GHz licenses; the multi-spectrum auction held in April 2021 has enabled them to improve the resilience and capacity of 5G; all MNOs are engaged in closing down their 3G networks and repurposing spectrum for LTE and 5G use (2021)
domestic: fixed-line roughly 12 per 100 and about 124 per 100 for mobile-cellular subscriptions (2021)
international: country code - 45; landing points for the NSC, COBRAcable, CANTAT-3, DANICE, Havfrue/AEC-2, TAT-14m Denmark-Norway-5 & 6, Skagenfiber West & East, GC1, GC2, GC3, GC-KPN, Kattegat 1 & 2 & 3, Energinet Lyngsa-Laeso, Energinet Laeso-Varberg, Fehmarn Balt, Baltica, German-Denmark 2 & 3, Ronne-Rodvig, Denmark-Sweden 15 & 16 & 17 & 18, IP-Only Denmark-Sweden, Scandinavian South, Scandinavian Ring North, Danica North, 34 series of fiber-optic submarine cables link Denmark with Canada, Faroe Islands, Germany, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Russia, Sweden, US, and UK; satellite earth stations - 18 (6 Intelsat, 10 Eutelsat, 1 Orion, 1 Inmarsat (Blaavand-Atlantic-East)); note - the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden) share the Danish earth station and the Eik, Norway, station for worldwide Inmarsat access (2019)
Military service age and obligation
18 years of age for compulsory and voluntary military service; conscripts serve an initial training period that varies from 4 to 12 months depending on specialization; former conscripts are assigned to mobilization units; women eligible to volunteer for military service; in addition to full time employment, the Danish military offers reserve contracts in all three branches (2023)
note 1: women have been able serve in all military occupations, including combat arms, since 1988; as of 2022, they made up about 9% of the military's full-time personnel; in 2024, Denmark announced that it would extend military conscription to women in 2026
note 2: conscientious objectors can choose to instead serve 6 months in a non-military position, for example in Beredskabsstyrelsen (dealing with non-military disasters like fires, flood, pollution, etc.) or overseas foreign aid work
note 3: foreigners who have lived in Denmark for at least 1 year or in another EU country for 6 years may apply to join the armed forces, provided they are fluent in DanishÂ
note 4: Denmark has had compulsory military service since 1849
Military - note
the Danish Armed Forces (Forsvaret) have a variety of missions, including enforcing the countryâs sovereignty, monitoring Danish waters and airspace, search and rescue, environmental protection, host nation support for alliance partners, international peacekeeping, fulfilling Denmarkâs commitments to NATO, and providing assistance to the police for border control, guard tasks, air surveillance, and during national disasters and other emergencies
NATO has been a cornerstone of Danish security and defense police since it joined in 1949 as one of the organizationâs original members under the North Atlantic Treaty (also known as the Washington Treaty); the Forsvaret regularly exercises with NATO allies and participates in a number of NATO missions, including its Enhanced Forward Presence in Eastern Europe, air policing in the Baltics, naval operations in the Baltic Sea and North Atlantic, and an advisory mission in Iraq; the Forsvaret leads NATOâs Multinational Division â North (inaugurated 2019), a headquarters based in Latvia that supports the defense planning of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and the coordination of regional military activities, including NATOâs forward deployed forces; it also takes part in other international missions for Europe and the UN ranging from peacekeeping in Africa to protecting Europe's external borders by patrolling the Mediterranean Sea in support of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency; Denmark is a member of the EU and voted to join the EUâs Common Defense and Security Policy in a June 2022 referendum; the Forsvaret cooperates closely with the militaries of other Nordic countries through the Nordic Defense Cooperation (NORDEFCO; established 2009), which consists of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden in such areas as armaments, training and exercises, and operations; it also has a joint composite special operations command with Belgium and the Netherlands
the Defense Command is Denmark's overall military command authority for land, air, and naval operations, although the Army, Air Force, and Navy also have their own individual service commands; an Arctic Command protects the sovereignty of Denmark in the Arctic region, including the Faroe Islands and Greenland, and conducts maritime pollution prevention, environmental monitoring, fishery inspections, search and rescue, and hydrographical surveys, plus support to governmental science missions; there is also a joint service Special Operations Command, which includes the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol, an elite unit that patrols the most remote parts of northeast Greenland (2024)
Space program overview
a member of the European Space Agency (ESA) and fully integrated within its structure; participates in ESA programs, particularly those linked to human spaceflight and satellite-based remote sensing activities, as well as technology programs involving telecommunications and navigation; independently builds and operates satellites, particularly those with meteorological, science, technology, and signal/traffic monitoring capabilities; conducts research and development of such technologies as measurement and instrumentation systems, microwaves, remote sensing, electromagnetic systems, astrophysics, geomagnetism, etc.; in addition to cooperating with the ESA and EU, as well as bi-laterally with member states, it has relations with the space agencies and industries of Canada, India, Japan, and the US (2024)
note: further details about the key activities, programs, and milestones of the countryâs space program, as well as government spending estimates on the space sector, appear in the Space Programs reference guide
|
|||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 60
|
https://ronaldderoij.photo/history-of-the-royal-netherlands-air-force/service-history-of-the-f-84f-with-the-rnlaf/
|
en
|
Service history of the F-84F with the RNLAF
|
[
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/cropped-cropped-3371.jpg",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-169_f-84f_315-sqn_rnlaf.jpg",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-255_f-84f_315-sqn_rnlaf.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-238_f-84f_315-sqn_rnlaf.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-231_f-84f_314-sqn_01-07-1968_soeterberg_rnlaf.jpg?w=150",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2018-09-09T17:43:43+00:00
|
The Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was introduced in 1949, as a competitor to North American Aviation's F-86 "Sabre". The "F" model differs from the other models in that its wings are swept back forty degrees; its tail and elevator are swept back and it has a smaller canopy and redesigned windscreen. Although the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak …
|
en
|
https://s1.wp.com/i/favicon.ico
|
Ronald's photo site
|
https://ronaldderoij.photo/history-of-the-royal-netherlands-air-force/service-history-of-the-f-84f-with-the-rnlaf/
|
The Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was introduced in 1949, as a competitor to North American Aviation’s F-86 “Sabre”. The “F” model differs from the other models in that its wings are swept back forty degrees; its tail and elevator are swept back and it has a smaller canopy and redesigned windscreen. Although the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was a modified Republic F-84E Thunderjet, it only utilized fifteen percent of its ancestor’s airframe. With the addition of swept wings and tail, and improved engines, the new aircraft matched anything flying in 1954.
The Republic F-84F Thunderstreak became the front line fighter bomber of NATO throughout the 1950’s. The original production schedule for the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak that was prepared in August of 1950 called for the first deliveries to be made by the autumn of 1951. But serious production problems with the airframe and the engine delayed the delivery so badly that a straight-winged Republic F-84G Thunderjet was developed as a stop-gap measure, the first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was delivered to the USAF at the end of 1952.
Delivery to the Royal Netherlands Air Force
The delivery to the Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmachtor KLu) was a direct result of a decision that was made during a NATO meeting in in Lisbon in 1951 where it was decided that the Royal Netherlands Air Force would create two tactical air wings operating the Republic F-84 at first with the E and G model Thunderjet and on a later date with the Republic F-84 F Thunderstreak. The wings would eventually be created at Volkel and Eindhoven air base, with the aircraft being delivered via the Mutual Defence Assistance Program (MDAP).
The Royal Netherlands Air Force received onehundred and eighty Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks via the MDAP with the first arriving in the Merwehaven at Rotterdam on the sixth of November 1955. These planes were transported by road to Avio-Diepen at air base Ypenburg for reassembly and flight testing. These transport occurred by night over the highway to minimise the impact on the traffic. A hundred and three were delivered by cargo ships and aircraft carriers; the other seventy seven were flown from the USA to the airbases of Volkel and Eindhoven via the so called “High Flight”route.
In the first years of their operational life the Royal Netherlands Air Force Republic F-84F Thunderstreak were painted silver. They all got a registration, beginning with P-. As the Republic RF-84F Thunderflash were registered as P-1 to P-24, the Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks started with P-101. It seems to be logical that the last registration had to be P-280, but due to a mistake the registration were P-101 to P-277 and P-298 to P-300.
In the fifties the Royal Netherlands Air Force used the British system of squadron codes; eachsquadron within the West European Union had its own unique code. Forexample, 311 squadron at Volkel used PP-, so the second delivered Republic F-84F Thunderstreak got the code PP-2 on the nose and the registration (P-121)and USAF serial number (52-7189) on the tail. When an aircraft changed squadron, the squadron code had too be changed as a result, so most of the Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks have used several different squadron codes.
The First squadron to resave the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was 311 squadron in November 1953.
Operational history
311 squadron was the first to be operational with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak. The first Aircraft, registered P-103, was delivered November 29, 1955; the last and 25th Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, registered P-239, was delivered June 20, 1956. In March 1956 the first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were delivered to 312 and 313 squadron. 312 squadron received the last Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, registered P-235, on June 12, 1956. March 9, 1955 313 squadron received the first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, P-214. Because of delay of the delivery of the rest of the aircraft, eight examples were loaned from 312 squadron, so the Thunderjet could be withdrawn from use.
At the end of 1956 the last Republic F-84F Thunderstreak for 313 squadron were delivered, so its strength was 25 aircraft. 314 squadron received its first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, registered P-212, on May 1, 1956; its last example, P-161, was delivered just three months later. 314 squadron was part of the so called Allied Command Europe Mobile Forces (ACEMF) and was on a regular basis detached in Denmark and Norway. April 28, 1956 the first Streak, P-205 for 315 squadron arrived. In September the squadron received its 27th and last Republic F-84F Thunderstreak.
In the meantime two Streaks were written off due to accidents. May 1970 315 squadron was moved to air base Twenthe for the conversion to the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter. The remaining Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were handed over to 314 squadron. On July 27, 1956 the first three Streaks, P-157, P-166 and P-186 were delivered to 316 squadron and the last one was delivered in 1957. Strangely in January 1958 the squadron was abolished again, because due to accidents twenty-two Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s had been written of and over thirty aircraft were in maintenance. The aircraft of the squadron were handed over to the other squadrons.
June 1958, 313 squadron was merged with the Jacht Vlieg School. Its Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were handed over to the other four CTL squadrons (Commando Tactische Luchtstrijdkrachten = Tactical Command). Squadrons 311 and 312 squadron converted to the Lockheed F-104G Starfighter in 1964 – 1965. One hundred and fifteen Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were left for two squadrons.
These Republic F-84F Thunderstreak were of different modification standards, so it was decided to withdraw the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak 60-RE and earlier. On demand of the US twenty of these aircraft were handed over to Turkey. In 1970 both squadrons exchanged their Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s for the Northrop Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter.
Show aircraft.
Despite its poor flying capabilities the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was used by several display teams, such as the famous US team ‘Thunderbirds’. Also in the Netherlands several display teams used the Republic F-84FThunderstreak, such as the “Dash Four” team of 1956 and the “Red Noses-team.
In 1963 there was a team of 315 squadron “Sandbag Diamond” with four Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s plus one solo. Very little is known about this team.
A well-known team, which never flew an official display, was the “Whiskey Four 67″ of squadron 314. Seven aircraft had the special scheme applied. Because of an accident killing the pilot during a training flight the team was dismissed shortly before its first official display.
In 1970 314 squadron raised a team, called “The Rascals” which displayed several times. In 1971 the team flew with the successor of the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, the Northrop Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter.
Squadrons equipped with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak
311 squadron
In preparation for the arrival of MDAP Thunder-jets, the airfield at Volkel, which had been constructed during the war to house Luftwaffe units, was rebuilt during 1950 and handed over to the Luchtstrijdkrachten (LSK) on 3 April 1951. At this time, four F-84E Thunderjets were on strength, and on 1 May these formed 311 Squadron, with ‘PP- ‘ codes. Deliveries progressed slowly, and by September 18 had been delivered. Seven transferred to 312 Squadron in January 1952, but between April and June 311 Squadron re-equipped with the F-84G (serialsK-22 to K-40), and their remaining E variants were withdrawn for conversion to reconnaissance configuration.
Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s began to arrive in Holland in mid-1955, and once they had been assembled the first batch was handed over by the US Ambassador on December 9th , with 311 Squadron as the recipient. In the days of the Thunderjet, 311 Squadron had flown an aerobatic team, the ‘Skyblazers’, only a few months after receiving their first aircraft, and this precedent was followed by the ‘Dash 4’ team, established early in 1956.The four aircraft gave their first public display at an open day at Soesterberg, and later in the year went on to win an aerobatic competition at Las Vegas, Nevada.
With the exception of the British and American air forces, the remainder of NATO’s aircraft strength was restricted to operations in the conventional role. However, on 1 July 1960, 311 Squadron became the first tactical nuclear strike unit outside of these two air arms, carrying the atomic weapon in place of one external fuel tank for release in a LABS manoeuvre. Retirement for the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s was signalled by the arrival of the first Starfighters at Volkel in June 1964. On September the 18th 1965 the last four Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s of 311 squadron were transferred to Eindhoven AB, marking the end of this type with 311 Squadron.
312 Squadron
The second Thunderjet squadron in the Luchtstrijdkrachten, 312 formed on1 December 1951 and its first seven aircraft transferred from 311Squadron, also at Volkel, the next month. The code letters ‘DU- ‘ were allocated to the new equipment, together with the radio call sign ‘Bonzo’. The G versions of the Thunderjet soon arrived with 312 Squadron and remained in use until 1956.
In January of 1955 the squadron started its conversion to the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak . On April 3th 1956, the squadron made its first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak flight and returned its ‘Jets to the USAF. Together with its sister squadron,311 it formed a joint aerobatic team which existed until 1958.
Following the absorption of 313 Squadron into the Jachtvliegeropleiding(JVO), the F-84F Operationele Conversie Curses (Operational Conversion Course) was transferred to 312 Squadron in January 1959, where it remained until October 1961, when 315 Squadron took on the task.
Having previously been one of the first squadrons to accept any new equipment, 312 was the last Royal Netherlands Air Force unit to convert to the Starfighter(mostly second-hand examples from other units), and transferred its last Streaks to Eindhoven on 1 December 1965.
313 squadron
The history of 313 squadron traces back to 1952 when the first T-33 T-birds where delivered to Volkel AB. At first as a base flight but as the number of aircraft being used grew the flight was transformed in 311squadron on the first of December 1953 at Volkel AB.
In the first period the squadron operated a mix of aircraft consisting off, the T-33 T-bird , Harvard and some F-84G Thunderjets. As more Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s come available 313 squadron exchanged its Republic F-84G Thunderjets for the newer type in1956. With the centralisation of the jet training at Woensdrecht AB the squadrons also makes the move to Woensdrecht AB in 1958, during this transition the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s are transferred to 312Squadron. At the end of the year when the squadron has transferred its remaining aircraft to the “Jachtvliegopleiding” it is dissolved at the first of January 1959
The squadron was re-established at Twenthe AB on 12-10-72, flying the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter in the training role it took over, from the 315 Squadron. This made the squadron responsibility for the operational conversion of pilots returning from advanced training in the USA and Canada with Theatre Operational Conversions Courses (TOCC) followed by Advanced Operational Courses (AOC)to adjust to European operations (weather) and weapons usage.
314 Squadron
Created in 1952 at Eindhoven AB the squadron started on the F-84G Thunderjet with four aircraft in the beginning the strength steadily grew as more aircraft where delivered till the squadron was on strength with twenty-five aircraft in 1953.
The first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s where delivered to the squadron in 1956at the moment the squadron started its transition to the new type. In this year the squadron delivered many of its F-84G Thunderjet to NATO allies like Portugal and Turkey , the last flight of a F-84GThunderjet was made on August the 23th 1956 during a flight to Ypenburg AB.
During 1956 the last of the twenty-five Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s for the squadron was delivered and the squadron was full operational on the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s. In de following years the squadron would become part of the Allied Command Europe Mobile Force resulting in the first rotation to Norway in 1959 with many to follow.
At the moment of the introduction of the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter the squadron was part of the NATO Allied Mobile Force and deployed with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s for the last time in January 1970.
The arrival of the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter started the withdrawal off the RepublicF-84F’s witch was officially withdrawn from service on the 21th of December 1970.
315 Squadron
Formed at Eindhoven on 25 June 1952 as the second of three Thunderjet squadrons in the local wing, with 25 aircraft coded ‘TB- ‘. In 1956 the squadron followed the lead set by 314 Squadron and re-equipped with Thunderstreaks, disposing of its last Thunderjet on 23 August 1956.
The unit took up a training role on 1 October 1961, when a joint intake of Belgian and Dutch pilots heralded the commencement of a unified training scheme, whereupon 315 Squadron took over the five-month Operational Conversion Course (OCC) from 312 Squadron. Under the mutual scheme (see VVS, ‘Belgian Military Aviation’ page 37), basic training was given at Gilze-Rijen (NL) and Goetsenhoven (B), after which the two streams merged to pass through Brustem (B), Woensdrecht (NL), and ultimately Eindhoven. Types used were the Fokker S.1 1, Stampe SVAB/C,Fouga Magister, T-33A and F-84F.
Large-scale use of the Thunderstreak ensured a rapid flow of pupils through Eindhoven, one new course every five months.
When in 1965 311 and 312 Squadrons at Volkel received Starfighters, the Thunderstreaks of 314 and 315 Squadrons (all 1952 vintage) were returned to the USAF for the use of other NATO countries, and the newer (1953)Volkel examples went to 315 and 316 in their stead.
Replacement came at last in December 1969, when the first Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter arrived at Twenthe, and 315 left its Thunderstreaks at Eindhoven on 1 May 1970 to take up residence at its new home. The squadron was given the responsibility of being the F-5A training unit, prior to 313 Squadron at the same base adopting the task.
316 squadron
With the establishment of 316 squadron in 1953 at Eindhoven AB the local wing was completed , operating twenty-five F-84G Thunderjets coded from’TC-1′ upwards, and functioning as a “maandvlieg” reserve squadron, tasked with keeping former pilots “airworthy”.
Although disbanded in March 1955, 316 Squadron was reactivated on 1August 1956, this time as a regular unit with the F-84F Thunderflash, which it flew until deactivated on 15 January 1958. This premature disbandment was in order to keep the other units flying the F-84FThunderflash up to strength, as twenty of the type had already been written off.
In May 1971, 314 Squadron and its Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter As left Eindhoven for Gilze-Rijen, where on 1 June it was split to form a new 316 Squadron. After transferring to Eindhoven, the squadron continued to work up on its allocation of twenty-two NF-5A and six Canadair NF-5B Freedom Fighter, but made a permanent move back to Gilze-Rijen on 27 April 1972, becoming operational there the next year.
The F-84Fs were phased out of Dutch services in two batches. The first half involved the Streaks of 311 and312 squadron at Volkel. From October 1964 onwards these squadrons started converting to the Starfighter and this was completed by the end of 1965. Their Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were either returned to the USAF (and subsequently sent to Greece and Turkey), taken in use for spare parts or decoy purposes or transferred to 314 and 315 squadrons at Eindhoven.
At Eindhoven the type remained in service till 1970, when the conversion to the Northrop Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter was completed. The majority of the Republic F-84FThunderstreak where scrapped. A number of them was allowed to stay in Holland mainly for decoy and museum purposes, and some 20 aircraft were transferred to Greece where they soldiered on till the early 1980
The last operational flight with a Dutch F-84F was December 21, 1970.
Because of accidents 75 aircraft were written off during the fourteen years the Streak had been used. This is almost 42 % of the total amount of Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks used in Dutch service.
After their operational service about 30 Streaks were temporarily used as eye-catchers (“decoys”) at air-bases of the Royal Netherlands Air Force: about 4 aircraft were present at each airfield. They were removed and scrapped in 1980. A few Dutch F-84F’s still survive today as gate-guards, monuments, instructional airframes or museum aircraft
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 35
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Netherlands
|
en
|
Portal:Netherlands
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/static/favicon/wikipedia.ico
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/static/favicon/wikipedia.ico
|
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/icons/wikipedia.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-wordmark-en.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-tagline-en.svg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Darkgreen_flag_waving.svg/30px-Darkgreen_flag_waving.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/100px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Royal_Arms_of_the_Netherlands.svg/60px-Royal_Arms_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Netherlands_in_Europe.svg/200px-Netherlands_in_Europe.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Cscr-featured.png/23px-Cscr-featured.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Anne_Frank_passport_photo%2C_May_1942.jpg/220px-Anne_Frank_passport_photo%2C_May_1942.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Amir_Hamzah_portrait_edit.jpg/220px-Amir_Hamzah_portrait_edit.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/Potret_Roekiah1.jpg/220px-Potret_Roekiah1.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Weyden_Deposition.jpg/400px-Weyden_Deposition.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8f/Djajakusuma_Parfini_brochure-restoration.JPG/220px-Djajakusuma_Parfini_brochure-restoration.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/Van_Eyck_-_The_Crucifixion%3B_The_Last_Judgment.jpg/400px-Van_Eyck_-_The_Crucifixion%3B_The_Last_Judgment.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Cscr-featured.png/23px-Cscr-featured.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/Phillip_James_De_Loutherbourg_-_The_Battle_of_Camperdown_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/300px-Phillip_James_De_Loutherbourg_-_The_Battle_of_Camperdown_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/A_Wong_Brother_KR_30_April_1947.jpg/170px-A_Wong_Brother_KR_30_April_1947.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Blank.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/Loetoeng_Kasaroeng_p67.jpg/220px-Loetoeng_Kasaroeng_p67.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/DJ_Tiesto2005.jpg/100px-DJ_Tiesto2005.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Cscr-featured.png/23px-Cscr-featured.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/NI-122b-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-half_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg/120px-NI-122b-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-half_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Queen_Wilhelmina_%26_Juliana.jpg/69px-Queen_Wilhelmina_%26_Juliana.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/Helleborus_orientalis%2C_Zaaddozen_zwellen%2C_Locatie%2C_Tuinreservaat_Jonkervallei_01.jpg/120px-Helleborus_orientalis%2C_Zaaddozen_zwellen%2C_Locatie%2C_Tuinreservaat_Jonkervallei_01.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/Nevelzwam_%28nebularis%29_tussen_afgevallen_beukenblad_%28d.j.b.%29_01.jpg/120px-Nevelzwam_%28nebularis%29_tussen_afgevallen_beukenblad_%28d.j.b.%29_01.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/Willem_III_%281817-90%29%2C_koning_der_Nederlanden%2C_Nicolaas_Pieneman%2C_1856_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg/81px-Willem_III_%281817-90%29%2C_koning_der_Nederlanden%2C_Nicolaas_Pieneman%2C_1856_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/Johannes_van_den_Bosch.jpeg/96px-Johannes_van_den_Bosch.jpeg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/V-2victimAntwerp1944.jpg/120px-V-2victimAntwerp1944.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/F-16_Solo_Display_Team_Radom_2009_b.JPG/120px-F-16_Solo_Display_Team_Radom_2009_b.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Vermeer%2C_Johannes_-_Woman_reading_a_letter_-_ca._1662-1663.jpg/100px-Vermeer%2C_Johannes_-_Woman_reading_a_letter_-_ca._1662-1663.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/De_bedreigde_zwaan_Rijksmuseum_SK-A-4.jpeg/120px-De_bedreigde_zwaan_Rijksmuseum_SK-A-4.jpeg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Herman_Antonie_de_Bloeme_-_Baron_van_Omphal.jpg/98px-Herman_Antonie_de_Bloeme_-_Baron_van_Omphal.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/Ambrosius_Bosschaert_the_Elder_%28Dutch_-_Flower_Still_Life_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/120px-Ambrosius_Bosschaert_the_Elder_%28Dutch_-_Flower_Still_Life_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Michiel_Jansz_van_Mierevelt_-_Maurits_prins_van_Oranje-edit_1.jpg/77px-Michiel_Jansz_van_Mierevelt_-_Maurits_prins_van_Oranje-edit_1.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/AmstelHotelAmsterdam.jpg/120px-AmstelHotelAmsterdam.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/50000_rupiah_bill%2C_2011_revision_%282013_date%29%2C_processed%2C_obverse%2Breverse.jpg/120px-50000_rupiah_bill%2C_2011_revision_%282013_date%29%2C_processed%2C_obverse%2Breverse.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/Nuvola_apps_filetypes.svg/47px-Nuvola_apps_filetypes.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/da/C_Puzzle.png/42px-C_Puzzle.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Flag_of_Belgium.svg/27px-Flag_of_Belgium.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Flag_of_Denmark.svg/27px-Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/ba/Flag_of_Germany.svg/27px-Flag_of_Germany.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Flag_of_Suriname.svg/27px-Flag_of_Suriname.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4c/Flag_of_Sweden.svg/27px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/ae/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg/27px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/Europe_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg/25px-Europe_%28orthographic_projection%29.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Flag_of_Europe.svg/27px-Flag_of_Europe.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/14px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/Amphitheatrum_sapientiae_aeternae_-_Alchemist%27s_Laboratory.jpg/79px-Amphitheatrum_sapientiae_aeternae_-_Alchemist%27s_Laboratory.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/The_Anatomy_Lesson.jpg/80px-The_Anatomy_Lesson.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/94/The_Nightwatch_by_Rembrandt_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg/80px-The_Nightwatch_by_Rembrandt_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Bartholomeus_van_der_Helst%2C_Banquet_of_the_Amsterdam_Civic_Guard_in_Celebration_of_the_Peace_of_M%C3%BCnster.jpg/80px-Bartholomeus_van_der_Helst%2C_Banquet_of_the_Amsterdam_Civic_Guard_in_Celebration_of_the_Peace_of_M%C3%BCnster.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/Frans_Hals%2C_De_magere_compagnie.jpg/80px-Frans_Hals%2C_De_magere_compagnie.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Zaandam2.jpg/80px-Zaandam2.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Frans_Hals_-_Wedding_portrait_of_Isaac_Abrahamsz_Massa_and_Beatrix_van_der_Laan.jpg/80px-Frans_Hals_-_Wedding_portrait_of_Isaac_Abrahamsz_Massa_and_Beatrix_van_der_Laan.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/The_Garden_of_Earthly_Delights_by_Bosch_High_Resolution.jpg/80px-The_Garden_of_Earthly_Delights_by_Bosch_High_Resolution.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7e/Pieter_Brueghel_the_Elder_-_The_Dutch_Proverbs_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Pieter_Brueghel_the_Elder_-_The_Dutch_Proverbs_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Van_Gogh_-_Starry_Night_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Van_Gogh_-_Starry_Night_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Petrus_Christus_-_Portrait_of_a_Young_Woman_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/61px-Petrus_Christus_-_Portrait_of_a_Young_Woman_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Wheat-Field-with-Cypresses-%281889%29-Vincent-van-Gogh-Met.jpg/80px-Wheat-Field-with-Cypresses-%281889%29-Vincent-van-Gogh-Met.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_-_Portret_van_een_paar_als_oudtestamentische_figuren%2C_genaamd_%27Het_Joodse_bruidje%27_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_-_Portret_van_een_paar_als_oudtestamentische_figuren%2C_genaamd_%27Het_Joodse_bruidje%27_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_%28Vienna%29_-_Google_Art_Project_-_edited.jpg/80px-Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_%28Vienna%29_-_Google_Art_Project_-_edited.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/Rembrandt_van_Rijn_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/62px-Rembrandt_van_Rijn_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_The_Church_in_Auvers-sur-Oise%2C_View_from_the_Chevet_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/62px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_The_Church_in_Auvers-sur-Oise%2C_View_from_the_Chevet_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Sunset_at_Montmajour_1888_Van_Gogh.jpg/80px-Sunset_at_Montmajour_1888_Van_Gogh.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheat_Field_with_Cypresses_%28National_Gallery_version%29.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheat_Field_with_Cypresses_%28National_Gallery_version%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Irises-Vincent_van_Gogh.jpg/80px-Irises-Vincent_van_Gogh.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Hieronymus_Bosch-_The_Seven_Deadly_Sins_and_the_Four_Last_Things.JPG/80px-Hieronymus_Bosch-_The_Seven_Deadly_Sins_and_the_Four_Last_Things.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_-_Jeremia_treurend_over_de_verwoesting_van_Jeruzalem_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/63px-Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_-_Jeremia_treurend_over_de_verwoesting_van_Jeruzalem_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Rembrandt_van_Rijn_-_A_Polish_nobleman.jpg/54px-Rembrandt_van_Rijn_-_A_Polish_nobleman.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Johannes_Vermeer_-_Het_melkmeisje_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/71px-Johannes_Vermeer_-_Het_melkmeisje_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_-_The_Raising_of_Lazarus_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/67px-Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_-_The_Raising_of_Lazarus_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Jan_Vermeer_-_The_Art_of_Painting_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/67px-Jan_Vermeer_-_The_Art_of_Painting_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Sunflowers_-_VGM_F458.jpg/61px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Sunflowers_-_VGM_F458.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Bloeiende_pruimenboomgaard-_naar_Hiroshige_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/67px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Bloeiende_pruimenboomgaard-_naar_Hiroshige_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Almond_blossom_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Almond_blossom_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Head_of_a_skeleton_with_a_burning_cigarette_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/60px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Head_of_a_skeleton_with_a_burning_cigarette_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/Rembrandt_-_Joseph_and_Potiphar%27s_wife.jpg/80px-Rembrandt_-_Joseph_and_Potiphar%27s_wife.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Man_Writing_a_Letter_by_Gabri%C3%ABl_Metsu.jpg/62px-Man_Writing_a_Letter_by_Gabri%C3%ABl_Metsu.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Woman_Reading_a_Letter_by_Gabri%C3%ABl_Metsu.jpg/61px-Woman_Reading_a_Letter_by_Gabri%C3%ABl_Metsu.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/Johannes_Vermeer_-_Woman_Holding_a_Balance_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/71px-Johannes_Vermeer_-_Woman_Holding_a_Balance_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Meisje_met_de_parel.jpg/68px-Meisje_met_de_parel.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Sorrow.jpg/50px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Sorrow.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Willem_Drost_-_Batsheba_met_de_brief_van_koning_David.jpg/67px-Willem_Drost_-_Batsheba_met_de_brief_van_koning_David.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f1/Roses_-_Vincent_van_Gogh.JPG/80px-Roses_-_Vincent_van_Gogh.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Tromp-l%27oeil_Still-Life_1664_Hoogstraeten.jpg/80px-Tromp-l%27oeil_Still-Life_1664_Hoogstraeten.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/Geertgen_tot_Sint_Jans%2C_The_Nativity_at_Night%2C_c_1490.jpg/59px-Geertgen_tot_Sint_Jans%2C_The_Nativity_at_Night%2C_c_1490.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Vangogh_mousme.jpg/65px-Vangogh_mousme.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_Peasant_Wedding_-_Google_Art_Project_2.jpg/80px-Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_Peasant_Wedding_-_Google_Art_Project_2.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/De_menagerie%2C_Melchior_d%27_Hondecoeter%2C_ca._1690_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg/65px-De_menagerie%2C_Melchior_d%27_Hondecoeter%2C_ca._1690_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Frans_Hals%2C_Merrymakers_at_Shrovetide%2C_The_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.jpg/61px-Frans_Hals%2C_Merrymakers_at_Shrovetide%2C_The_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Frans_Hals_-_Claes_Duyst_van_Voorhout.jpg/66px-Frans_Hals_-_Claes_Duyst_van_Voorhout.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/The_Temptation_of_St_Anthony_%28Bosch%29.jpg/57px-The_Temptation_of_St_Anthony_%28Bosch%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Bellona%2C_by_Rembrandt_van_Rijn.jpg/61px-Bellona%2C_by_Rembrandt_van_Rijn.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/The_Miracle_at_the_Grave_of_Elisha_by_Jan_Nagel_%28d_1602%29.jpg/69px-The_Miracle_at_the_Grave_of_Elisha_by_Jan_Nagel_%28d_1602%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Cornelis_Cornelisz._van_Haarlem_-_The_Fall_of_the_Titans_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Cornelis_Cornelisz._van_Haarlem_-_The_Fall_of_the_Titans_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Enclosed_Field_with_Ploughman_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Enclosed_Field_with_Ploughman_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Vincent_Van_Gogh_-_Corn_Harvest_in_Provence_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_Van_Gogh_-_Corn_Harvest_in_Provence_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Geploegde_akkers_%28%27De_voren%27%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Geploegde_akkers_%28%27De_voren%27%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_De_oogst_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_De_oogst_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_with_a_reaper_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_with_a_reaper_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Peasant_woman_binding_sheaves_%28after_Millet%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/61px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Peasant_woman_binding_sheaves_%28after_Millet%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Green_Field_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Green_Field_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Vincent_Willem_van_Gogh%2C_Dutch_-_Rain_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_Willem_van_Gogh%2C_Dutch_-_Rain_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a0/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Landscape_from_Saint-R%C3%A9my_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Landscape_from_Saint-R%C3%A9my_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/Vincent_Van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_With_Cornflowers_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_Van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_With_Cornflowers_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Gogh%2C_Vincent_van_-_Landscape_at_Saint-R%C3%A9my_%28Enclosed_Field_with_Peasant%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Gogh%2C_Vincent_van_-_Landscape_at_Saint-R%C3%A9my_%28Enclosed_Field_with_Peasant%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_with_crows_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_with_crows_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/98/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_under_thunderclouds_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Wheatfield_under_thunderclouds_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/De_bedreigde_zwaan_Rijksmuseum_SK-A-4.jpeg/80px-De_bedreigde_zwaan_Rijksmuseum_SK-A-4.jpeg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/32/Gerard_David_-_Virgin_and_Child_with_Four_Angels_-_WGA6036.jpg/47px-Gerard_David_-_Virgin_and_Child_with_Four_Angels_-_WGA6036.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/Velazquez-The_Surrender_of_Breda.jpg/80px-Velazquez-The_Surrender_of_Breda.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3d/Jan_Vermeer_van_Delft_-_Lady_Standing_at_a_Virginal_-_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg/70px-Jan_Vermeer_van_Delft_-_Lady_Standing_at_a_Virginal_-_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/Crustacean%2C_lying_on_his_back_by_Vincent_van_Gogh_%28Van_Gogh_museum_photograph%29.jpg/80px-Crustacean%2C_lying_on_his_back_by_Vincent_van_Gogh_%28Van_Gogh_museum_photograph%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Vermeer-Portrait_of_a_Young_Woman.jpg/72px-Vermeer-Portrait_of_a_Young_Woman.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/76/Hendrik_Voogd_-_Italian_landscape_with_Umbrella_Pines.jpg/80px-Hendrik_Voogd_-_Italian_landscape_with_Umbrella_Pines.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/Bloemen_in_een_terracotta_vaas.%2C_Albertus_Jonas_Brandt%2C_Eelke_Jelles_Eelkema%2C_1810_-_1824_-_Zoeken_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg/62px-Bloemen_in_een_terracotta_vaas.%2C_Albertus_Jonas_Brandt%2C_Eelke_Jelles_Eelkema%2C_1810_-_1824_-_Zoeken_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder-_The_Harvesters_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder-_The_Harvesters_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Lady_Seated_at_a_Virginal%2C_Vermeer%2C_The_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg/71px-Lady_Seated_at_a_Virginal%2C_Vermeer%2C_The_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Vermeer%2C_Johannes_-_Woman_reading_a_letter_-_ca._1662-1663.jpg/67px-Vermeer%2C_Johannes_-_Woman_reading_a_letter_-_ca._1662-1663.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/African_man_portrait_Mostaert.jpg/54px-African_man_portrait_Mostaert.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Bulb_Fields.jpg/80px-Bulb_Fields.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Dr_Paul_Gachet_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/66px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Dr_Paul_Gachet_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Johannes_Vermeer%2C_Allegory_of_the_Catholic_Faith%2C_The_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.jpg/62px-Johannes_Vermeer%2C_Allegory_of_the_Catholic_Faith%2C_The_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/Johannes_Vermeer_-_Gezicht_op_huizen_in_Delft%2C_bekend_als_%27Het_straatje%27_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/64px-Johannes_Vermeer_-_Gezicht_op_huizen_in_Delft%2C_bekend_als_%27Het_straatje%27_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/66px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_The_yellow_house_%28%27The_street%27%29.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_The_yellow_house_%28%27The_street%27%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Hendrick_ter_Brugghen_The_Crucifixion_with_the_Virgin_and_Saint_John.jpg/54px-Hendrick_ter_Brugghen_The_Crucifixion_with_the_Virgin_and_Saint_John.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Dieric_Bouts_-_The_Entombment_-_Artron.jpg/65px-Dieric_Bouts_-_The_Entombment_-_Artron.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/Hieronymus_Bosch_-_Christ_Mocked_%28The_Crowning_with_Thorns%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/64px-Hieronymus_Bosch_-_Christ_Mocked_%28The_Crowning_with_Thorns%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Van_Gogh%27s_Bedroom_in_Arles_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Van_Gogh%27s_Bedroom_in_Arles_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/Rembrandt%2C_Self_Portrait_at_the_Age_of_34.jpg/67px-Rembrandt%2C_Self_Portrait_at_the_Age_of_34.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Rembrandt%2C_Self_Portrait_at_the_Age_of_63.jpg/65px-Rembrandt%2C_Self_Portrait_at_the_Age_of_63.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Houses_at_Auvers_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/80px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Houses_at_Auvers_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus.jpg/80px-The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Hendrick_Averkamp_A_Winter_Scene_with_Skaters_near_a_Castle.jpg/80px-Hendrick_Averkamp_A_Winter_Scene_with_Skaters_near_a_Castle.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Anbetung_der_K%C3%B6nige_%28Bruegel%2C_1564%29_%E2%80%93_cropped.jpg/60px-Anbetung_der_K%C3%B6nige_%28Bruegel%2C_1564%29_%E2%80%93_cropped.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Willem_van_de_Velde_II_-_Dutch_men-o%27-war_and_other_shipping_in_a_calm.jpg/80px-Willem_van_de_Velde_II_-_Dutch_men-o%27-war_and_other_shipping_in_a_calm.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/06/Farmhouse_in_Provence%2C_1888%2C_Vincent_van_Gogh%2C_NGA.jpg/80px-Farmhouse_in_Provence%2C_1888%2C_Vincent_van_Gogh%2C_NGA.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Girl_in_White_by_Vincent_Van_Gogh_-_NGA.jpg/54px-Girl_in_White_by_Vincent_Van_Gogh_-_NGA.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/1855_Ary_Scheffer_-_The_Ghosts_of_Paolo_and_Francesca_Appear_to_Dante_and_Virgil.jpg/80px-1855_Ary_Scheffer_-_The_Ghosts_of_Paolo_and_Francesca_Appear_to_Dante_and_Virgil.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Young_Man_with_a_Skull%2C_Frans_Hals%2C_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg/70px-Young_Man_with_a_Skull%2C_Frans_Hals%2C_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/Pieter_de_Hooch_-_The_Courtyard_of_a_House_in_Delft.jpg/67px-Pieter_de_Hooch_-_The_Courtyard_of_a_House_in_Delft.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Vermeer-view-of-delft.jpg/80px-Vermeer-view-of-delft.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Rembrandt-Belsazar.jpg/80px-Rembrandt-Belsazar.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/A_Meat_Stall_with_the_Holy_Family_Giving_Alms_-_Pieter_Aertsen_-_Google_Cultural_Institute.jpg/80px-A_Meat_Stall_with_the_Holy_Family_Giving_Alms_-_Pieter_Aertsen_-_Google_Cultural_Institute.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/Gerard_van_Honthorst_-_Adoration_of_the_Shepherds_%281622%29.jpg/80px-Gerard_van_Honthorst_-_Adoration_of_the_Shepherds_%281622%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/BoschTheCrucifixionOfStJulia.jpg/80px-BoschTheCrucifixionOfStJulia.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Olympic_Road_Race_Womens_winners%2C_London_-_July_2012.jpg/80px-Olympic_Road_Race_Womens_winners%2C_London_-_July_2012.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/Dutch_Guiana-Suriname-1_Guilder_%281801%29_card_money.jpg/80px-Dutch_Guiana-Suriname-1_Guilder_%281801%29_card_money.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/IND-%28NethEastInd%29-1-Dutch_Administration-1_Gulden_%281815%29.jpg/80px-IND-%28NethEastInd%29-1-Dutch_Administration-1_Gulden_%281815%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/NI-119b-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-1_Cent_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-119b-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-1_Cent_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/NI-120c-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-5_Cents_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-120c-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-5_Cents_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/NI-121a-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-10_Cents_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-121a-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-10_Cents_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/NI-122b-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-half_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-122b-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-half_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/NI-123-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-1_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-123-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-1_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/NI-124c-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-5_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-124c-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-5_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/NI-125c-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-10_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg/80px-NI-125c-Netherlands_Indies-Japanese_Occupation-10_Gulden_%281942%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/Netherlands_East_Indies_Java_Rupee_1803-Z.jpg/80px-Netherlands_East_Indies_Java_Rupee_1803-Z.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/World_Map_1689.JPG/80px-World_Map_1689.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg/80px-California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/Hispaniola_Vinckeboons4.jpg/80px-Hispaniola_Vinckeboons4.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Castelloplan.jpg/80px-Castelloplan.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Delaware_Bay_Vinckeboons_14.jpg/80px-Delaware_Bay_Vinckeboons_14.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Goliath_Poldermolen.jpg/80px-Goliath_Poldermolen.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/Cheese_limburger_edit.jpg/80px-Cheese_limburger_edit.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Havana_1639b.jpg/80px-Havana_1639b.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/De_slag_bij_Terheide_-_The_Battle_of_Schevening_-_August_10_1653_%28Willem_van_de_Velde_I%2C_1657%29.jpg/80px-De_slag_bij_Terheide_-_The_Battle_of_Schevening_-_August_10_1653_%28Willem_van_de_Velde_I%2C_1657%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Westfaelischer_Friede_in_Muenster_%28Gerard_Terborch_1648%29.jpg/80px-Westfaelischer_Friede_in_Muenster_%28Gerard_Terborch_1648%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Nicolaas_Pieneman_-_The_Submission_of_Prince_Dipo_Negoro_to_General_De_Kock.jpg/80px-Nicolaas_Pieneman_-_The_Submission_of_Prince_Dipo_Negoro_to_General_De_Kock.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7e/Pah_Wongso%27s_Japanese_occupation_registration_card.jpg/59px-Pah_Wongso%27s_Japanese_occupation_registration_card.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/Battle_of_Scheveningen_%28Slag_bij_Ter_Heijde%29%28Jan_Abrahamsz._Beerstraten%29.jpg/80px-Battle_of_Scheveningen_%28Slag_bij_Ter_Heijde%29%28Jan_Abrahamsz._Beerstraten%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Queen_Wilhelmina_%26_Juliana.jpg/46px-Queen_Wilhelmina_%26_Juliana.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/Queen_Wilhelmina2.jpg/51px-Queen_Wilhelmina2.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/Mark_Rutte-6.jpg/56px-Mark_Rutte-6.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Michiel_Jansz_van_Mierevelt_-_Maurits_prins_van_Oranje-edit_1.jpg/51px-Michiel_Jansz_van_Mierevelt_-_Maurits_prins_van_Oranje-edit_1.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Rochussen.jpg/62px-Rochussen.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/Judith_Leyster_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/70px-Judith_Leyster_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/Raden_Saleh.jpg/63px-Raden_Saleh.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/Mary_%281505%E2%80%931558%29%2C_Queen_of_Hungary.jpg/67px-Mary_%281505%E2%80%931558%29%2C_Queen_of_Hungary.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/William_I_of_the_Netherlands.jpg/53px-William_I_of_the_Netherlands.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Posthumous_Portrait_of_Herman_Willem_Daendels%2C_Governor-General_of_the_Dutch_East_Indies_-_Rd_Saleh.jpg/66px-Posthumous_Portrait_of_Herman_Willem_Daendels%2C_Governor-General_of_the_Dutch_East_Indies_-_Rd_Saleh.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Paulus_Moreelse_-_Zelfportret.jpg/70px-Paulus_Moreelse_-_Zelfportret.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9b/Hendrik_Merkus_Baron_de_Kock_by_Cornelis_Kruseman.jpg/67px-Hendrik_Merkus_Baron_de_Kock_by_Cornelis_Kruseman.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project_%28454045%29.jpg/63px-Vincent_van_Gogh_-_Self-Portrait_-_Google_Art_Project_%28454045%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/Johannes_van_den_Bosch.jpeg/64px-Johannes_van_den_Bosch.jpeg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/Willem_III_%281817-90%29%2C_koning_der_Nederlanden%2C_Nicolaas_Pieneman%2C_1856_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg/54px-Willem_III_%281817-90%29%2C_koning_der_Nederlanden%2C_Nicolaas_Pieneman%2C_1856_-_Rijksmuseum.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Herman_Antonie_de_Bloeme_-_Baron_van_Omphal.jpg/66px-Herman_Antonie_de_Bloeme_-_Baron_van_Omphal.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Louis_Meijer_-_Zelfportret.jpg/71px-Louis_Meijer_-_Zelfportret.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/Michiel_J._van_Miereveld_-_George_Villiers%2C_Duke_of_Buckingham_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/66px-Michiel_J._van_Miereveld_-_George_Villiers%2C_Duke_of_Buckingham_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Dirck_Jacobsz_-_Jacob_Cornelisz._van_Oostsanen_Painting_a_Portrait_of_His_Wife_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/67px-Dirck_Jacobsz_-_Jacob_Cornelisz._van_Oostsanen_Painting_a_Portrait_of_His_Wife_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Cornelis_Kruseman%2C_Self-portrait.jpg/65px-Cornelis_Kruseman%2C_Self-portrait.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/Rich%C3%A8l_Hogenkamp_-_Masters_de_Madrid_2015_-_11.jpg/80px-Rich%C3%A8l_Hogenkamp_-_Masters_de_Madrid_2015_-_11.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Jean_Augustin_Daiwaille_-_Zelfportret.jpg/63px-Jean_Augustin_Daiwaille_-_Zelfportret.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Zelfportret_-_Hendrikus_van_de_Sande_Bakhuyzen.jpg/80px-Zelfportret_-_Hendrikus_van_de_Sande_Bakhuyzen.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/Laura_Dekker_%28cropped%29.jpg/80px-Laura_Dekker_%28cropped%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Amsterdam_Canals_-_July_2006.jpg/80px-Amsterdam_Canals_-_July_2006.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/HerdenkingVuurgrensRotterdam1940_2007_edit1.jpg/80px-HerdenkingVuurgrensRotterdam1940_2007_edit1.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/KeizersgrachtReguliersgrachtAmsterdam.jpg/80px-KeizersgrachtReguliersgrachtAmsterdam.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/94/AmstelAmsterdamNederland.jpg/80px-AmstelAmsterdamNederland.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Amsterdam_photochrom2.jpg/80px-Amsterdam_photochrom2.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Amsterdam_Centraal_Station2.jpg/80px-Amsterdam_Centraal_Station2.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/AmstelHotelAmsterdam.jpg/80px-AmstelHotelAmsterdam.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Munttoren_Amsterdam.jpg/41px-Munttoren_Amsterdam.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/WestertorenAmsterdam.jpg/33px-WestertorenAmsterdam.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/GroteWerfMarkenNederland.jpg/80px-GroteWerfMarkenNederland.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/67/Amstel.jpg/80px-Amstel.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Koppelpoort_Amersfoort_Cropped.jpg/80px-Koppelpoort_Amersfoort_Cropped.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/De_Zoeker_LCD.jpg/80px-De_Zoeker_LCD.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/NET-Margraten-American_Cemetery_01.jpg/60px-NET-Margraten-American_Cemetery_01.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Detroit_Publishing_Company_-_Rotterdam_-_Delftsevaart%2C_c._1895.jpg/80px-Detroit_Publishing_Company_-_Rotterdam_-_Delftsevaart%2C_c._1895.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/526452-Fort_Pampus.jpg/80px-526452-Fort_Pampus.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e7/Cscr-featured.svg/16px-Cscr-featured.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/F-16_Solo_Display_Team_Radom_2009_b.JPG/80px-F-16_Solo_Display_Team_Radom_2009_b.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Featured_article_star.svg/16px-Featured_article_star.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1f/Clipboard.svg/48px-Clipboard.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/85px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/24/Wikinews-logo.svg/45px-Wikinews-logo.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Wiktionary-logo-en-35px.png/30px-Wiktionary-logo-en-35px.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Wikiversity_logo_2017.svg/30px-Wikiversity_logo_2017.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg/20px-Commons-logo.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Lorentzian_Wormhole.svg/35px-Lorentzian_Wormhole.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Nuvola_apps_package_graphics.png/35px-Nuvola_apps_package_graphics.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/69/P_vip.svg/35px-P_vip.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Ambox_current_red_Americas.svg/35px-Ambox_current_red_Americas.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f5/Terra.png/35px-Terra.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/P_history.svg/35px-P_history.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Nuvola_apps_edu_mathematics_blue-p.svg/35px-Nuvola_apps_edu_mathematics_blue-p.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Nuvola_apps_kalzium.svg/35px-Nuvola_apps_kalzium.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Social_sciences.svg/35px-Social_sciences.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Noun-technology.svg/35px-Noun-technology.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Random_font_awesome.svg/35px-Random_font_awesome.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Portal.svg/35px-Portal.svg.png",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikipedia.png
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Netherlands
|
The Netherlands, informally Holland, is a country located in Northwestern Europe with overseas territories in the Caribbean. It is the largest of the four constituent countries of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Netherlands consists of twelve provinces; it borders Germany to the east and Belgium to the south, with a North Sea coastline to the north and west. It shares maritime borders with the United Kingdom, Germany, and Belgium. The official language is Dutch, with West Frisian as a secondary official language in the province of Friesland. Dutch, English, and Papiamento are official in the Caribbean territories.
The Netherlands has been a parliamentary constitutional monarchy with a unitary structure since 1848. The country has a tradition of pillarisation (separation of citizens into groups by religion and political beliefs) and a long record of social tolerance, having legalised prostitution and euthanasia, along with maintaining a liberal drug policy. The Netherlands allowed women's suffrage in 1919 and was the first country to legalise same-sex marriage in 2001. Its mixed-market advanced economy has the eleventh-highest per capita income globally. The Hague holds the seat of the States General, Cabinet, and Supreme Court. The Port of Rotterdam is the busiest in Europe. Schiphol is the busiest airport in the Netherlands, and the fourth busiest in Europe. Being a developed country, the Netherlands is a founding member of the European Union, Eurozone, G10, NATO, OECD, and WTO, as well as a part of the Schengen Area and the trilateral Benelux Union. It hosts intergovernmental organisations and international courts, many of which are in The Hague. (Full article...)
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 3
|
https://www.japcc.org/articles/transforming-the-rnlaf-into-a-5th-generation-air-force-just-doing-it/
|
en
|
Transforming the RNLAF into a 5th Generation Air Force: Just Doing It!
|
[
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J37_theme-400x132.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_DD_Banner_2000x660-400x132.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_2023_Conf_Banner_2000x660-400x132.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/JAPCC_J33_FC_400x566-288x408.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-288x453.jpg 288w, https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-127x200.jpg 127w, https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-180x283.jpg 180w, https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen.jpg 360w",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-288x453.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J37_Art-01-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J37_Art-01-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J36_Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J36_Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_J35_Banner_2000x660_J35-Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_J35_Banner_2000x660_J35-Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Red_Air_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Red_Air_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-05_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-05_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-02_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-02_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/13_J33_Art-13_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/13_J33_Art-13_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-08-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-08-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-07-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-07-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2022-02-03T12:21:04+01:00
|
Introduction The world is changing rapidly. The geopolitical landscape is transforming as a result of the strategic competition among existing, emerging, and revisionist powers. Simultaneously, these powers are developing emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and hypersonic missiles at an incredibly rapid pace. Our societies are more connected through our smartphones, smart homes,
|
en
|
Joint Air Power Competence Centre - NATO's Advocate to Air and Space Power
|
https://www.japcc.org/articles/transforming-the-rnlaf-into-a-5th-generation-air-force-just-doing-it/
|
Introduction
The world is changing rapidly. The geopolitical landscape is transforming as a result of the strategic competition among existing, emerging, and revisionist powers. Simultaneously, these powers are developing emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and hypersonic missiles at an incredibly rapid pace. Our societies are more connected through our smartphones, smart homes, and the internet of things. The growing world population is struggling to comprehend and overcome the challenges of climate change and global pandemics, resulting in an economy under pressure from both events. These trends and developments impact our armed forces in their efforts to stay relevant in safeguarding peace and security and making the necessary changes to organizations, capabilities, and operational concepts.
In this volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous context, the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) is transforming into a 5th Generation Air Force. Since we launched our ‘5th Generation Air Force’ vision in 2017, the RNLAF has incorporated a number of new weapon systems: our new Chinook F/CAAS-helicopters, the multinational A330 MRTT, the MQ-9 Reaper, and the F-35 Lightning II. Perhaps less visible, but certainly not less important, we have been transforming our organization, including how we train and exercise, to prepare for Joint All-Domain Operations (JADO). Finally, we have put information, data science, and software at the core of our efforts to improve our processes to fly, fight, and win more effectively and more safely. This article will highlight some of our ‘lighthouse projects’1 to illustrate the challenges we had to overcome and the solutions we were able to find. It will first look at the new possibilities that 5th generation capabilities offer, particularly sensors and connectivity. Next, it will explain innovative ways of implementing the required changes. Finally, the article will provide an insight into some of the innovative and transformative units that are leading the way toward operationalizing our ‘5th Generation Air Force’ vision: the Data Science Cell, the Space Security Centre, the Cyber Warfare Team and the F-35 Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E) Unit. The article will conclude by drawing conclusions and providing some key takeaways.
New Capabilities Supporting the Joint All-Domain Fight
The 5th generation capabilities are mainly about employing ‘next-level’ weapons systems to speed up our effects-cycle so we ‘outpace’ and ‘outsmart’ an opponent. It is also about keeping the technological edge over potential adversaries. Leading-edge technologies are applied to combine sensors with kinetic and non-kinetic effectors resulting in improved connectivity and survivability. The F-35 is clearly the centrepiece of our 5th generation air combat capability, but other new weapon systems like the MQ-9 and our new AH-64E are also part of the bedrock that underpins a next-level Air Force. The F-35 combines low observability with a sensor suite that is unmatched by any 4th generation fighter aircraft. On top of that, stand-off capabilities enable us to exploit altitude, speed, and range to our advantage. Furthermore, the F-35 brings new maintenance and logistics concepts to maximize mission availability. Clearly, 5th generation capabilities bring to bear the ability to operate near and through Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) regions that some of the revisionist powers tend to deploy. As advanced as the aircraft and its systems may be, to prevail in tomorrow’s combat missions, the main aim is to overwhelm potential adversaries with challenges and to get inside their Observe-Orient-Decide-Act (OODA) loop. Information dominance enables decision dominance, which is required to deter, defend, and dominate in modern combat. This means that data and information handling are becoming more critical in support of airpower. It is my firm belief that in the upcoming decade software will become as important, if not more important, than hardware. 5th generation capabilities are synonymous with information, are data-driven by design, and are potentially capable of functioning as nodes in a combat cloud. However, that will only happen if we unlock and find ways to share data and information more seamlessly than we are able to do now. As a coalition, we still have some steps to go to make this happen.
Innovate by Doing!
Receiving 5th generation capabilities stresses the importance of what we call an ‘operational information backbone’. This federated combat network with layered security connects participants in multiple domains and enables joint all-domain command and control. During the first few years of our transformation, we found that building and experimenting with small parts of this network is more important than first designing (and debating) an overall solution. Modus operandi from the digital industry assisted us in digitizing the battlespace and improving our adaptability to rapidly changing threat conditions. The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Robotic Process Automation (RPA) freed up scarce resources (i.e. personnel), particularly in processes that comprise dirty, dull, or dangerous tasks. The newly available resources are necessary to continue to perform operational tasks that require meaningful human control. Therefore, future combat units will have to be resourced with cyber experts, data scientists, and AI-specialists that continuously support the unit in improving its combat effectiveness. These changes cannot happen overnight, but they can begin in small start-up formats at the edges of our organization and in close cooperation with civil partners. These projects are designed to either fail fast or be scaled-up, if successful. It was merely the combination of the inherently pioneering spirit of our Airmen and the cooperation with digital partners that enabled us to stand-up and scale-up the following 5th generation lighthouse units. However, we need to be realistic about the tempo we can achieve in scaling our innovative efforts. Most of our Air Forces are facing limited budgets which, combined with the limited personnel resources we can dedicate to the innovation of all our other tasks, drives the tempo of our common innovation agendas.
The RNLAF’s Lighthouse Units
The Data Science Cell (DSC)
The DSC delivers data-driven, decision-making support products to accelerate and strengthen our transition to the 5th Generation RNLAF. The DSC started in 2017 and groups together a small number of military and civil data science experts. Firstly, the DSC tested and experimented with big data analysis to prove its added value for the RNLAF. This first phase concluded in less than a year and the RNLAF decided to take DSC to the next level and connect it to the operational and maintenance processes. Today the DSC is working on applications in the fields of predictive flight maintenance planning, long-term readiness planning, human resources analytics, and analysis of imagery from the sensors of 5th generation systems.
The Defence Space Security Center (DSSC)
In response to developments in the geopolitical arena and the lower threshold of access to space capabilities, the RNLAF has started to develop knowledge in the military use of space with the aid of the DSSC. After building capacity for monitoring space weather and developing space situational awareness, we recently launched a small communication satellite named ‘BRIK II’. This project was conducted in close cooperation with the Dutch small satellite or SmallSat enterprise and the Royal Aerospace Laboratory (NLR). The launch was contracted to Virgin Orbit, which gave us an opportunity to experiment with Responsive Launch Capability. Furthermore, the dual-use nature of space capabilities offers exciting opportunities to cooperate among European militaries and industries with the aim of improving Europe’s strategic autonomy in space. Even though the Ministry of Defence has not yet issued a formal space policy, the RNLAF is ready to scale up its efforts to develop a national military use of space capability in order to safeguard national and European interests in this new domain. Obviously, we are also building this capability on the foundation of our transatlantic partnership. This is illustrated by our participation in the Responsive Space Capability programme, among other projects.
Cyber Warfare Team
Geopolitical developments have led to strategic competition in cyberspace. Hyper-connected societies have become more vulnerable to threats in the virtual and cognitive domains. Cyber security has become an essential part of any company’s or organization’s efforts to mitigate the risks of cybercrime and other digital attacks. Modern 5th generation capabilities rely heavily on connectivity and thus have become vulnerable to cyber threats. That is why the RNLAF Cyber Warfare Team currently focusses on defensive and preventive strategies to Cyber Readiness in a two-way approach. Firstly, we educate our personnel on Cyber Awareness and Cyber Security, so our people can function as smart sensors. Secondly, we run risk and vulnerability management (on- and off-base) and central monitoring of our essential digital systems and networks in our Cyber Security Operations Center (CSOC). In addition, offensive cyber and electromagnetic activities are employed in cooperation with the Defence Cyber Command. The Cyber Warfare Team is another example of a typical 5th generation unit that is very small in numbers, but potentially high in impact. This is also in line with the RNLAF motto: ‘Parvus Numero Magnus Merito’ (Small in numbers, great in achievements).
F-35 OT&E Squadron
Having received less than half of the initially ordered F-35 fleet, we have been able to reach Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in December of 2021. Even before the delivery of the first aircraft, a small OT&E unit has put significant effort into developing the necessary skills, concepts, and Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) required to operate the F-35. This OT&E unit was initially co-located with our United States, United Kingdom, and Australian partners. This test unit has transferred its results to the first F-35 squadron in the Netherlands. All fields of expertise involved in F-35 operations had to adapt their way of working to the newly available technologies that are incorporated into the operations and maintenance concepts. On the operational side, we have seen a shift in the balance between live flying and simulated training efforts. Not only does the F-35 simulator provide the latest technology in live-virtual-constructive training, but the joint all-domain context also drives the need to simulate more challenging scenarios. On the maintenance side, the system presents fewer challenges in repairing single items, which leads to a more system-oriented approach by the technicians. The traditional three-tiered organization of the maintenance system is becoming obsolete, which requires the maintenance organization to transform itself to meet the new requirements and guarantee the required high levels of serviceability together with commercial partners.
Conclusions and Key Takeaways
The transition of the RNLAF to becoming a 5th Generation Air Force is well underway. Using an innovative approach by starting small, failing fast, and cooperating with digital partners has paid off for a number of lighthouse units. Apart from procuring and implementing 5th generation capabilities, it has been crucial to focus on transforming the organization and mindset. A large part of this mindset is about learning by doing. We have been able to make huge steps because of this approach. Putting data and software at the core of the transition has proven to be as important as the hardware we operate. Even though the transition is still ongoing, I feel confident that we are on the right track. It makes me proud to see how our women and men apply innovative approaches on a daily basis to make our vision a reality. To sum it up, the key takeaways are:
5th generation capabilities open up new ways to meet the challenge of a rapidly evolving threat.
Software and data drive the effectiveness of our hardware and our weapon systems.
5th generation air forces should foster an innovative, pioneering spirit and provide room for failing fast and scaling up at speed.
Small lighthouse projects – learning by doing – function as accelerators for innovation, cooperation, and results.
Doing is the new designing!
‘Lighthouse project’ is a term that is used in the NE Armed Forces to identify a project or unit that tests new concepts and demonstrates new capabilities in order to lay the foundation for scaling up and implementing these concepts and capabilities.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 76
|
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2012-12-21/eurocontrol-shares-air-traffic-data-netherlands-air-force%3Fqt-latest_trending%3D1
|
en
|
Eurocontrol Shares Air Traffic Data with Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=256,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/ainlogo-small.jpg 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=384,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/ainlogo-small.jpg 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=256,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/AIN-Logo.svg 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=384,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/AIN-Logo.svg 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=256,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/AIN-Logo.svg 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=384,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/AIN-Logo.svg 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1200,format=webp,quality=95/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_1200x630/public/uploads/2013/06/netherlandscontrollerdsc03794.jpg?h=782dd465&itok=iM98Ntx- 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=3840,format=webp,quality=95/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_1200x630/public/uploads/2013/06/netherlandscontrollerdsc03794.jpg?h=782dd465&itok=iM98Ntx- 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Sarasota%20Bradenton%20International%20Airport.png?h=c673cd1c&itok=ruzoFhc- 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Sarasota%20Bradenton%20International%20Airport.png?h=c673cd1c&itok=ruzoFhc- 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/200k_subscribers_thumbnail.jpg?h=c673cd1c&itok=3Xo0keW- 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/200k_subscribers_thumbnail.jpg?h=c673cd1c&itok=3Xo0keW- 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1080,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_885x500/public/2024-08/textron_aviation_t-54a_king_air_trainer_thumbnail.jpg?h=c673cd1c&itok=zkQDLHLt 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_885x500/public/2024-08/textron_aviation_t-54a_king_air_trainer_thumbnail.jpg?h=c673cd1c&itok=zkQDLHLt 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/549502-FOR%20NEWS%20RELEASE%20-%20Cessna%20SkyCourier%20Passenger%20Variant-80f1d9-original-1724185896.jpg?h=1c9b88c9&itok=Gr6AtLvc 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/549502-FOR%20NEWS%20RELEASE%20-%20Cessna%20SkyCourier%20Passenger%20Variant-80f1d9-original-1724185896.jpg?h=1c9b88c9&itok=Gr6AtLvc 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Hades%20Global%206500.jpg?h=58727e0f&itok=1kisJAUd 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Hades%20Global%206500.jpg?h=58727e0f&itok=1kisJAUd 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/magniX_NASA_Dash7.jpg?h=a3eba8cf&itok=0SsXnPSY 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/magniX_NASA_Dash7.jpg?h=a3eba8cf&itok=0SsXnPSY 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Laurent-et-Pierre-Beaudoin-Paris-2007.jpg?h=fa1c963e&itok=owHJbJqV 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Laurent-et-Pierre-Beaudoin-Paris-2007.jpg?h=fa1c963e&itok=owHJbJqV 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=750,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Inflight%20Bombardier%20Global%207500%20-%20sea.jpg?h=dff50bb1&itok=m3dizmXu 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1920,format=webp/https://backend.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/fpsc_700x395/public/2024-08/Inflight%20Bombardier%20Global%207500%20-%20sea.jpg?h=dff50bb1&itok=m3dizmXu 2x",
"https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=128,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/AIN-Logo-Footer.svg 1x, https://www.ainonline.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=256,format=webp/images/cnc-images/ain/AIN-Logo-Footer.svg 2x"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Bill Carey"
] |
2012-12-21T00:00:00
|
Aviation International News is the industry's best read and most authoritative news publication, covering all aspects of aviation: business, military and transport.
|
/images/cnc-images/apple-touch-icon-57x57.png
|
Aviation International News
|
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2012-12-21/eurocontrol-shares-air-traffic-data-netherlands-air-force
|
Eurocontrol Shares Air Traffic Data with Netherlands Air Force
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 8
|
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v01p1/d162
|
en
|
Office of the Historian
|
[
"https://history.state.gov/resources/images/Office-of-the-Historian-logo_500x168.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
history.state.gov 3.0 shell
|
en
|
/resources/images/favicon.ico
| null |
S/S–NSC files, lot 63 D 351, NSC 135 Series
Report Prepared by the Office of the Director of Mutual Security (Harriman)1
[Extract]
The Mutual Security Program*
[Here follows a table of contents.]
[Page 517]
i. summary evaluation
1. European NATO Area and Western Germany. Since the submission of NSC 114/2,2 the major U.S. policy objectives in the NATO area have been modified by a material change in the method of programming the force build-up.3 Instead of continuing to plan with reference to the Medium Term Defense Plan force goals for 1954 it was decided to predicate programs and policy objectives upon force commitments undertaken year by year by NATO partners, after a thorough collective review of their politico-economic capabilities in relation to force goals which the NATO Military Committee and Standing Group proposed as militarily desirable. In line with this new approach, the NATO countries adopted at Lisbon in February a series of force goals for December 31, 1952, to which each country firmly committed itself, together with preliminary goals for 1953 and planning guides for 1954.
On the basis of information received from U.S. military authorities in Europe, there will be a shortfall of at least 15 divisions in the Lisbon goal of 43⅔ divisions for the European NATO countries (i.e., excluding the U.S. and Canada) which were to be raised and brought to prescribed standards of combat readiness by December 31, 1952. M-Day divisions will be only 2⅓ short of the 19-division goal, the balance of the shortfall being in divisions in readiness categories M+3 through M+30. These latter divisions are substantially all in being, but it is not anticipated they will meet the prescribed readiness standards by December 31.
As to air forces, slight shortfalls are anticipated in the numbers of aircraft—about 90 out of the total goal of 3,276 frontline aircraft (excluding U.S. and Canada). The fact that no allowance for combat reserves has been made, coupled with deficiencies in training and organization, makes the situation considerably less satisfactory than these figures would indicate. Prospective shortfalls in navy goals are restricted to escorts, minesweepers, and submarines, but are nevertheless deemed significant in view of the missions contemplated.
[Page 518]
One important factor in the shortfall is the delay of the European nations in raising and, especially, in effectively training forces. Another factor which, while less important as of June 30, 1952, threatens to become more serious in coming months, is the delay in deliveries from the U.S. of MDAP military matériel.
Targets indicated in NSC 114/1 were that the FY 1952 MDAP program (worldwide) would be delivered by December 31, 1952, with the exception of certain aircraft and other long-lead items. Consistent with this forecast, the U.S. agreed, during the TCC review last fall, to the adoption, for planning purposes only, in connection with setting NATO defense budgets and force goals, of the assumption that end-item deliveries from U.S. and Canada to the NATO area in FY 1952 and 1953 combined would total $9.8 billion. Current estimates indicate that actual deliveries during this period will not exceed $6 billion. Continuance of Korean attrition, general shortfalls in U.S. munitions production, and the recent steel strike have all been factors in reducing the total supply of materiel available.
On January 9, 1952, the President issued a directive to the Secretary of Defense concerning priorities to be given to deliveries of MDAP material, the key passages of which are:
Allocation procedures have been worked out, and a review is now in progress to identify the high-priority NATO requirements to which allocations should be made. To date the altered priorities and revised allocation procedures have apparently had only a limited impact on the total monthly volume of MDAP shipments.
NSC 114/2 indicated that, though a substantial amount of productive capacity for munitions was available in the NATO area, inadequate provisions in country defense budgets for the financing of major matériel procurement made it impossible fully to utilize this capacity. The U.S. Government during the last half of fiscal 1952 placed in the NATO area over $600 million worth of offshore procurement [Page 519] contracts. It is anticipated that this financing—along with a substantially higher rate of contract placement expected to be financed during fiscal 1953, both through off-shore procurement and through country defense budgets—will take up a large part of the slack in European defense production potential.
NSC 114/1 noted that lack of political cohesion and resoluteness on the part of the NATO countries in the adoption of and adherence to defense build-up programs was a major limiting factor in the accomplishment of U.S. objectives in the NATO area. The successful completion of the TCC review of politico-economic capabilities last fall, coupled with the adoption of firm December 31, 1952, force goals at Lisbon, were encouraging steps toward remedying these deficiencies. Securing the adoption of adequate legislation on military service, and assuring that defense budget expenditures meet the levels required to support the scheduled forces, remain major problems. There have been strong pressures for a stretch-out of the defense build-up period, particularly with respect to defense production. While periods of conscription have generally been lengthened since Korea, serious difficulties are being met in extending them to fully adequate levels. In summary, still to be accomplished is the basically political task of reconciling the high military requirements of NATO defense with the limited capabilities of the NATO countries to meet these requirements.
Despite these difficulties, the past year has in many respects been a period of remarkable progress in NATO. Problems which a year ago appeared insoluble have now either been solved or are well on the way toward solution. NATO has been given a sense of direction and a concentration of purpose which it previously had lacked. In addition to the TCC exercise and adoption of the Lisbon force goals, two notable accomplishments were the adherence of Greece and Turkey, and laying the groundwork for bringing the Federal Republic of Germany into the European defense scheme through the EDC treaty and related arrangements. The difficult task of securing the ratification of the EDC treaty still remains. Its accomplishment is of major importance to the success of the entire NATO plan.
The validity of certain of the conclusions in this report and the accuracy of the evaluations made are limited by the existence of major problems and unresolved issues with respect to deliveries of U.S.-furnished end-items and to the adequacy of European defense expenditure levels. As regards deliveries of U.S.-furnished end-items, the following problems have been encountered:
a.
No objective measure is available of the importance of delays in the delivery of MDAP matériel as a factor contributing to the shortfall in meeting force goals. Data on the estimated number of [Page 520] divisions, aircraft, and vessels meeting readiness standards as of June 30 and as of December 31, 1952, are compiled from briefly summarized judgments submitted by MAAG chiefs. These judgments have mentioned various important factors contributing to the shortfall, rather than presenting (as would probably be impossible) quantitative data on these factors.
b.
Scanty information is available on the extent to which delays in the delivery of MDAP matériel have discouraged individual countries from calling up more forces or increasing defense budget expenditures. Evaluation of this factor must inherently be subjective.
c.
In the light of the two limitations above, no attempt has been made to judge what impact on the attitudes of European governments might be expected as they become aware of the anticipated $3.8 billion shortfall (below TCC assumptions) in total U.S. matériel deliveries in fiscal 1952 and 1953. Nor is it possible to appraise quantitatively what effect the currently prevailing level of deliveries (not over $200 million per month) has had in discouraging the Europeans from making greater efforts—i.e. what confidence would the European governments feel in U.S. forecasts of a shortfall of $3.8 billion, when a continuation through fiscal 1953 of prevailing delivery rates would mean a shortfall of $5.7 billion?
d.
The validity of the stated delivery forecasts is crucially dependent on the accuracy of the underlying assumptions as to U.S. production and as to requirements of U.S. forces, particularly those in Korea.
e.
Whether the new allocation procedures will be effective in adequately increasing deliveries to NATO, is not yet known. As indicated previously, total U.S. production, and total higher-priority requirements, are factors which cannot be accurately forecast.
As to whether European defense budget expenditures are reaching levels adequate to support the planned force build-up, major problems of analysis encountered are:
a.
Originally stated defense expenditure “goals” were not precisely computed in terms of their adequacy in supporting specified force levels. The Screening and Costing Staff estimates relied on certain assumptions which it is known have not fully materialized. The TCC “desirable levels” of defense expenditure were developed in aggregate terms, with emphasis on appraising the country’s general financial capacity rather than on determining the precise forward requirements which would correspond to the desired force goals and readiness standards.
b.
While the attainment of goals in country defense expenditures for major matériel procurement is still a substantial factor in contributing to the over-all success of the U.S. objectives of stimulating defense production in Europe, the large-scale activation of the offshore procurement program promises increasingly to take up the slack in cases where physical capacity is idle for lack of European financing.
Despite the uncertainties involved in making an accurate estimate of over-all U.S. military matériel production during the [Page 521] coming year, and despite the fact that there is now little basis for determining how effective the revised allocations procedures will be in channeling matériel to the NATO area, it can still be stated categorically that vigorous efforts will have to be made if the U.S. is to meet even the substantially reduced end-item delivery targets outlined in this report. Furthermore, if the major objective of building up the European defense production potential is to be realized, the responsible agencies of the U.S. Government must take major steps to secure the placement of offshore procurement contracts in a pattern consistent with this objective.
2. Austria, Yugoslavia and Spain.
a. Austria. The political stability which has characterized Austria since 1945 continued during the past year. However, since the major parties have concentrated on the protection of the interest groups which they represent, Austrian economic policy has been one of compromise and expediency, satisfactory to neither party and frequently detrimental to the interests of Austria as a whole. Pressures by the U.S., U.K., and France to conclude a peace treaty with Austria have proved fruitless. The Soviets have refused to attend a meeting of the Treaty Deputies since 1950 and have rejected an Allied proposal for a short-form treaty. The 1946 Control Agreement5 continues to serve as the occupation statute, and the Allied Council retains supreme power.
A military aid program of $70 million (Stockpile A) was set up in fiscal 1950, the plan being to turn the matériel over to Austria when a peace treaty was signed and an armed establishment was authorized. So far, there has been no implementation of the program, except for the issuance of small arms and personal equipment for the training of gendarmérie cadres.
Under the postwar bilateral programs, Austria has received more than $1.5 billion in grant aid. Since Austria is prohibited from engaging in a defense program, this aid has been primarily directed toward assisting Austria to achieve the productive potential to achieve economic viability. This objective has been accomplished in large measure. Despite this evidence of progress, basic problems still await resolution. Among these are inflation, continuation of balance of payments deficit, low productivity, and the general rigidity of the economy, which has impeded expansion of the economic base.
b. Yugoslavia. The stability of the Yugoslav Government has not changed to any significant extent during FY 1952. The hostility between the Kremlin and its satellites, on the one hand, and Yugoslavia, [Page 522] on the other, did not lessen during the year. The rift between them still appears to be unbridgeable. Yugoslavia’s relations with Italy have become more hostile and more potentially explosive as the result of the U.S.–U.K.–Italian understanding concerning Zone A of the Free Territory of Trieste. On the other hand, Yugoslavia’s relations with Greece and Turkey became markedly more cordial in the period.
Yugoslavia had on hand, as of June 30, ground and naval forces of approximately the size contemplated in JCS force goals. Considerable expansion of air forces is planned. Combat effectiveness of all services is rated as low by U.S. standards, the greatest weakness being lack of modern equipment.
The tripartite aid programs have in large part enabled Yugoslavia to maintain and enlarge its army and preserve minimum living standards, despite the disruption of trade patterns as a result of the 1948 Cominform break and the 1950 drought. In addition, the U.S. Government has directed its influence toward securing a consolidation and reduction of the unrealistic Yugoslav investment program, and a postponement of large loan repayments during the period of aid. The aid has, nevertheless, enabled the Yugoslav Government to continue its development program along more modest lines by encouraging the long-term financing of capital imports by the International Bank.
c. Spain. The Spanish Government has been stable and the strength of the Communist Party as a disrupting influence in Spain is considered to be insignificant. Economically, the major problems faced are low production, maldistribution of income, and inflation. To date, the only U.S. aid program to have been implemented in Spain is the $62.5 million loan authorized in fiscal 1951. Administered by the Export-Import Bank, substantially all the loan funds have now been committed, about half for basic current imports and half for capital development.
In fiscal 1952 the Congress appropriated $100 million exclusively for military, economic and technical assistance to Spain under terms and conditions to be established by the President. So far, none of these funds have been allotted or obligated, pending the outcome of negotiations currently under way with Spain for conclusion of necessary bilateral aid agreements for military and for economic assistance. These agreements are, in turn, contingent upon the broader negotiations now being carried on with the Spanish Government in connection with base rights.
3. Near East and Africa, Including Greece and Turkey. Military assistance in the Near East and African areas was extended during FY 1952 to Greece, Turkey and Iran, continuing programs which [Page 523] had been in existence since 1947 in Greece and Turkey, and since 1948 in Iran.
The Greek forces as a whole are considered well-led, satisfactorily trained, and, except for some matériel shortages, prepared to carry out their wartime mission. With steady progress in combat worthiness, with the aid equipment already granted and with the materiel to be delivered against FY 1953 program requests, Greek forces are believed capable of repelling attacks by Soviet satellite forces and causing a maximum delay in such an attack even if it is directly assisted by the USSR.
Turkish forces are regarded as capable of defending successfully the areas to which they have been assigned against the types of units which are likely to be employed against them, unless they are overwhelmingly outnumbered. Their mission is essentially one of defense of Turkey. Units are not equipped or prepared for overseas movement, although consideration is being given to the possibility of Turkish participation in the defense of neighboring Middle Eastern territory.
The military program of the Iranian Government is designed for maintenance of internal security with but limited capacity to resist aggression. With regard to JCS standards, strength in terms of manpower is within 5% of the approved goals. Equipment is generally adequate, considering training and capacity to absorb. Serious deficiencies in leadership, planning, training and logistical support restrict military effectiveness to the maintenance of internal order.
Cumulative deliveries to the three countries against FY 1950–52 programs amounted to $320 million—36% of the total programmed amount.
The admission of Greece and Turkey into NATO took place only at the Lisbon meeting in February. Consequently, neither country’s military contribution enters into the so-called Lisbon force goals. Nevertheless, both Greece and Turkey have raised and maintained force levels up to approved JCS standards, and far beyond their ability to support without continued U.S. or other assistance. Both lack the industrial and technical base to supply military matériel on a large scale or to provide a substantial proportion of the “common use” items required by the armed forces: petroleum products, medical supplies, and even some food and clothing items. Economic aid programs in Greece and Turkey were adjusted to take account of defense requirements, which consume about 40% of the total government budget in each country.
Economic aid programs throughout the balance of the Near East and African area were keyed to meet the crucial Arab refugee problem, the neutralism in international relations which has characterized the Arab world, and the deterioration in Israel’s economic [Page 524] capabilities during a period of rapid economic expansion and heavy absorption of immigrants. $50 million were provided under Section 205 of the Mutual Security Act of 1951 for refugee relief and resettlement in Israel. In addition, $13.5 million was made available for economic assistance to Israel. Critical foreign exchange shortages made it necessary to provide the bulk of such aid in the form of reimbursements to the Israel Government for expenditures already made toward these ends.
Point Four efforts in the area ranged from relatively small efforts in Iraq and Saudi Arabia to more elaborate proposals for Iran, Israel, Jordan and Lebanon. Programs have been kept small in oil-rich Iraq and Saudi Arabia, but maintained to induce the adoption of mutually beneficial projects which would not otherwise be undertaken. In the less-fortunate neighboring states and in North Africa, where the need for technical assistance is equally pressing, the United States is accepting a larger portion of the financial burden. Throughout the area, however, the main accomplishment of the year was the final signature of Point Four general agreements and the determination of specific program needs. There was relatively little substantive progress to report. Notable exceptions are the Israel trainee program, the U.S. finance team in Saudi Arabia, the well-advanced Liberian program, and Iranian “impact” programs in locust control, malaria control and well-drilling.
Communist influence in most of these countries during FY 1952 has been negligible or non-existent. In most countries the Communist Party has been officially outlawed. Party organization appears to be weak and ineffectual throughout most of the area. Communist strength, however, made itself felt in Iran and Egypt. In both countries, nationalist extremists joined forces temporarily with Communist groups in outbursts of violence against government forces. In Iran the Communist (Tudeh) Party shows evidence of recent gains in strength and organization. In each case the nationalist group broke with the Communists after a brief period of common cause, but the speed and success with which the Communists united with nationalist fanatics to whip up anti-Western emotion gives cause for concern.
The political unrest in Iran is inextricably bound up with the economic crisis brought about by expropriation of British petroleum properties. Western defense planning has had to be adjusted in the light of the total loss of Iranian oil. The Iranian economy has been seriously disrupted by the loss of oil revenues. The FY 1952 Iranian Point Four program included a $5 million U.S.-financed commodity import program under the fairly flexible Act for International Development interpretation which obtained during the year. A further extension of this type of economic assistance [Page 525] seems inevitable. To avert the possibility of Communist domination in Iran, the United States may have to extend special economic assistance.
Progress in initiating development projects under the technical cooperation program was, in the main, disappointingly slow, particularly in the Arab States. The underdeveloped countries of the area showed considerable reluctance in committing themselves to joint programs of technical cooperation. Arab resentment over the volume of assistance accorded to Israel complicated the problem, In addition, the task of locating, hiring and securing clearances for technicians created a further barrier to progress. Less than 50% of authorized U.S. personnel were on duty in the field as of June 30, 1952.
There is now insufficient legal authority to carry on the types of economic development programs designed to meet the long-range problems of the area. Some countries, e.g., Syria, require, in addition to present programs for technical education, long-range programs for capital development. The Act for International Development is now limited by Congressional action in connection with the FY 1953 appropriation requests to the furnishing of “technical assistance” in the sense of technical demonstration work. Commodity and capital assistance is generally limited to programs directly related to this basic educational objective. If the United States is to contribute more directly to the solution of the long-range development problems, the scope of presently legal economic aid activities would have to be broadened by law to include assistance for fundamental economic development.
4. Far East and South Asia. Political instability and threats to internal security are significant factors in most of the countries of this area. One of the major objectives of U.S. policy is, accordingly, to increase popular support for the governments. With the possible exception of Thailand, and in spite of occasional temporary setbacks elsewhere, there is growing evidence that the presence of American aid missions is steadily creating a climate of opinion that enables local governments to push ahead courageously with internal economic and social reforms without which the loyalty and the faith of the people in the cause of the free world, and their willingness to fight for that cause if necessary, cannot be expected to exist.
To further the U.S. objective of strengthening against aggression the present moderate and western-oriented governments of this area, the U.S. has undertaken major military assistance programs for Indo-China and the Chinese Nationalists. JCS force goals for Indo-China were set on the assumption that there would be no invasion by the Chinese Communists. Measured against these goals, [Page 526] good progress has been made. The build-up of French forces has approximately attained these goals. 50% attainment is reported with respect to the native forces of Vietnam, Laotia [Laos], and Cambodia. Nevertheless, despite the highest priority having been given to allocations of military matériel, less than ¼ of the army program so far financed (exclusive of Lisbon off-shore procurement) had been shipped by June 30, and less than 15% of programmed air force matériel.
As to Formosa, forces are numerically about at the level prescribed in JCS goals, which assume that their mission will be the defense of Formosa. However, available equipment is scanty and combat effectiveness of all three services is rated at 20–25%. Enough MDAP matériel was programmed through fiscal 1952 to supply about 50% of the equipment needs of ground forces Shipments by June 30 had reached 30% of the amount so far programmed. Out of the $120 million air force program, shipments were 1%.
About 15–20% of the programs approved for the Philippines and Thailand (about $100 million each) had been shipped by June 30.
In Indo-China, Formosa, the Philippines, and Thailand, the U.S. had undertaken economic and technical assistance programs designed to strengthen the financial and economic fibre of these countries, thereby permitting their governments to maintain internal security and stability and provide a solid base for their defense efforts.
U.S. economic and technical assistance programs in Indo-China have three main purposes: (a) provide economic support for the French and Indochinese anti-Communist military forces; (b) at the same time assist in securing a greatly improved effectiveness on the part of the newly created governments of the Associated States, without which nothing better than stalemate appears possible; and (c) help increase production and pave the way for future economic development. Critically needed support has been given to the military forces through repair and maintenance (little actual improvement has been possible) of highways, bridges, ports and waterways; through care and resettlement of refugees from combat and guerrilla areas; and in various indirect ways. Although the governments have far to go in recognizing and forcefully grappling with their responsibilities for providing leadership and basic services to their people, the MSA Program has registered some initial gains on this front. Production, particularly of rice, has been assisted to some extent.
In Formosa the principal purposes of economic aid programs are: (1) to support the military establishment, (b) to maintain a standard of living adequate to insure support of the Government by the [Page 527] general population and prevent unrest that would endanger internal security, and (c) to help the island become independent of outside economic assistance in a relatively short period.
The program has effectively buttressed the military effort by bringing in common-use imports and supplying counterpart to cover the associated local costs, and by helping to rehabilitate vital transport and power facilities, etc. Through heavy commodity imports (mainly producer goods), active participation in the work of the Economic Stabilization Board, and support of the many-sided work of the Joint Commission on Rural Reconstruction (JCRR) among the peasants, the program has also had a marked degree of success in offsetting the heavy economic strain imposed by military expenditures. Economic stability has been substantially maintained. Price curves have tended to flatten out. Notwithstanding multiple burdens on the farmer, he appears, on balance, to be at least as well off as pre-war. Communist-inspired unrest is of negligible proportions. The program has contributed substantially to the industrial expansion now in process. Aid to basic utilities, help in building fertilizer production capacity, importation for sale of vital raw materials and manufacturing equipment items, and the financing of a broad engineering advisory contract with a private American firm have all played a significant part. The point has just now been reached where joint consideration with the Chinese of a timetable for termination of economic aid appears feasible.
In the Philippines, economic and technical assistance is designed to: (a) improve the efficiency, integrity and vitality of government administration; (b) institute economic and social measures for the improvement of the living standards of the people, both as a necessary means of achieving internal security and in order to strengthen the permanent foundations of a democratic society; (c) build up production both for local use and for export; and (d) spark an economic development program involving diversification of activity and affording maximum opportunity for private enterprise. The program has secured measurable improvement in tax assessment and collection, customs, and import controls; stimulated a broad effort to raise competence in public administration generally; been partially responsible for a marked rise in agricultural production; launched promising campaigns in public health and education; and made a successful start in assisting in the settlement of the large and fertile island of Mindanao, which is proving an important factor in pacification of the Huks. A vigorous effort to promote industrial expansion and diversification, on a private-enterprise basis, is about to begin. Social reforms, however, are encountering difficulty, despite earlier pledges. For lack of political support, success [Page 528] is not being achieved at the moment in securing needed legislation to ameliorate the lot of the farmer and laborer.
5. American Republics. U.S. programs in this area must be conducted against a background of far-reaching political, social and economic adjustments. These adjustments have afforded nationalist and Communist groups a wide opportunity to provoke dissension in existing political institutions and to associate the so-called economic imperialism of the United States with the underdevelopment of the area. While political instability has been no worse than in the past, most of the governments have been preoccupied with domestic problems.
Despite this preoccupation, the majority of Latin American governments favor collective defense of the hemisphere. U.S. Military Grant Aid programs for the Title IV countries (first provided for in the FY 1952 MDAP program) have been designed for a very limited objective: to meet equipment and training deficiencies of selected units of certain Latin American nations which these nations have agreed to earmark for specific missions of hemisphere defense, missions which would otherwise, in the event of war, require the deployment of U.S. forces. Bilateral military assistance agreements have been or are being negotiated with the more important governments. 7 have been signed to date. As of June 30, no shipments of military assistance matériel had been made to Title IV countries, since program refinements and matériel deliveries were delayed by agreement negotiations. Programs totaling more than $34 million had been established, however, and the initial shipment went forward on July 25.
The FY 1952 technical cooperation program was predicated upon the demonstrated ability of the Latin American governments effectively to utilize Point Four type assistance, coupled with the manifest need to encourage political stability. Another major purpose was to increase the production of strategic materials. The $19 million in available funds (including carry-overs from FY 1951) provided an important contribution to the attainment of U.S. political and economic objectives in the region. But the total program, amplified by private and public loans, private investment and expenditures of local governments, was enormously larger. Against the availability from U.S. funds of $19 million, the Latin American governments contributed about $28 million toward the cost of technical cooperation programs, a less favorable ratio than had obtained in FY 1951. This ratio did not reflect a smaller total participation in program cost, but rather a larger U.S. participation. The 1951 ratio of three to one is expected to be reattained.
6. United Nations Programs. Of the many international programs conducted by the United Nations and affiliated specialized agencies [Page 529] during FY 1952, three were of particular significance in that they complemented or paralleled activities in one or more sectors of the Mutual Security Program: The UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the U.N. Technical Assistance Program, and the U.N. International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF).
UNRWA was established in 1950 to resolve the problem of 850,000 Arab refugees from Palestine who have been recipients of relief from the United Nations since 1948. Its activities are concentrated in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq. During FY 1952, refugee relief has been provided at an over-all cost of $3 per person per month. U.S. contributions to UNRWA and its predecessor, U.N. Relief for Palestine Refugees, have totaled over $93 million, against $64 million from 41 other nations. The contribution in FY 1952 was $50 million. The UNRWA program for the three years ending June 30, 1954 calls for $250 million, of which $200 is earmarked for rehabilitation and $50 for relief. Relief expenditures are to be reduced from the level of $27 million in FY 1952 to $18 million in FY 1953 and to $5 million in FY 1954. Plans are well under way for the integration into the Near Eastern Economy of some 150,000 refugee families.
The $20 million 1950–51 U.N. Technical Assistance program, to which the U.S. contributed over $12 million, was supported by 55 countries and operated in 69 countries. 64 countries have pledged support for the “second financial period” (calendar 1952), and 81 countries have requested technical specialists or training services. The U.S. pledge for 1952 is $11 million. As of June 1, 1952, 681 experts were working in the field under the U.N. Technical Assistance Program, and 758 trainees were studying abroad. This U.N. program has several advantages for the U.S.: it has demonstrated its ability to operate in areas where activity would be difficult for the U.S. alone; it costs less to operate since the U.S. pays only part of the expense; and it makes possible the utilization of foreign specialists in fields where U.S. technicians might be difficult to find. It is true, however, that U.N. programs have been carried on in many of the countries where the U.S. has also been operating. There is an important need for program coordination to prevent duplication of U.S. and U.N. efforts.
The emphasis in the U.N. International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) program has been directed away from its earlier focal point—the assistance to child victims of aggression in countries which had received UNRRA aid—toward long-range programs for children in underdeveloped countries. Three-fourths of its present funds have been apportioned to Asia, Africa, Latin America [Page 530] and the Eastern Mediterranean countries. All programs in Eastern Europe are terminated or in the last stages of completion.
ii. european nato and western germany
1. International and Internal Political Developments
a. Stability of governments. NATO governments, with the exception of France, are rated as being generally stable and as giving reasonable promise of continuity for at least the next year or so. The Pinay government is relatively more stable than recent French governments, although the chances for its survival for a considerable period after the Assembly reconvenes in October are not rated as particularly good. The Governments of the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Denmark do not enjoy very comfortable margins in the parliamentary majorities at their command, a fact that frequently weakens their ability to take a firm, all-out stand on issues related to the fulfilment of their NATO commitments. In the U.K., however, the defense program was initiated by the Labor government and receives the support of the Labor Party, except for the Bevanite minority. The Italian Government is prevented from taking positive action on many issues because of the forthcoming national elections. Aside from communism, there are no serious threats to internal political stability in any of the European NATO countries. The rising power of the right in Italy and the royalist question in Belgium are potential threats to internal stability, although neither of these is felt to be immediate.
b. Communist strength. The Communist Party appears to be a major threat only in France and Italy. In other NATO countries, notably the Scandinavian members, the Netherlands, and the U.K., the Communist potential for undermining internal security and contributing to governmental instability is almost non-existent. Although not a serious threat, there are some areas of Communist strength in certain other countries, such as Belgium and Western Germany. For example, controlling Communist infiltration of the key labor unions remains a troublesome problem in Belgium.
Communist Party membership and voting strength in Western Europe have declined sharply since the early post-war years. Total membership in the European NATO countries and Western Germany is estimated to have declined from 3,500,000 in 1946 to 2,600,000 at present. In countries other than France and Italy, Communist voting strength has been about cut in half during the past four or five years.
The French Communist Party remains a powerful and cohesive organization claiming around 650,000 members, and is rated as having a high capacity for subversive activity. In the case of Italy, [Page 531] the recent elections indicate that the government parties have lost 25% of their electoral support since 1948. This has caused the Italian Government to postpone or avoid positive action on a number of vital matters until after the national elections in the spring of 1953.
For the coming year, the outcome of next year’s national election will be not only crucial for Italy but extremely important for the West as a whole. Should the Democratic parties fail to command a working majority in the new parliament, the road to Communist domination will be open. Should the Democratic elements be placed in a minority, a Communist take-over would be nearly immediate unless prevented by an alliance of the Center parties with neo-Fascists or other extreme right elements or both. In either case, the NATO and united Western front would be seriously shaken.
c. Developments in NATO. One year ago NATO was in a critical situation. Despite many long months of discussion in Council meetings and elsewhere, no agreement had been reached on such pressing problems as German participation in Western defense and the admission of Greece and Turkey into NATO. NATO had no adequate knowledge of where it stood or of where it was going. There was widespread feeling that military requirements, as embodied in the Medium Term Defense Plan, were not realistic. Too much emphasis was placed on long-range planning and not enough on the need for a rapid build-up to meet the immediate danger. There was no clear idea of the political and economic capabilities of the NATO countries. Confusion as to the scope of the North Atlantic Treaty led many Europeans to think that NATO was being used by the U.S. solely as a military alliance without regard for the development of closer political and economic ties. Finally, there were serious defects in the organization of NATO which resulted in duplication of effort and general inability to reach decisions and take action. All these factors produced dissatisfaction and discouragement, and, as a result, NATO was for a time unable to move ahead at an adequate pace in many areas.
One of the major achievements of the past year in clearing the way for further progress in the defense build-up was the work of the Temporary Committee of the Council. As a result of the TCC’s work, NATO gained several things which it previously lacked. First, it gained a realistic and carefully screened statement of its military requirements, as prepared by the Screening and Costing Staff (SCS). Second, an over-all program was drawn up which, for the first time, tackled the problem of reconciling military requirements with the political and economic capabilities of the NATO nations. The TCC force recommendations were accepted by the NATO countries with a minimum of political strain, although the Belgians [Page 532] at first objected strongly to the approach used. These recommendations formed the basis for the 1952 force goals agreed to at Lisbon. The force goals placed emphasis on the immediate build-up, rather than on long-range plans for the distant future.
The Lisbon agreements did a great deal to restore confidence in the NATO program. Governments were given definite targets and a firm basis for future planning, as well as assurance that the U.S. would not try to push NATO countries to the point where they would be threatened with internal collapse. As a result, the people in the European countries gained confidence that NATO was succeeding. The advantages gained from the TCC experience are to be continued in the future through the Annual Review process.
A second major accomplishment of the past year has been the negotiation and signing of the EDC Treaty,6 the NATO–EDC Protocol, and the convention on relations with the Federal Republic of Germany. These three related agreements are the key to solving a major problem in the defense of the NAT area—German participation in Western defense—while at the same time avoiding the problem of German membership in NATO. The German convention,7 when ratified, will restore Germany to the degree of independence necessary to insure German willingness to participate; the EDC Treaty will make it possible for Germany to participate within the context of an integrated Western Defense Force in a manner acceptable to those countries which fear a resurgence of German militarism; and the NATO–EDC Protocols will tie the EDC to NATO so as to insure reciprocal guarantees between Germany and NATO. Ratification of the Schuman Plan8 and preliminary steps toward establishing Schuman Plan institutions have further reinforced this progress. It should be emphasized that the difficult tasks of securing ratification of the EDC Treaty by all members and ratification of the German contract by France and Germany still remain.
The U.K. has not joined either the EDC or the Schuman Plan (primarily because of its ties outside the continent of Europe and its policy of avoiding identification as a strictly European power), but has nevertheless agreed to cooperate closely with these continental institutions.
[Page 533]
Thirdly, as a result of action initiated at Ottawa,9 Greece and Turkey acceded to the North Atlantic Treaty. This brought to a successful conclusion prolonged efforts on our part to strengthen NATO’s southern flank by bringing these countries into NATO. Inclusion of Greece and Turkey was for a long time opposed by some of the smaller nations, particularly Denmark, Norway, and the Netherlands. Their eventual agreement to bringing in Greece and Turkey was obtained without unduly straining internal NATO political relationships, although there would be strong resistance to further extension of the NATO area.
Changes during the past year in NATO organization resulted in improvements in NATO’s ability to reach decisions and take action. At Ottawa for the first time Council meetings were attended by the Foreign, Defense and Finance Ministers of each country. Although Council meetings as a result became somewhat large and unwieldy, this disadvantage was more than compensated for by the fact that Council decisions received broad support from key ministries within each government. The major reorganization plans agreed at Lisbon should further strengthen NATO, provided they work out in practice. Centralization of NATO headquarters should improve general efficiency. Creation of a high-level Permanent Council is designed to enhance NATO’s ability to reach important decisions. Creation of an International Staff and a permanent Secretary-General should make it possible for NATO to become a more effective operating organization.
Some progress was made during the year in developing the non-military objectives of NATO, although there is strong feeling among the European members that more should be done in this field. A working party of small nations established at Ottawa developed a set of recommendations which was accepted by the Council at Lisbon. The Council at Lisbon also passed a strong resolution on the importance of non-military objectives. Council discussion of political matters has increased and has served a useful purpose in demonstrating to the European members that NATO is something more than a purely military organization.
2. Progress in Build-Up of Military Forces
a. General Review. In February 1952 the NATO countries agreed at Lisbon on firm goals for the build-up of their ground, naval and air forces through December 31, 1952. Provisional and planning goals were established for the periods through calendar 1953 and 1954, respectively. The goals were stated in terms of combat-ready forces, and stiff criteria were established as to the standards of [Page 534] readiness to be used in measuring the extent to which force commitments were being met. These standards measure units against a required combat-readiness on M Day for air units; and at stated periods ranging from M to M+30 days for Army units, and from M to M+180 days for naval units.
Although less than 5 months have elapsed since the Lisbon meetings, the current status and the current rate of build-up of NATO forces provides some basis for estimating the probability of attaining the Lisbon goals for December 31, 1952. The prospects of meeting these goals are discussed below separately for ground, naval and air forces. Generally, in cases where shortfalls in ground forces are predicted as of December 31, 1952, the units required to meet force goals will be actually in existence but will not yet meet the required readiness standards.
Estimates are based on information and judgments provided by the Military Assistance Advisory Groups in each of the NATO countries, as revised and analyzed by JAMAG. The Department of Defense is engaged in a comprehensive analysis of the status of NATO forces as of December 31, 1952 in connection with the development of the U.S. position for the NATO Annual Review. The results of this study should be available shortly as supplementary data.
b. Ground Forces. On June 30, 1952, European NATO countries (i.e., NATO countries excluding Greece, Turkey, the U.S. and Canada) had available for commitment by SACEUR 22 M–through–M+30 divisions. By December 31, 1952 it is estimated that these countries will have available 28⅔ divisions or about ⅔ of their Lisbon goals of 43⅔ divisions;† with an additional 16⅔ divisions available on an M+30+ basis in varying degrees of readiness. The anticipated shortfall of 15 divisions is due to failures to provide active-duty personnel, training, and (to a lesser degree) equipment sufficient to bring the units up to the required standards.
Substantial agreement between anticipated performance by December 31, 1952 and the Lisbon goals is indicated for divisions in readiness categories through M+3. However, a shortfall of almost 50% of units at M+15 to M+30 standards of readiness is expected. These are the forces designated to augment and back up the covering force of M-Day and M+3 which will have to bear the initial brunt of any aggression in Western Europe. In view of the fact that the Lisbon goals are admittedly militarily inadequate, the expected [Page 535] shortfall in augmenting these covering forces means serious impairment of SACEUR’s ability at the end of the current year to contain an enemy attack for more than a very limited period.
It should be emphasized that these estimates with respect to the number of effective divisions through M+30 take no account of the adequacy of combat and logistic support or of wartime reserves. Both elements are admittedly inadequate or on an extremely austere basis, a situation which inevitably sets serious limitations on the ability of combat ready units to sustain operations for an extended period. For purposes of analysis, however, these problems are separable from the question of the adequacy of organic combat divisions in terms of trained personnel and equipment, which were the only readiness criteria established at Lisbon for major combat units.
The following table10 summarizes the actual June 30 status, and anticipated December 31, 1952 status of NATO ground forces, by type of division and by readiness category. Figures are only for divisions to be contributed by European NATO countries. Seven and two-thirds U.S. and Canadian divisions are not included. Addition of these .7⅔ divisions to the 43⅔ divisions indicated in the table would give approximately the 50 divisions which constitute the popularly known Lisbon goals.
c. Naval Forces. As of June 1952, the only substantial present and prospective shortfalls in meeting Lisbon goals for December 31, 1952, for naval units related to escorts, minesweepers (AM and AMI) and submarines. Between June 30 and December 31, some closing of the gap for ocean minesweepers available by M+180 is indicated, as well as a small increase in available inshore minesweepers at M+180.
The expected shortfall in inshore minesweepers at M+180 is appreciable (approximately 25% of the Lisbon goal) and stems primarily from the French decision to eliminate, as impracticable and unsatisfactory, 31 fishing boats previously scheduled for conversion to fill their M+180 commitment for that type of vessel. With the exception of these inshore minesweepers, it appears probable that the Lisbon 1952 naval force goals will be substantially met and, in certain cases, exceeded. This general conclusion should be accepted, nevertheless, with certain reservations with respect to special conditions in specific countries.
Total shipments as of June 30 were $340 million out of a cumulative program of $1,200 million, or about 28% in dollar value. Table [Page 536] 2 on the next page11 indicates the numbers of major vessels programmed through fiscal 1952, number shipped through June 30, and anticipated total shipments as of December 31, 1952.
As far as is known, delays through December 31, 1952 in delivery of items in the FY 1950–FY 1952 Navy matériel programs which can be considered as contributing to NATO shortfalls in meeting Lisbon goals will have occurred only in the case of 6 PC’s for Denmark and the Netherlands, and sonar equipment for Portuguese patrol craft.
d. Air Forces. The number of effective front-line aircraft available as of June 30 was more than ⅓ below the December 31, 1952 Lisbon goals. By December 31, this shortfall is expected to be reduced to somewhat less than 6%. The shortfall, however, appears concentrated in the critical categories of interceptors and fighter-bombers and amounts to nearly 16% of the Lisbon goal for Interceptor Day Fighters-Fighter Bombers (IDF/FB). The situation in summary is as follows:
Effective 30 June 1952 Estimated Effective 31 Dec 1952 Lisbon Goal 31 Dec 1952 Anticipated Shortfall or Overage Total Front-Line Aircraft (M Day) 2,038 3,087 3,276 –189 Interceptor Day Fighter 878 1,225 1,243 –18 IDF/FB 624 1,053 1,238 –185 All-Weather Fighter 117 294 326 –32 Light Bomber 28 66 66 0 Medium Bomber 139 144 144 0 Tac Recon 127 161 109 +52 Transport 123 142 144 –2 Maritime 2 2 6 –4
Actually the above table exaggerates the shortfall (185) in the IDF/FB category, at least in so far as the mere number of aircraft available is concerned. At least 94 of this shortfall will be on hand in Denmark. It is the lack of unit training in this case which precludes their being included as effective front-line aircraft. On the other hand, a rigorous application of readiness standards would probably reduce further the figures on effective front-line aircraft from those given in the above table. There is evidence, for instance, that inadequate pilot training and unit training, lack of organizational equipment, and even failure to approximate authorized personnel [Page 537] strengths for certain air units, singly or together, seriously limit the combat readiness of one or more air units in nearly all the NATO countries. The above figures must therefore be regarded as upper limits on the probable number of effective front-line aircraft which European NATO countries will be able to contribute by December next towards meeting their 1952 Lisbon commitments.
It should further be emphasized that, in estimating the number of effective aircraft to be available by December 31, 1952, no allowance was made for requirements for combat reserve aircraft. Such reserves are, of course, virtually non-existent except for the U.K. The present estimates of front-line aircraft refer, therefore, to units in what has frequently and appropriately been dubbed a “one-time” air force. This fact should not be overlooked in appraising the considerable progress which it is anticipated will be made by December 1952 towards meeting the Lisbon goals.
Total shipments as of June 30 were valued at $300 million, 13% of cumulative programs totaling $2,300 million. Table 3 on the next page12 indicates the numbers of aircraft (by type) programmed through fiscal 1952, shipped through June 30, and anticipated total shipments as of December 31, 1952.
The projected shipment of unit equipment aircraft through December 31, 1952, indicates that sufficient aircraft will be on hand in each NATO country to permit activation of units as scheduled and to meet most of the peacetime attrition requirements. The remaining shortage in peacetime attrition aircraft will have been eliminated by June 30, 1953.
While delays in MDA shipments of ground handling equipment are reported to have interfered with the ability of some countries to obtain maximum effectiveness of aircraft on hand, the point is in sight where delays in pilot training in the NATO countries may be a limiting factor and may even require postponement of MDAP aircraft shipments to avoid non-utilization of MDAP-supplied matériel.
3. Economic Situation.
Throughout fiscal year 1952 several continuing major problems were encountered in administering the Mutual Security Program. First, every possible support had to be given to the military buildup. Second, there had to be taken into consideration the fact that the build-up was imposing a heavy economic burden on countries that were just emerging from war and postwar economic and political disruptions, and were vulnerable to drastic economic dislocations. Third, it had to be recognized that while the build-up required [Page 538] an immediate economic and military effort, further effort would be required to maintain the forces after the higher levels had been reached. The force in being after 1955 would continue to impose a heavy economic load on the European countries, and if they were to carry this load their economies would have to be further strengthened. Fourth, the program had to safeguard and continue to promote the long-term aims of U.S. foreign policy in Europe which began with the Marshall Plan.
The long-term objectives are solvency—ability to meet the required import level without extraordinary U.S. aid—and the progressive unification of Western Europe. Concurrently with the promotion of these specific aims the program had to consider the desires of the European people for a rising living standard and their reasonable hope that Western Europe would at some early date achieve sufficient economic strength to tackle some of its most pressing social and economic problems, among them the continued large structural unemployment in Western Germany and in Italy; the under-development of Greece, Turkey and Southern Italy; and the persistence of large Communist parties in Italy and France.
a. Growth of Economic Base. Despite the burden of the rearmament effort, further progress has been made in expanding Western European trade and production. Coal and steel production, agricultural output, and the foreign trade of the NATO and associated countries all rose to new postwar highs, and most of them were well above prewar.
The most spectacular advances were made in steel and electricity production. Output of steel ingots and castings for the NATO countries and Germany, which had begun to exceed 1938 levels as early as 1949, continued to grow from 48.3 million metric tons in 1950 to 53.6 million tons in 1951, and electricity output rose from 192 billion KWH in 1950 to 214 billion KWH in 1951, thus more than doubling prewar production. Motor vehicle output showed only a slight increase during the year under review, but with 1.5 million units produced, stood almost two-thirds higher than prewar. The combined industrial index for the NATO countries and Germany rose from 135% of 1938 to 144% during the year reviewed.
Significant advances were also made in coal production. Output for the NATO countries as a whole grew from 338 million tons in 1950 to 342 million tons in 1951, for the first time exceeding 1938 production. Germany also increased its coal output by 7.6 million tons to 118.8 million tons, but production was still considerably below the 136 million tons mined in the Ruhr area in 1938. Total coal production for NATO plus Germany amounted to 460.6 million tons, still about 14 million tons short of 1938 levels.
[Page 539]
Substantial increases were also scored in agricultural production. Output of milk, meats, fats and oils, and bread grains all rose, raising the index of gross agricultural production for the OEEC countries from 103% of 1938 in fiscal 1950 to an estimated 112% in fiscal 1952. Foreign trade of the NATO countries and Germany increased sharply from a monthly average of $1.4 billion in 1950 to close to $2 billion in 1951.
The continuous growth of Western Europe’s economic base had an important politically stabilizing effect. It proved that a measure of rearmament could be carried on while still expanding the economy as a whole. Most important of all, the continuous economic expansion made it possible for most of the NATO countries to carry the armament burden without serious inroads on the living standards of their people. In most of the NATO countries standards of living—admittedly lower than desirable—continued to improve somewhat, although at a far lower rate than before the Korean war. A notable exception is the United Kingdom where living standards declined slightly.
b. Balance of Payments. The year was marked by serious balance-of-payments crises in the two principal NATO countries. France lost $100 million in reserves, and the U.K. lost $2 billion in gold and dollars. The weakness of the French and British gold and dollar reserves has been an important factor in the stretch-out of the armament program of these countries. Most of the other NATO and associated countries ended the year with reserves that were equal to or slightly higher than the reserves in the preceding year.
The gold and dollar drain experienced by France and the United Kingdom was closely related to the violent fluctuations in the prices of commodities that have marked the post-Korean period. In the immediate months following the outbreak of the Korean war, rubber and the coarser wools rose to three times the price they had commanded in early 1950. Other fibers and the non-ferrous metals, especially tin, also showed remarkable increases. As a result, the sterling area, a large exporter of these commodities, was able to raise its gold and dollar holdings from $2.4 billion in June 1950 to $3.9 billion in June 1951. The period of large reserves, however, was short-lived. The drain began when the United Kingdom, which had consumed its inventories in the hope of price break, had to replenish its stocks of raw materials, while the other members of the sterling area, cashing in on their earlier gains, raised the level of their imports from the dollar area. By December 1951 sterling area reserves had fallen to $2.3 billion and by March they had decreased to $1.7 billion, remaining at that level through June 30. EPU gold and dollar settlements accounted for over $400 million of this loss in reserves.
[Page 540]
In the case of France the generally higher cost of imports was aggravated by political and budgetary uncertainties which induced a flight from the franc. The result was that France, which had held a net creditor position in the European Payments Union in early 1951, not only became a net debtor in 1952 but was required to make gold and dollar settlements of $130 million during the fiscal year. With the prospect of somewhat greater financial stability, France’s balance-of-payments position has improved in recent months. France’s trade deficit narrowed in the second quarter. Furthermore, the gold loan of the Pinay government appears to have resulted in substantial additions to French gold reserves.
4. Defense Expenditures and Defense Production.
Countries in the NATO area increased their total defense expenditures from $6.2 billion in fiscal 1951 to $8.8 billion in fiscal 1952. The U.S. agencies concerned believe that, by and large, assuming no major change in the degree of international tensions, and leaving aside increments in defense expenditure which may be expected to accompany further expansion of total production, the current orders of magnitude of European defense expenditures are as high as can be supported.
Expenditures by the Federal Republic of Germany were for the most part associated with occupation costs and remained at about the same level as in fiscal 1951. Despite the encouraging overall progress in increasing NATO outlays for defense, expenditures made by France, the U.K. and Italy fell short to some extent of the levels which U.S. Mutual Security agencies had hoped might result from the TCC review. The major area in which expenditures were lower than had been hoped for was in the field of defense budget outlays for procurement of major matériel.
Major matériel expenditures did, nevertheless, rise almost $900 million above fiscal 1951 levels, accounting for 35% of the total increase in defense budgets. In the case of France, budgetary restrictions made it necessary for the U.S. to take over (through the offshore procurement device) the financing of a substantial number of matériel procurement contracts which had previously been entered into by the French Government. As the fiscal year closed the French were making a strong plea to the U.S. for further budgetary relief of this nature. The fact that funds available during fiscal 1953 are not adequate to meet the full French request will mean some further curtailment of their defense production plans in the future.
The U.K. recently took a governmental decision to stretch out the timing of its NATO defense build-up. While fiscal 1952 matériel expenditures were not appreciably affected, defense production [Page 541] levels in fiscal 1953 will have to be decreased unless off-shore procurement financing can be provided. As to Italy, the Government has shown continuing reluctance to increase the overall level of defense expenditures, and has particularly been unwilling to accede to U.S. proposals that expenditures for major matériel procurement be substantially increased.
Outside the field of major matériel procurement, it is difficult to evaluate to what degree limitations in defense expenditures have been a factor in delaying the build-up of forces. It appears clear that in certain cases increased defense budgets might have permitted faster progress to have been made in raising and training forces.
In connection with the Lisbon conference, each country adopted a revised defense expenditure plan calculated to support the agreed force build-up. These defense budget plans were stated in response to suggestions emanating from the TCC review as to desirable levels of defense expenditures for each country. The fact that neither the expenditure levels originally suggested by TCC nor those eventually adopted by the countries have been reviewed by NATO or by the U.S. Government to determine their adequacy to support the Lisbon goals, makes it difficult to establish any meaningful bench-marks against which to measure country defense expenditures. However, since both the TCC Executive Bureau “desirable levels” and the individual defense expenditure plans of the NATO countries have been frequently referred to in the U.S. Government’s appraisals of NATO progress, the following table is presented subject to the major reservations indicated above.
Defense Expenditures of European NATO Countries
(in $ Millions)
Fiscal 1951 (Actual) Fiscal 1952 (MSA estimate) Country plans adopted in connection with Lisbon decisions (Replies to TCC) TCC Executive Bureau “desirable levels” Belgium–Luxembourg 200 375 389 530 Denmark 56 90 97 123 France 2,325 3,200 3,271 3,271 Italy 641 820 811 920 Netherlands 228 320 395 395 Norway 67 101 112 112 [Page 542] Portugal 50 58 58 58 United Kingdom 2,665 3,865 4,007 4,007 Total 6,232 8,829 9,140 9,416
a. Defense Production. In general, the activities of defense production in the NATO areas, up to June 30, proceeded at a less rapid pace than had been estimated as possible during the course of the TCC exercise. To some extent, no doubt, shortfalls were the result of administrative red-tape, of the difficulties encountered in conversion and tooling up, and of technical bottlenecks arising from shortages of machine tools, manpower, and critical materials. In its major outlines, however, the failure of European defense production to reach the levels that had been hoped for by NATO and by the U.S. Government was attributable to two main factors: (1) failure of the European governments to provide in their defense budgets adequate financing for major matériel procurement; and (2) delay recognition, by the U.S. Government and by NATO, of the crucial contribution that could be made to the collective effort by large-scale off-shore procurement by the U.S.
Both in France and Italy, “politico-economic” considerations resulted in major delays in government placement of firm defense contracts, and in substantial downward adjustments in the originally hoped-for programs. These two countries together received about two-thirds of the total of $450 million “regular” off-shore procurement contracts placed by the U.S. in Europe during fiscal 1952. In addition French contracts for matériel in the amount of about $180 million were taken on under the so-called “Lisbon commitment” type of off-shore procurement. The fact that the regular offshore procurement contracts were not placed in any volume until the last quarter of the fiscal year, together with inadequate budgetary provisions for major matériel procurement, resulted in a [Page 543] marked under-utilization of defense production capacity in these two countries during fiscal 1952.
In the U.K., financial stringencies have not so far played such a major role as in France and Italy in accounting for lagging defense production. Tooling up delays, and shortages of manpower, critical materials, and machine tools, all of which had to be diverted from industries turning out peacetime goods for export, are seen as the major reasons for the shortfalls experienced to date. The “stretchout” for the balance of the program is, however, prompted basically by financial considerations, both as regards budgetary outlays and as regards protecting from further depletion Britain’s hard currency reserves. That a certain amount of physical capacity is available, given the existence of financial underwriting—and particularly, given the promise of dollar payments to compensate for the loss of foreign exchange when capacity is shifted from production for export—is evidenced by the fact that the U.S. has recently been able to place off-shore procurement contracts in the amount of $65 million for tanks, ammunition, and electronic equipment.
Now that the off-shore procurement program is getting under way on a large scale, the U.S. and the European NATO countries are faced with major policy decisions relating to the establishment of a rational pattern of European production. Among the many factors which must be considered are: (1) comparative cost of U.S. and European output, (2) need to fill gaps in material availability caused by U.S. production shortfalls, (3) strategic necessity of having a nearby source of supply for expendable items such as ammunition and spare parts, and (4) long-range European production needs for maintenance of military equipment.
The problem of developing European production of ammunition is one of the most pressing at this time. Also in an advanced stage of planning and negotiation is a substantial program for the production of fighter aircraft. Combat and transport vehicles, electronics, and smaller naval craft are among the other important fields where production is either planned or is already activated for offshore procurement.
[Here follows Section III, “Austria, Yugoslavia and Spain”.]
iv. near east and africa, including greece and turkey
1. Internal and External Security. With the notable exception of Egypt and Iran, the governments of countries receiving U.S. assistance in the Near East and Africa displayed a considerable degree of stability during fiscal year 1952—a stability which is the more noteworthy because of the widespread tensions in the area. In the face of a heightened nationalism throughout many of these countries, which the Communists have made every effort to exploit, the [Page 544] orientation of their governments remained anti-Communist and friendly to the West.
No state in the area appeared to offer any serious threat to the immediate security of any other state at the end of June 1952. Although Iraq still refused to recognize Syria’s new military government, the danger of overt interference has subsided. The smouldering threat of a “second round” of Arab attack on Israel seems to have lost its force as it has become apparent that no conceivable coalition of Arab states could defeat the Israeli forces. The only serious possibility of danger from external sources remained that of the U.S.S.R.
Turkey continued to be one of the strongest and most stable governments in the area, and Greece demonstrated some evidence of progress toward political stability. In neither country is Communism considered to be a serious threat: Communism has been embraced by less than 1/10 of 1% of the population in Turkey. Recent elections in Greece showed less than 10% of the votes cast for the extreme left-wing parties. In these elections, the extreme left-wing, considered to be covertly Communist controlled, failed to increase its strength over the 1950 returns. There continues to be evidence of Communist activity in moderate left-wing groups and labor unions as well as in distressed tobacco areas in Thrace and Macedonia.
The long standing distrust which has separated the Greeks, Turks and Yugoslavs has subsided. Greece and Turkey, both before and since their admission to NATO, have enjoyed increasingly friendly relations, and the two countries have agreed to a considerable exchange of military information. Both have made efforts to improve generally their relations with Yugoslavia. Yugoslav military leaders have indicated a willingness to engage in military staff talks with Greece and Turkey. It is hoped that such a move would eventually lead to coordinated defense efforts. Greece is now considering revival of a prewar arrangement under which an area in the Port of Salonika is reserved as a free port for Yugoslav use.
Internal security threats have been held in check in most countries. The glaring exceptions are, of course, Iran and Egypt. It is still too early to predict the course to be followed by Premier Mossadeq, who now has virtually unlimited power in Iran, or by Egypt’s military coup regime headed by General Naguib. There is nothing to indicate any tendency on the part of either leader to look to the East, although in Iran there is some evidence that a working agreement between the Tudeh (Communist) Party and some extreme elements of the National Front existed during the anti-Qavam riots. It is possible that the Tudeh Party in Iran may [Page 545] be the ultimate victor if Mossadeq’s somewhat different concepts of economic planning prove faulty.
In Egypt, however, immediate steps were taken by the authorities to ensure that there would be no recurrence of the January 26 riots and burning of Cairo. The drive against the already outlawed Communist Party has been intensified; the Communist Party in Egypt, unlike the Tudeh Party in Iran, is badly organized and lacking in indigenous leadership. Recent reforms in the economic situation and those contemplated in land distribution will probably further decrease strength of the Communists and will certainly dilute the effect of their propaganda.
Assassinations of Jordan’s Abdullah and Pakistan’s Liaquat Ali Khan removed strongly pro-Western leaders and for a time threatened internal security in the two countries. New leaders lack the ability of their predecessors, but have maintained their Western affiliations.
Following Colonel Shishikli’s military coup of November 1951, Syria appears to have the most stable government in its seven year history as an independent republic. Although its leaders are in many ways nearer to a pro-Western attitude than other Arab countries, they still have not concluded negotiations for a Point 4 general agreement, for IBRD loans, or for Arab refugee resettlement projects.
2. Attitude Toward Collective Defense. Of the 14 countries in the Near East and African area, only two—Greece and Turkey—are participating in an effective collective defense arrangement. Both are strong supporters of the principle of collective defense and have cooperated fully with the United Nations in its efforts to stop Communist aggression. Both provided combat troops in Korea, with full popular support. Both have acceded to the North Atlantic Treaty and have thus become full-fledged members of NATO.
The only other collective defensive arrangement in the area is the Arab League Collective Security Pact, to which Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen are all signatories. This “defense arrangement” of Arab states is less likely to produce actual security than to develop a bargaining position for Western defense proposals. Significantly, three of the first four countries to ratify the pact (Egypt, Iraq, Syria) have already expressed considerable interest in joining the proposed Middle East Defense Organization (MEDO).13 Lebanon has unofficially indicated its willingness to participate in MEDO after one of the other Arab League states has broken the way. That the principal interest of [Page 546] Arab leaders is in the chance to acquire military training and equipment in no way detracts from the importance of their interest, which represents a sharp change in the traditional neutralism of the area.
Israel, which has not been approached with respect to MEDO, might find it difficult to enter a collective defense alliance with the Arab states, but has unofficially offered to “cooperate” with them in such an arrangement.
3. Military Assistance and Defense Support to Greece, Turkey and Iran.
a. Greece
Summary of MDAP Programs, FY 1950–52
(In millions of dollars)
Program FY 50–52 Shipments as of June 30, 1952 Percent Shipped Army 202.2 82.5 40.8 Navy 70.2 60.3 85.9 Air Force 116.2 23.8 20.4 Total 388.6 166.6 42.9
Greece was just recently admitted to NATO. Lisbon Force Goals were not established for 1952; so program objectives are in terms of JCS-approved forces. From the manpower point of view, the Greek Armed Forces are capable of raising and maintaining the forces approved by the JCS.
The size of the Greek National Army meets the approved JCS force goals with the exception of a shortfall of 2 light infantry regiments. There has been no change in the size of the Greek Army. The arrival of arms and equipment, however, have greatly increased its effectiveness. The Greek Army as a whole is considered well led, satisfactorily trained and, except for some matériel deficiencies, prepared to carry out its wartime mission.
The Greek Navy is organized in accordance with the approved JCS force goals. The training vessels and equipment received in the past year have increased the effectiveness of the Greek Navy by approximately 30%.
The strength of the Greek Air Force has remained unchanged. Aircraft and supporting equipment to complete the build-up of the air force were programmed in the MDAP FY 1953 budget. This [Page 547] force is not considered sufficient adequately to defend Greece from the air, nor is it large enough to furnish sufficient tactical air support to exploit the potential of the large Greek National Army. However, it is the maximum force to which the Royal Hellenic Air Force is considered capable of expanding by December 1953.
Since the advent of the Mutual Security Program, the Greek defense effort has remained at the relatively high level established shortly after the outbreak of the Korean war. The maintenance of this effort has required defense expenditures of about $185 to $195 million per annum, or about 9% of the gross national product and about 40% of total national budget expenditures. This level of expenditures has provided for (a) the maintenance of about ten divisions of land forces, support troops, and a smaller complement of sea and air forces; (b) the requirements of the armed forces for food, clothing, medical supplies, fuels, and other quartermaster items, as well as the creation of reserves of similar items to meet additional requirements related to the mobilization of trained reserves numbering some 300,000 men; and (c) the construction of military highways, airfields, port facilities, telecommunications, and other essential military installations.
The present size of the Greek Armed Forces appears adequate to enable Greece to fulfill its task within NATO and no significant expansion in the Greek defense effort is now contemplated. The goal of the Greek defense effort is qualitative, calling for the continued improvement of the military effectiveness of the existing forces. In fact, the Greek Government has expressed its intention of reducing military expenditures by as much as 10% but has stated that this reduction will be effected without impairing either the size or effectiveness of the defense establishment.
b. Turkey
Summary of MDAP Programs, FY 1950–52
(In millions of dollars)
Program FY 50–52 Shipments as of June 30, 1952 Percent Shipped Army 187.5 79.6 42.5 Navy 81.4 34.7 42.6 Air Force 173.6 24.3 14.0 Total 442.5 138.6 31.3
[Page 548]
In view of Turkey’s recent admission to NATO, no Lisbon Force Goals were established for Turkey in 1952. However, Turkey’s Armed Forces already exceed JCS goals by about 19%. Present plans do not call for an increase in numerical strength over the present 386,000. Nor will the number of existing units be expanded. Continued modernization, however, will proceed during and after 1952 through programmed shipments of transport equipment, artillery, etc., for the Army, modern submarines for the Navy, and the transition of the Air Force into jets. The main build-up will be in the increased efficiency of existing forces in the field of training and in the arrival of programmed equipment.
The Turkish Army is trained and organized to defend Turkey from aggression by nations which border on Turkey. Therefore, in evaluating the combat potential of the Turkish Army, it is not possible to compare the Turkish divisions and brigades with similar units of the U.S. Army fully prepared for overseas movement. It is felt, nevertheless, that the Turkish organizations are sound and that they can successfully defend the areas to which they have been assigned against the types of units which may be employed against them by Russia and/or Bulgaria, unless they are overwhelmingly out-numbered. The major matériel deficiencies of the Turkish Army consist chiefly of: (a) unit equipment, (b) spare parts and replacements, including annual operating requirements and combat reserves, and (c) training ammunition and combat reserve ammunition. Unit equipment deficiencies include artillery, engineering, motor transport, signal, mechanized, and miscellaneous small arms. FY 1952 and the proposed FY 1953 programs cover these matériel deficiencies.
In the Turkish Navy the major equipment deficiencies are vessels (new replacements and modernization), vessel equipment, electronics equipment, ordnance equipment and supplies, rockets, ammunition, and engineering equipment and supplies. There are also inadequate naval bases and logistic bases, anti-submarine and anti-torpedo nets, shipyards, and underground POL storage facilities. All these deficiencies are due for correction in the FY 1953 Aid Program and Turkish plans.
The major deficiency of the Turkish Air Force is that it is not yet equipped with modern aircraft to act as a real deterrent to an aggressor. Modern jet fighter-bomber aircraft are programmed for the planned forces of the Turkish Air Force to the extent that they can be efficiently utilized. The delivery of this type aircraft has just started and will continue through FY 1953. If all programmed equipment is approved and delivered, it will complete the initial equipping of a Turkish Air Force of 15 squadrons.
[Page 549]
The main task of the Gendarmérie—an organized, semi-military organization of approximately 40,000 officers and men—is to assist the police in the country areas and to reinforce the Army in time of war. It is trained along military lines under the Turkish General Staff. The Ministry of National Defense provides administration, supply and part of the pay. The enlisted personnel are conscriptees as in the other armed forces. However the Gendarmérie operates in its police function under the Department of Interior.
There is no system of Organized Reserve, National Guard or similar civilian training organization within the Turkish Armed Forces. Neither officers nor enlisted men receive additional military training after they have completed their required active duty tour of military service. Upon discharge, officers and men are given mobilization assignments. The Turkish Armed Forces reserve system is wholly dependent upon each individual’s ability to retain the knowledge acquired during his required active duty tour of service.
Turkey lacks manufacturing facilities to sustain herself independently in a major conflict. Food, clothing, and most small-arms ammunition can be provided, but major armaments, vehicles, aircraft, spare parts, and POL supplies must be imported. POL storage facilities are marginal, and must be supplemented if extended conflict is anticipated and before any POL support could be provided to allies who may operate in Turkey.
MDAP has exceeded the scope of the originally assigned mission in that the Turkish Armed Forces are being developed beyond Turkey’s economic ability to support them without outside help, yet not to the point where, unaided, they can deter the Soviets from successful all-out aggression. In regard to the economic capacity of the Turks to maintain present forces, unless there is great improvement in the Turkish economic situation, continued aid will be necessary for operational and maintenance purposes over and above that which Turkey’s 500 million lira annual budget will support.
c. Iran
[Page 550]
Summary of MDAP Program, FY 1950–52
(In millions of dollars)
Program FY 50–52 Shipments as of June 30, 1952 Percent Shipped Army 61.0 14.5 23.8 Navy — — — Air Force 5.6 1.1 19.8 Total 66.6 15.6 23.4
The development of a first-class fighting force in Iran with a reasonable degree of self-sufficiency is a long-term project requiring basic reform. One of the most serious deficiencies in the Iranian forces is the poor quality of its leadership. Corruption and lack of integrity are widespread and contribute significantly to the inefficiency of the Army. Much procrastination, little supervision and casual compliance with orders are significant characteristics. Better command techniques may be obtained as younger, better trained officers reach key positions. However, there is little delegation of any important authority, probably because of danger of a coup.
The strength of the Army—132,500—is 5% above JCS approved force goals. However, this strength is spread over two infantry divisions and 4 infantry brigades in addition to JCS force goals. Equipment is generally adequate considering the state of training and ability to absorb. Present level of equipment is approximately 35% of planned minimum. Deficiencies include inadequate leadership, planning, training and logistical support. It is estimated that the Army could be logistically supported in combat for only two weeks. The Army is considered to be sufficiently effective to maintain internal order.
The Navy strength is within 5% of JCS approved force goals. Equipment is generally adequate except for repair facilities. The Iranian Navy has virtually no combat capabilities in view of obsolescent equipment and limited size of naval forces. It has limited capabilities for assistance in internal security operations.
The Air Force is within 1% of approved JCS force strength but is not organized in accordance with JCS force goals. The level of equipment is generally adequate except for training aircraft. The Iranian Air Force has no combat capabilities. It suffers from the [Page 551] overall deficiency of the Army, aggravated by the technical requirements of aviation.
The Iranian Gendarmérie is not part of the peacetime military establishment. Dispersed in small squad posts and functioning in non-municipal and non-tribal areas, it lacks communications and transportation. It has no capacity other than day-to-day police functions, little flexibility and practically no reserves. Morale is somewhat better than in the Army because the Gendarmérie has no conscripts and there is relatively better pay and opportunity for graft.
. . . . . . .
v. far east and south asia
1. Internal and External Security. During FY 1952 the Nationalist Government of China and the Government of the Philippines were the most stable in the entire Far Eastern area. There was no internal challenge in Formosa to either Chiang Kai-shek or the Kuomintang. The strength of the present Philippine Government was somewhat impaired by the victory of the opposition party in the 1951 elections. But the cause of good government as well as the stability of the government was considerably furthered because the elections were on the whole conducted honestly and with a minimum of violence, in contrast to previous elections.
The coalition Government of Burma achieved a resounding victory by being reelected by a substantial margin of the popular vote. This clear mandate from the people strengthened the hand of the government and encouraged it to form a more effective cabinet with a more positive attitude toward solving the problems confronting it. It is significant to point out that the government’s endorsement of American economic assistance was an important issue in the elections.
The Associated States of Indochina made significant progress in assuming the responsibilities of self-government within the past year. The government which had been in power for the past two years in Viet-Nam was replaced by a new and stronger government in June 1952. A major part in this change was played by Emperor Bao Dai and is believed to reflect an increasing determination on his part to stabilize the government and improve its effectiveness.
Thailand has had a recent history of governmental change by coup rather than by parliamentary process. Two such coups were attempted in the past year, both of which were engineered within the government itself to consolidate the power of the military leaders. This seeming governmental instability, coupled with the highhandedness and corruption of the governing group, has been a matter of serious concern to the United States Government. There [Page 552] is no reason to believe, however, that the present control of the governing group will be disturbed in the near future.
In Indonesia the government which had given assurances to the United States acceptable under Section 511(a) of the Mutual Security Act was ousted in February, 1952 and was succeeded, after a difficult formation period, by a government which was an uneasy coalition. This government has not yet, after a number of months, been accorded a clear vote of confidence by the parliament. Instead, the parliament has voted the government an “opportunity to work.”
Food shortages and economic difficulties continued to offer the greatest danger to the internal security of existing governments in India and Pakistan, where they are exploited by the Communists. Communist strength was significantly disclosed in India, where Communist-supported candidates drew over 6,000,000 votes in the recent general elections, although the party itself claimed only 30,000 dues-paying members prior to the election. Twenty-seven Communists and Communist sympathizers were elected to the House of the People (total seats—497). The Communists won large blocs of seats in several of the state assemblies. While not by themselves sufficiently strong to be able to form a government in any state, the Communists emerged from the general election with the largest number of elected representatives in opposition to the Congress Party, although the Socialists actually polled twice as many popular votes. The Congress Party drew only 45% of the total votes while winning 74% of the seats in the House of the People. It is possible that the disclosure of Communist Party strength within India has had some effect on the Government’s attitude toward international communism. While India is still unwilling to become directly involved in the cold war or openly to take the part of the West, the Indian Government has shown signs of apprehension regarding the intentions of Red China, and has recently taken steps to strengthen its defenses along the Chinese and Tibetan borders.
In Nepal the quarrels of the Congress Party leaders and a series of minor outbreaks of violence kept the country in a turmoil which was exploited by the Communists.
Turning from the question of governmental stability in terms of constitutional change to the question of overthrow by force, most governments in the area were in the shadow of serious threats throughout most of the period. In Indochina active warfare was waged during the entire year to regain and consolidate control in areas which had been taken over by the Viet Minh. With French financial subsidies and military effort, coupled with U.S. arms aid, the governments of the Associated States were able to retain their control over large portions of the area. The Vietnamese Government [Page 553] has also been increasingly successful in maintaining and extending its political control. Although there has been no overt invasion from Communist China, the military capability of the opposing Viet Minh forces has been increased significantly through arms assistance and technical support and advice from the Chinese Communists.
Burma has long been the scene of a number of concurrent insurrections. The outstanding effect of the government’s victory in the elections was the adoption of a more aggressive attitude toward the insurgents, including considerably more effective efforts against the Communist insurgents, with a corresponding decrease in the attention given to the non-Communist Karen rebels. The government’s forces have prevented the insurgents from improving their position and have succeeded in driving them from some parts of the country which they held for several years.
Indonesia has been in little danger of external invasion, but it has been the scene of widespread dissident action, particularly by a fanatic Muslim group operating in Central and West Java. It is estimated that there are a total of approximately 128,000 dissidents in the country, of whom 70,000 may be armed. The Communist Hukbalahap movement in the Philippines was broken during the past year and is no longer considered to be a major threat to the stability of the government. While Thailand has a large number of Chinese residents, it is nevertheless relatively free from any threat of organized Communist dissidents. Total Communist strength is not believed to exceed 20,000 members and sympathizers.
In considering the security of governments in this area there is always, of course, the ever-present twin danger faced by the Nationalist Government of China on Formosa, in the form of the threat of an all-out military assault by the Chinese Communists from the mainland and the economic difficulties arising from the maintenance of disproportionately large armed forces needed to meet an invasion from the mainland.
Pakistan and India appear no nearer to a solution of the long-festering Kashmir problem; and Afghanistan continues the bitter quarrel with Pakistan over the “Pushtoonistan” issue.
2. Economic Aid and Defense Support. Programs of general economic aid, including the financing of substantial consumer and capital goods imports, were carried on in the following countries:
Country Approved Programs Nationalist China (Formosa) $81.0 million Indo-China 24.7 million Philippines 32.0 million [Page 554] Thailand 7.0 million Total $144.7 million
The objectives and general nature of programs in the three major countries are indicated in the Part I, “Summary Evaluation”.
3. Military Assistance to Indochina and Formosa
a. Indochina
Summary of MDAP Programs, FY 1950–52‡
(In millions of dollars)
Program FY 50–52 Shipments as of June 30, 1952 Percent Shipped Army 469.6 144.5 31 Navy 89.1 66.7 74 Air Force 146.2 25.0 17 Total 704.9 236.2 33
Present Army Strengths in Relation to JCS Goals
Force Men, % of Goal Units Over JCS Goal Units Short of JCS Goal French 100% 1 RCT 1 Inf. Div. (12 Bns.) 1 Inf. Regt, Armored 1 Inf. Regt. (Separate) Vietnamese 50% 4 Inf. Div. (9 Bns.) 7 Inf. Div. (12 Bns.) 3 Inf. Bns. (Separate) 1 Airborne Battalion Laotian 50% 1 Inf. Company (Separate) 4 Inf. Bns. (Separate) 2½ Airborne Bns. [Page 555] Cambodian 50% None 6 Inf. Bns. (Separate) 1½ Airborne Bns. Total 86% (395,803)
Combat effectiveness of French units in comparison to U.S. wartime units ranges from 40% up to 150%. Vietnamese units compare to U.S. forces in the range of 30% up to approximately 100%. As forces are undergoing a profound transition in modernizing their armies, the bulk of the native officers and enlisted men do not presently possess the aggressiveness, initiative and technical skill of U.S. wartime units. The FY 50–52 aid programs involve equipment to supplement the French equipment for 3 French Divisions, provide the majority of the equipment for 6 Vietnamese Divisions, and provide the equipment for the Laotian and Cambodian battalions.
Naval forces are currently at JCS force goals, with the following exceptions:
Short 8 LSSL (Land ship supp. large)
Over 3 LSIL (Land ship Inf. large)
Over 6 CG Patrol Craft (40 foot)
Vessels 91% of JCS force bases
Personnel 71% of JCS force bases
Naval aircraft 100% of JCS force bases
Combat effectiveness of French naval forces varies from 40 to 100% in comparison to U.S. Navy. For instance, effectiveness is 40% for ASW where there is little or no occasion for use, but 100% in river warfare operations where there is daily combat or employment. FY 50–51 MDA programs provide requirements to meet JCS force goals but subsequent programs are relied upon to provide replacement craft and equipment.
The Air Force is currently at JCS force goals, with the following exceptions:
a.
Short 1 fighter-interceptor squad. (25 operating aircraft)
b.
Short ⅓ Recon. Squad. (16 operating aircraft per squadron)
c.
Possess 2 Transp. Squads. Light in lieu of 2 Transp. Squads. Medium specified in JCS goals.
d.
Have no fighter bomber attrition aircraft and are 1 plane short in operating aircraft.
[Page 556]
Combat effectiveness is rated at 74%. Lack of maintenance personnel and pilots lowers effectiveness of French Air Force.
b. Formosa
Summary of MDAP Programs, FY 1950–52
(In millions of dollars)
Program FY 1950–52 Shipments as of June 30, 1952 Percent Shipped Army 139.3 41.6 30 Navy 11.4 5.0 44 Air Force 119.7 1.2 1 Total 270.4 47.8 18
On Formosa all ground force units are now in being but are currently being reorganized into a lesser number of divisions to be in accord with the JCS force goals. The reorganization process was 25% complete by June 30. Over-all combat effectiveness of ground forces is 20%. Ground force units will, upon completion of delivery of FY 1950–52 programs, be approximately 50% supplied with equipment required by new tables of organization and equipment.
Naval forces are now at the level prescribed by the JCS. Combat effectiveness of the Navy is 22%; Marines, 25%. The Navy will be 100% equipped, upon completion of FY 1950–52 deliveries, but there will be a continuing requirement for replacement spare parts and materials for overhaul of vessels.
The Air Force is at the numerical level prescribed by the JCS with the exception of an all-weather fighter squadron. Combat effectiveness is 18% for combat aircraft units, 65% for transport aircraft units. The process of conversion of conventional fighter aircraft squadrons to jet fighter bombers squadrons will be 50% complete when FY 1950–52 programs have been delivered. The Nationalist Chinese Government recently expressed concern over delays in delivery of MDAP aircraft, on grounds that a large number of trained pilots was available without planes to fly.
. . . . . . .
vi. american republics
1. Internal and International Political Developments. Most of the Latin American governments appear to be relatively secure at the conclusion of the period under review. Political stability and continuity [Page 557] of governments are at least superficially no worse than they have generally been in the past. Nevertheless, the past year has witnessed unconstitutional seizures of governmental power in Cuba and Bolivia. The ability of the constitutionally-elected governments in Chile and Ecuador to maintain themselves in control hung at times in precarious balance. In other countries, such as Colombia and Venezuela, those in control were preoccupied with maintaining their power against actual or threatened violence. In still other countries stability was the product of one-man or one-party rule which tolerated no opposition.
Aside from the influence of Communism, there were no external threats to political stability within the Hemisphere. Among the nations of Latin America, none seriously threatened the security of any other.
Internal threats to political stability were apparent in several countries due primarily to the unpopularity of governments with important groups within their countries, economic difficulties, or a combination of the two. The dissatisfaction of important elements was obvious in Argentina, Colombia, Cuba and Guatemala. Economic difficulties were the most important factor in Bolivia, Paraguay and Panama, and a strong contributory factor in Argentina. In Brazil, the developme
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 82
|
https://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/analyses/a-partner-of-choice-spains-performance-in-the-european-defence-fund-in-2023/
|
en
|
A partner of choice? Spain’s performance in the European Defence Fund in 2023
|
[
"https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/20240703-fiott-un-socio-de-eleccion-el-desempeno-de-espana-en-el-fondo-europeo-de-defensa-en-2023.jpg",
"https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/daniel-fiott-74x74.jpg",
"https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/20240801-salazar-multilateral-export-controls-1-100x100.jpg",
"https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/20240617-chislett-economy-doing-better-but-no-room-for-complacency-100x100.jpg",
"https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/daniel-fiott-74x74.jpg",
"https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/20240801-salazar-multilateral-export-controls-1-100x100.jpg"
] |
[
"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/osy2e/1/",
"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/tgzfL/1/",
"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Wu5PU/1/",
"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/61xqb/2/",
"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/CkgfI/1/"
] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Gonzalo de Salazar",
"William Chislett"
] |
2024-08-07T08:59:13+00:00
|
Spain strengthens its role and stands out in the European Defence Fund 2023, leading in areas such as innovation and air combat.
|
en
|
https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/favicon-elcano.ico
|
Elcano Royal Institute
|
https://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/analyses/a-partner-of-choice-spains-performance-in-the-european-defence-fund-in-2023/
|
Theme
Following the 2023 call results, Spain is performing positively in the European Defence Fund.
Summary
Since 2021 there have been three calls of proposals under the European Defence Fund (EDF). The 2023 results publicly released by the European Commission in May 2024 reveal that Spain continues to perform well as to the Fund. This can be seen in the way Spain is involved in the majority of projects and how it is playing the role of coordinator in several important defence research and development projects. For this successful role, Spain relies on a diversified defence ecosystem made up of firms, specialised colleges and research institutes. The country relies on a several large defence firms to ensure efficient project management, and it is increasing its collaborative role in key military domains such as defence innovation, air combat, information superiority, ground combat and more. Thus, the 2023 EDF call results ring a positive note for Spain’s continued role in developing the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base.
Analysis
On 16 May 2024 the European Commission released the results of its latest call for proposals under the European Defence Fund (EDF).[1] This is now the third set of results released by the Commission and the publicly available data reveals more about how EU member states cooperate on defence research and prototyping at the EU level. In fact, the 2023 EDF call results reveal that the Commission has invested €1.03 billion in 54 collaborative defence research and development projects. This is an increase on the 2022 EDF call results, which saw €832 million invested in 41 projects,[2] but a decrease compared with the 2021 EDF call results of €1.2 billion invested in 60 projects.[3] Overall, the 2023 results see further investments in cyber defence, ground, air and naval combat, and space, while there has been an additional push on projects designed to stimulate innovation among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
The aim of this paper is to ascertain how Spain has performed in the 2023 EDF call results, and to compare its performance with 2021 and 2022. In this respect, the aim is to learn how Spanish firms and institutes have benefitted from the EDF, in what military capability domains Spain specialises in and how it engages with entities from fellow EU member states. Past research on this matter has revealed that Spain plays a key role in important military domains for Europe and its diverse defence ecosystem positions the country to play a coordinating and supporting role in many EDF projects. This, it was argued, demonstrates not only Spain’s key role in the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) but a determination to further enhance Spain’s domestic defence industrial base.[4]
In global terms, Spain can be said to be a preferred partner of choice when launching EDF calls and projects, based on its technological base and its capacity for project management and innovation. For example, in 2023 Spanish entities were involved in 40 of the 54 funded projects, which confirms Spain’s high involvement rate since the EDF was created: in 2021 Spain was involved in 42 of 60 projects and in 2022 it participated in 32 of 41 projects. Further still, Spain’s political and financial investment in the EDF is clearly making a solid financial return with Spanish entities involved in projects that have secured €1 billion worth of EU contributions –this compares favourably with the €722 million in 2022 and €1 billion in 2021–.
1. The European picture
Ever since the first EDF call results in 2021, it has become easier to understand how EU member states invest their time and resources in collaborative defence projects at the EU level. For the EDF call results, the EU has placed the bulk of its investments in the naval domain (€288 million), space (€158 million), information superiority (€140 million) and underwater capabilities (€129 million). As Figure 1 shows, however, since 2021 there have been increased investments in vital sectors such as sensors, space, cyber, materials and components, and information superiority.
In addition to the military domains in which the EDF is investing its resources, the data reveal how each EU member state is benefitting from the Fund. It is no surprise to learn that the EU member states with the better established and sizeable defence industrial and technological bases are better positioned to secure funding. As Figure 2 shows, France leads the way in how many entities it has involved in EDF projects since 2021 (366 entities) but Italy (320), Germany (295), Greece (171), Netherlands (129) and Belgium (106) are performing well too. For its part, there are 291 entities involved across the 2021, 2022 and 2023 EDF call results, making Spanish entities some of the most cooperative and engaged in the Fund from across the EU. In Spain’s case, 117 entities were involved in the 2021 call results compared with 88 in 2022 and 86 in 2023. The decline should not be a cause of concern, however, as in 2023 Spain recorded the fourth highest participation rate (86 entities) after France (117), Germany (104) and Italy (103).
The EDF call result data for 2023 also enable us to have a fuller picture of the military and technological domains each EU member state cooperates in under the Fund. As Figure 3 reveals, since 2021 45 entities from Spain are involved in projects devoted to defence innovation, although it has a strong involvement in projects related to air combat (24 entities), digital transformation (25), ground combat (23) and space (24).
2. The Spanish picture
In each of the projects shown in Figure 3 there are a range of Spanish entities based on a diverse set of technological and innovative attributes. For instance, the 2023 call results saw the involvement of 36 major Spanish defence firms (such as Navantia, Escribano, GMV, Airbus, Sener, Indra, Santa Barbara and more), 10 technical institutes and state agencies and seven universities (Vigo, Murcia, Madrid, Castilla-La Mancha, Barcelona, Valencia and Catalunya). The involvement of this diverse set of industrial and technical actors only serves to re-emphasise the conclusion reached in past analyses that Spain is served by a diverse and innovative defence ecosystem.[5] Having these Spanish entities involved in pan-European defence projects meets Spain’s long-standing goals of not only playing an engaged role in EU security and defence, but also to ensure the internationalisation of the Spanish defence sector.
This diverse defence industrial ecosystem also allows Spain to play a collaborative role in multiple military technology domains. In this respect, Spain is not restricted to niche technological sectors and it can flex its industrial and technological muscles in multiple domains simultaneously. As Figure 4 indicates, Spanish entities are present in all technology domains that are financially supported under the EDF. The data here reveal that Spanish firms and institutes are mainly involved in defence innovation, ground combat, air combat and information superiority. Nevertheless, the data also show that Spanish entities have increased their presence in cyber and force protection and mobility projects since 2021. What is also noticeable is that Spanish entities were not present in sensors or simulation and training projects in 2023.
Furthermore, the 2023 data on the EDF calls confirms that Spain is seen as a reliable and efficient project coordinator for EDF projects. To be clear, being a project coordinator for any EDF project not only implies a responsibility for managing the project consortium, but also that the project coordinator is responsible for the initial project idea and in bringing together partners from across Europe for the call for proposals. Thus, a project coordinator plays a vital role in the initiation and life-blood of any EDF project. Figure 5 shows that Spain is one of the leading member states for project coordination, as it is responsible for 30 projects, surpassed only by France (with 42). However, project coordination is only one part of the story, as it is necessary to analyse the financial volume of the projects being managed. In Spain’s case, the 30 projects it coordinates since 2021 amount to €470 million, calculated in terms of the euro contributions to the projects under the EDF. In this regard, Spain ranks third among EU member states in terms of project value with only France (€1.06 billion) and Italy (€612) surpassing it –Germany is below Spain at €261 million–.
Conclusions
The publicly available data on the EDF released by the European Commission shows that Spain plays an important industrial and political role in helping to develop the EDTIB and European security. Although the EDF pertains only to defence innovation and development –so therefore at the earlier stages of defence industrial development–, the data for 2023 confirm that Spain is a wholesale beneficiary from the Fund. This not only validates its involvement in EDF projects since 2021, but also demonstrates that the Fund remains an attractive financial incentive tool for EU defence cooperation. Spain plays its full industrial and technological role in military domains that are increasingly essential for Europe’s defence, and the country and its firms/institutes are seen as essential partners and leaders for a great many EDF projects. The Fund has emerged as a tool, albeit with limited financial resources (€8 billion for 2021-27), that can promote defence cooperation and allow Spain to Europeanise and internationalise the excellence of its domestic defence industrial base. Finally, continuing to benefit from the EDF means that Spain is well-placed to make the political case for further EU-level investments in defence, especially with the planned European Defence Industrial Programme (EDIP) for joint defence procurement on the horizon. In this regard, Spain has the opportunity to further promote the excellence of its national defence ecosystem.
[1] European Commission (2024), ‘Results of the EDF 2023 Calls for Proposals’, 16/V/2024.
[2] European Commission (2023), ‘Results of the EDF 2022 Calls for Proposals’, 26/VI/2023.
[3] European Commission (2022), ‘European Defence Fund 2021 Calls for Proposals – Results’, 20/VII/2022.
[4] Daniel Fiott (2023), ‘Investing and innovating? Spain and the European Defence Fund’, ARI, Elcano Royal Institute, 28/VIII/2023.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 1
|
https://www.europeanairshows.co.uk/aviation-anniversaries/march/royal-netherlands-air-force-founded
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force created — European Airshows
|
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/6338a0a6905456183845cdcb/65c3fcb43cf0a73ded5188eb/1711557597174/Fokker_G.1_in_de_vlucht_%282160_033464%29-topaz-enhance-3.2x.jpg?format=1500w
|
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/6338a0a6905456183845cdcb/65c3fcb43cf0a73ded5188eb/1711557597174/Fokker_G.1_in_de_vlucht_%282160_033464%29-topaz-enhance-3.2x.jpg?format=1500w
|
[
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/60368e2c-d450-41c3-b3e0-8e492be95907/White+logo+-+no+background.png?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/60368e2c-d450-41c3-b3e0-8e492be95907/White+logo+-+no+background.png?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/2099625f-f281-4ca8-a29f-552ed6cd808b/Fokker_G.1_in_de_vlucht_%282160_033464%29-topaz-enhance-3.2x.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/b6a9eff0-e9e5-4860-b9ab-51cf2d3f9878/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2841%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/7adf0965-9e7e-4964-90ab-600fdd8538bc/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2863%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/88eefa71-bf5d-44d6-b0fe-a40b47493a55/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2864%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/68e8bd37-b498-4d76-b7cb-92af2d6eaa61/Malta+Airshow+Static+Logo+%2842%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/c426a272-f244-4ff3-bd19-526bbca5625a/_DSC2673-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/8ae248f7-a6da-4b11-a73b-71648b8a4349/_DSC8656-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/ea0823d8-9dab-4c3e-af20-202886518e9a/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2882%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/d7e90dcd-95d0-4776-9990-a85dd20d1e61/_DSC5451-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/b6a9eff0-e9e5-4860-b9ab-51cf2d3f9878/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2841%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/7adf0965-9e7e-4964-90ab-600fdd8538bc/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2863%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/88eefa71-bf5d-44d6-b0fe-a40b47493a55/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2864%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/68e8bd37-b498-4d76-b7cb-92af2d6eaa61/Malta+Airshow+Static+Logo+%2842%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/c426a272-f244-4ff3-bd19-526bbca5625a/_DSC2673-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/8ae248f7-a6da-4b11-a73b-71648b8a4349/_DSC8656-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/ea0823d8-9dab-4c3e-af20-202886518e9a/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2882%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/d7e90dcd-95d0-4776-9990-a85dd20d1e61/_DSC5451-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/51455c00-009b-401c-900a-183f6fe0736d/White+logo+-+no+background.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/c4209e8a-10e9-4d6f-bd29-7fe2926a824f/favicon.ico
|
European Airshows
|
https://www.europeanairshows.co.uk/aviation-anniversaries/march/royal-netherlands-air-force-founded
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force
The Royal Netherlands Air Force was preceded by the Army Aviation Group (Luchtvaartafdeling, abbreviation LVA), founded in 1913 and renamed Army Aviation Brigade (Luchtvaartbrigade) in 1939. In 1953, it was raised to the level of independent operational part of the Dutch Armed Forces and renamed Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmacht).
Dutch air power started on 1 July 1913 with the founding of the Army Aviation Group at Soesterberg airfield (vliegbasis Soesterberg) with four pilots. When founded, the Army Aviation Group operated one aircraft, the Brik, which was supplemented with three French Farman HF.20 aircraft a few months later. These aircraft were soon outdated and the Dutch government ordered several fighter/reconnaissance Nieuport and Caudron aircraft to replace them.
The Netherlands maintained a neutral position during World War I and the Army Aviation Group did not take part in any action, instead developing the force's capabilities.
Pilot training was opened for ranks below officer, and technical, aerial photography, meteorological and navigation flights were established.
New airfields were established at Arnhem, Gilze-Rijen air base, Venlo and Vlissingen.
Because of the war, it was difficult to procure suitable aircraft. In 1917 this changed and 1918 personnel numbered 650.
After the end of World War I, the Dutch government cut the defence budget and the Army Aviation Group was almost dissolved. As political tensions in Europe increased during the late 1930s the government tried to rebuild the armed forces again in 1938 but there were many problems, not least the shortage of pilot instructors, navigators and pilots to fly the new multiple-engine aircraft. Lack of standardisation and resulting maintenance issues added to the complexity of the rebuilding task.
As war loomed, in July 1939 the Army Aviation Group was renamed the Army Aviation Brigade (Luchtvaartbrigade).
In August 1939, the Netherlands government mobilised its armed forces, but due to limited budgets the Army Aviation Brigade operated only 176 combat aircraft
In May 1940, Germany invaded the Netherlands. Within five days the Dutch Army Aviation Brigade was defeated by the Luftwaffe. All of the Brigade's bombers, along with 30 D.XXI and 17 G.I fighters were shot down; two D.XXI and eight G.I were destroyed on the ground. Two G.I were captured by German forces, one of which was later flown to England by a Fokker pilot. The Douglas bombers were used as fighters because no suitable bombs were available; these aircraft were poorly suited for this role and eight were shot down and three destroyed on the ground in the first hours of the conflict.
Despite their numerical superiority, the Luftwaffe lost 350 aircraft in the conquest of the Netherlands, many to anti-aircraft fire and crashes at improvised landing fields in the Netherlands rather than due to action by Dutch fighter aircraft. The cost was high – almost 95% of the Dutch pilots were lost. In recognition of their actions Queen Wilhelmina granted the highest Dutch military decoration, the Militaire Willemsorde (MWO), to the Army Aviation Brigade collectively.
Some aircrews escaped to England and on 1 June 1940, 320 Squadron and 321 Squadron were established there under RAF operational command. Due to a shortage of personnel, 321 Squadron was absorbed by 320 Sqn in January 1941. Although their personnel were predominantly from the Navy Air Service, Army Aviation aircrew also served with 320 Sqn until the end of the war.
In 1941, the Royal Netherlands Military Flying School was re-established, in the United States at Jackson Field (also known as Hawkins Field), Jackson, Mississippi, operating lend-lease aircraft and training all military aircrew for the Netherlands.
The separate Militaire Luchtvaart van het Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger (ML-KNIL; Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Military Air Service) continued in the Netherlands East Indies (NEI), until its occupation by Japan in 1942. Some personnel escaped to Australia and Ceylon. 321 Squadron was re-formed in Ceylon, in March 1942, from Dutch aviators.
In 1942, 18 (NEI) Squadron, a joint Dutch-Australian unit was established, in Canberra, equipped with B-25 Mitchell bombers. It saw action in the New Guinea campaign and over the Dutch East Indies. In 1943, 120 (NEI) Squadron was established. Equipped with Kittyhawk fighters, it flew many missions under Australian command, including the recapturing of Dutch New Guinea.
In June 1943, a Dutch fighter squadron was established in England. 322 (Dutch) Squadron, equipped with the Supermarine Spitfire, saw action as part of the RAF. 322 Sqn aircraft featured the British RAF roundels as well as the Dutch orange triangle. 322 Sqn was successfully deployed against incoming V-1 flying bombs. From mid-1944, during the invasion of Normandy, it executed ground attack missions over France and Belgium.
In July 1944, the Directorate of Netherlands Airpower was established in London.
In 1947, its Chief of Air Force Staff was appointed.
During the Indonesian War of Independence, the air force committed ground attacks and transported material and personnel. In 1948, transportation aircraft were used in support of the first Dutch airborne raid in southern Sumatra and Djokjakarta.
In 1951 several non-combat functions in the Army Aviation were opened to women.
On 27 March 1953, the Royal Netherlands Air Force officially became an independent part of the Dutch armed forces, rather than part of the Army.
The Air Defense Command, (Commando Lucht Verdediging, abbreviated CLV) consisting of a command unit, five radar stations and six fighter squadrons, had been established. Its radar equipment as well as its air defense fighters all came from obsolete RAF stocks.
After the Netherlands joined NATO another new command: Tactical Air Command (Commando Tactische Luchtstrijdkrachten) was established.
|
|||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 55
|
http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/pages/rnlaf.htm
|
en
|
Gallery index
|
[
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/karo%20logo%20n.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/diarol.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/tumblr.png",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/Pinterest.gif",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/facebook.png",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/twitter.png",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/youtube.png",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/welkom/attributes/mail.gif",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo1.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo2.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo11.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo3.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo4.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo5.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo6.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo7.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo8.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo9.jpg",
"http://karo-aviation.nl/photo/RNLAF/images/rnlaf/photo10.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
ON 1 July 2013 theRoyal Netherlands Air Force (RNethAF) will celebrated its 100 th anniversary. From one (borrowed) aeroplane in 1913, the Dutch air force has developed into a modern and versatile air arm, with the General Dynamics F-16 as its principal weapon system. In NATO, the RNethAF forms part of the Second Allied Tactical Air Force, and Dutch air force personnel hold important positions in the integrated organization
The crest of the Royal Netherlands Air Force bears the words Parvus NumeroMagnus Merito ("small in number but great in merit").
Operational units during these postwar years consisted of the 322d Dutch Spitfire Squadron, deactivated by Great Britain's Royal Air Force but now reactivated as a national squadron; No. 6 Auster Squadron (light aircraft); and a transport squadron, the TRANSVA, later numbered as the 334th Squadron. In 1948, international developments led first to the Brussels Treaty and, one year later, to the founding of NATO. The Netherlands accepted a Medium Term Defence Plan, whereby Belgian and Dutch air spaces were combined to one air defense area to be defended by No. 69 Group. The Royal Air Force was to take care of German airspace with two groups. This plan marked the beginning of international cooperation in the air defense field in what later would become the 2d Allied Tactical Air Force. It also was determined that tactical fighter bomber squadrons to support offensive and defensive ground operations needed to be established.
In the meantime, the U.S. government had agreed to the Mutual Defense Aid Program (MDAP). It was under the terms of this program that the tactical squadrons were to be equipped. In 1951, the first F-84E Republic Thunder jets arrived; and by 1953, with the support of U.S. MDAP teams, four tactical squadrons had obtained operational status. The buildup was accompanied by organizational changes. Army Air Command Netherlands was split up, forming an Air Defense Command, a Tactical Air Command, a Logistics Command, a Training Command, and an Air Field Defense Command. Two more air defense squadrons were added to the Dutch strength, as well as one more tactical fighter-bomber squadron and a photorecce squadron. In 1956, three night fighter squadrons, equipped with F-86K Sabre jets, completed the buildup.
The history of the Royal Netherlands Air Force during the years 1950 to 2000 is very much a history of NATO, of changes in strategy (from massive retaliation to flexible response), of modernization of aircraft and other equipment. With the fall of the Warsaw pact and the changed world order, new doctrines were needed necessitating different aircraft like long-range transport aircraft and tankers. But also of increasing costs,as a result, the Dutch air force today is smaller bud more suted for the task of today and rady for moost peace keeping operations and NATO deployments
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 19
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dutch_inventions_and_innovations
|
en
|
List of Dutch inventions and innovations
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/static/favicon/wikipedia.ico
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/static/favicon/wikipedia.ico
|
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/icons/wikipedia.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-wordmark-en.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-tagline-en.svg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Royal_Arms_of_the_Netherlands.svg/80px-Royal_Arms_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/16px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Frederiksborg_Slot_Hilleroed_Denmark_outer_courtyard1.jpg/180px-Frederiksborg_Slot_Hilleroed_Denmark_outer_courtyard1.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/House_of_Blackheads_-_Riga.jpg/180px-House_of_Blackheads_-_Riga.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Great_Armoury_in_Gda%C5%84sk_%285%29.jpg/180px-Great_Armoury_in_Gda%C5%84sk_%285%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/Gda%C5%84sk_Zielona_Brama.jpg/180px-Gda%C5%84sk_Zielona_Brama.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/Meuseujid_Raya_Baiturrahman%2C_Aceh.jpg/180px-Meuseujid_Raya_Baiturrahman%2C_Aceh.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/Dutch_door_open.jpg/200px-Dutch_door_open.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Rietveld_chair_1.JPG/200px-Rietveld_chair_1.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/Vroom_Hendrick_Cornelisz_Battle_between_England_and_Spain_1601.jpg/200px-Vroom_Hendrick_Cornelisz_Battle_between_England_and_Spain_1601.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Meisje_met_de_parel.jpg/180px-Meisje_met_de_parel.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f9/Rembrandt_lighting.png/180px-Rembrandt_lighting.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/CarrotRoots.jpg/180px-CarrotRoots.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/32/Carrots_of_many_colors.jpg/150px-Carrots_of_many_colors.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Mercator_1569.png/200px-Mercator_1569.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/OrteliusWorldMap1570.jpg/200px-OrteliusWorldMap1570.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/Nova_et_Accuratissima_Terrarum_Orbis_Tabula_%28J.Blaeu%2C_1664%29.jpg/200px-Nova_et_Accuratissima_Terrarum_Orbis_Tabula_%28J.Blaeu%2C_1664%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Side_A%2C_TDK_D-C60_20041220.jpg/220px-Side_A%2C_TDK_D-C60_20041220.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/OD_Compact_disc.svg/220px-OD_Compact_disc.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c5/Big_buck_bunny_poster_big.jpg/180px-Big_buck_bunny_poster_big.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/Vereinigte_Ostindische_Compagnie_bond_-_Middelburg_-_Amsterdam_-_1622.jpg/200px-Vereinigte_Ostindische_Compagnie_bond_-_Middelburg_-_Amsterdam_-_1622.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/M%C3%BCnze_Niederl%C3%A4ndische_Ostindien_Companie.jpg/200px-M%C3%BCnze_Niederl%C3%A4ndische_Ostindien_Companie.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/Jan_Brueghel_the_Younger%2C_Satire_on_Tulip_Mania%2C_c._1640.jpg/180px-Jan_Brueghel_the_Younger%2C_Satire_on_Tulip_Mania%2C_c._1640.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/VOC_aandeel_9_september_1606.jpg/200px-VOC_aandeel_9_september_1606.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/Saenredam_-_Het_oude_stadhuis_te_Amsterdam.jpeg/200px-Saenredam_-_Het_oude_stadhuis_te_Amsterdam.jpeg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/DecaturGins.jpg/200px-DecaturGins.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Huygens_first_pendulum_clock_-_front_view.png/120px-Huygens_first_pendulum_clock_-_front_view.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Huygens_first_pendulum_clock.png/112px-Huygens_first_pendulum_clock.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Christiaan_Huygens_Clock_and_Horologii_Oscillatorii.jpg/180px-Christiaan_Huygens_Clock_and_Horologii_Oscillatorii.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Fotothek_df_tg_0003783_Uhr_%5E_Uhrwerk.jpg/180px-Fotothek_df_tg_0003783_Uhr_%5E_Uhrwerk.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/Russian_finished_watch_movement.jpg/180px-Russian_finished_watch_movement.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Clinical_thermometer_38.7.JPG/200px-Clinical_thermometer_38.7.JPG",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Raumthermometer_Fahrenheit%2BCelsius.jpg/180px-Raumthermometer_Fahrenheit%2BCelsius.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Willem_Einthoven_ECG.jpg/220px-Willem_Einthoven_ECG.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/Museum_Boerhaave_Kolff%27s_Artificial_Kidney.jpg/200px-Museum_Boerhaave_Kolff%27s_Artificial_Kidney.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Wittner_metronome.jpg/200px-Wittner_metronome.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Leeuwenhoek_Microscope.png/170px-Leeuwenhoek_Microscope.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Leidse_flessen_Museum_Boerhave_december_2003_2.jpg/200px-Leidse_flessen_Museum_Boerhave_december_2003_2.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/Phase_contrast_microscope.jpg/180px-Phase_contrast_microscope.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Hendrick_Avercamp%2C_Kolfspelers_op_het_ijs%2C_Circa_1625.jpg/250px-Hendrick_Avercamp%2C_Kolfspelers_op_het_ijs%2C_Circa_1625.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Lidwinas_fall.png/200px-Lidwinas_fall.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Kortebaanwedstrijd_in_Hindelopen.jpg/220px-Kortebaanwedstrijd_in_Hindelopen.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/Oosterscheldekering-pohled.jpg/180px-Oosterscheldekering-pohled.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Zuiderzeeworks.png/180px-Zuiderzeeworks.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/OfficeThermostat.jpg/200px-OfficeThermostat.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Wymondham_magic_lantern.jpg/200px-Wymondham_magic_lantern.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Hendrick_Avercamp_-_A_Scene_on_the_Ice_-_WGA01076.jpg/200px-Hendrick_Avercamp_-_A_Scene_on_the_Ice_-_WGA01076.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Jacob_van_Strij_-_Het_Jacht_van_de_kamer_Rotterdam.jpg/170px-Jacob_van_Strij_-_Het_Jacht_van_de_kamer_Rotterdam.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Wenceslas_Hollar_-_A_Flute_%28State_2%29.jpg/220px-Wenceslas_Hollar_-_A_Flute_%28State_2%29.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/Sawmill_%27Salamander%27_in_Leidschendam%2C_Netherlands.jpg/200px-Sawmill_%27Salamander%27_in_Leidschendam%2C_Netherlands.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/Simon_Stevins_zeilwagen_voor_Prins_Maurits_1649.jpg/200px-Simon_Stevins_zeilwagen_voor_Prins_Maurits_1649.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/83/The_Drebbel_-_geograph.org.uk_-_7165.jpg/180px-The_Drebbel_-_geograph.org.uk_-_7165.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/1903-Spyker-60-HP-1920x1440.jpg/220px-1903-Spyker-60-HP-1920x1440.jpg",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Contributors to Wikimedia projects"
] |
2019-01-21T20:57:50+00:00
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikipedia.png
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dutch_inventions_and_innovations
|
The Netherlands and its people have made numerous contributions to the world's civilization in art, science, technology and engineering, economics and finance, cartography and geography, exploration and navigation, law and jurisprudence, thought and philosophy, medicine and agriculture. The following list is composed of objects, ideas, phenomena, processes, methods, techniques and styles that were discovered or invented by people from the Netherlands and Dutch-speaking people from the former Southern Netherlands (Zuid-Nederlanders in Dutch). Until the fall of Antwerp (1585), the Dutch and Flemish were generally seen as one people.[nb 1]
Inventions and innovations
[edit]
Arts and architecture
[edit]
Movements and styles
[edit]
De Stijl (Neo-Plasticism) (1917)
[edit]
The De Stijl school proposed simplicity and abstraction, both in architecture and painting, by using only straight horizontal and vertical lines and rectangular forms. Furthermore, their formal vocabulary was limited to the primary colours, red, yellow, and blue and the three primary values, black, white and grey. De Stijl's principal members were painters Theo van Doesburg (1883–1931), Piet Mondrian (1872–1944), Vilmos Huszár (1884–1960), and Bart van der Leck (1876–1958) and architects Gerrit Rietveld (1888–1964), Robert van 't Hoff (1888–1979) and J.J.P. Oud (1890–1963).
Architecture
[edit]
Brabantine Gothic architecture (14th century)
[edit]
Brabantine Gothic, occasionally called Brabantian Gothic, is a significant variant of Gothic architecture that is typical for the Low Countries. It surfaced in the first half of the 14th century at Saint Rumbold's Cathedral in the City of Mechelen. The Brabantine Gothic style originated with the advent of the Duchy of Brabant and spread across the Burgundian Netherlands.
Netherlandish gabled architecture (15th–17th centuries)
[edit]
The Dutch gable was a notable feature of the Dutch-Flemish Renaissance architecture (or Northern Mannerist architecture) that spread to northern Europe from the Low Countries, arriving in Britain during the latter part of the 16th century. Notable castles/buildings including Frederiksborg Castle, Rosenborg Castle, Kronborg Castle, Børsen, Riga's House of the Blackheads and Gdańsk's Green Gate were built in Dutch-Flemish Renaissance style with sweeping gables, sandstone decorations and copper-covered roofs. Later Dutch gables with flowing curves became absorbed into Baroque architecture. Examples of Dutch-gabled buildings can be found in historic cities across Europe such as Potsdam (Dutch Quarter), Friedrichstadt, Gdańsk and Gothenburg. The style spread beyond Europe, for example Barbados is well known for Dutch gables on its historic buildings. Dutch settlers in South Africa brought with them building styles from the Netherlands: Dutch gables, then adjusted to the Western Cape region where the style became known as Cape Dutch architecture. In the Americas and Northern Europe, the West End Collegiate Church (New York City, 1892), the Chicago Varnish Company Building (Chicago, 1895), Pont Street Dutch-style buildings (London, 1800s), Helsingør Station (Helsingør, 1891), and Gdańsk University of Technology's Main Building (Gdańsk, 1904) are typical examples of the Dutch Renaissance Revival (Neo-Renaissance) architecture in the late 19th century.
Netherlandish Mannerist architecture (Antwerp Mannerism) (16th century)
[edit]
Antwerp Mannerism is the name given to the style of a largely anonymous group of painters from Antwerp in the beginning of the 16th century. The style bore no direct relation to Renaissance or Italian Mannerism, but the name suggests a peculiarity that was a reaction to the classic style of the early Netherlandish painting. Antwerp Mannerism may also be used to describe the style of architecture, which is loosely Mannerist, developed in Antwerp by about 1540, which was then influential all over Northern Europe. The Green Gate (Brama Zielona) in Gdańsk, Poland, is a building which is inspired by the Antwerp City Hall. It was built between 1568 and 1571 by Regnier van Amsterdam and Hans Kramer to serve as the formal residence of the Polish monarchs when visiting Gdańsk.
Cape Dutch architecture (1650s)
[edit]
Cape Dutch architecture is an architectural style found in the Western Cape of South Africa. The style was prominent in the early days (17th century) of the Cape Colony, and the name derives from the fact that the initial settlers of the Cape were primarily Dutch. The style has roots in medieval Netherlands, Germany, France and Indonesia. Houses in this style have a distinctive and recognisable design, with a prominent feature being the grand, ornately rounded gables, reminiscent of features in townhouses of Amsterdam built in the Dutch style.
Amsterdam School (Dutch Expressionist architecture) (1910s)
[edit]
The Amsterdam School (Dutch: Amsterdamse School) flourished from 1910 through about 1930 in the Netherlands. The Amsterdam School movement is part of international Expressionist architecture, sometimes linked to German Brick Expressionism.
Rietveld Schröder House (De Stijl architecture) (1924)
[edit]
The Rietveld Schröder House or Schröder House (Rietveld Schröderhuis in Dutch) in Utrecht was built in 1924 by Dutch architect Gerrit Rietveld. It became a listed monument in 1976 and a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2000. The Rietveld Schröder House constitutes both inside and outside a radical break with tradition, offering little distinction between interior and exterior space. The rectilinear lines and planes flow from outside to inside, with the same colour palette and surfaces. Inside is a dynamic, changeable open zone rather than a static accumulation of rooms. The house is one of the best known examples of De Stijl architecture and arguably the only true De Stijl building.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]
Van Nelle Factory (1925–1931)
[edit]
The Van Nelle factory was built between 1925 and 1931. Its most striking feature is its huge glass façades. The factory was designed on the premise that a modern, transparent and healthy working environment in green surroundings would be good both for production and for workers' welfare. The Van Nelle Factory is a Dutch national monument (Rijksmonument) and since 2014 has the status of UNESCO World Heritage Site. The Justification of Outstanding Universal Value was presented in 2013 to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee.
Super Dutch (1990–present)
[edit]
An architectural movement started by a generation of new architects during the 1990, among this generation of architects were OMA, MVRDV, UNStudio, Mecanoo, Meyer en Van Schooten and many more. They started with buildings, which became internationally known for their new and refreshing style.
Furniture
[edit]
Dutch door (17th century)
[edit]
The Dutch door (also known as stable door or half door) is a type of door divided horizontally in such a fashion that the bottom half may remain shut while the top half opens. The initial purpose of this door was to keep animals out of farmhouses, while keeping children inside, yet allowing light and air to filter through the open top. This type of door was common in the Netherlands in the seventeenth century and appears in Dutch paintings of the period. They were commonly found in Dutch areas of New York and New Jersey (before the American Revolution) and in South Africa.[13]
Red and Blue Chair (1917)
[edit]
The Red and Blue Chair was designed in 1917 by Gerrit Rietveld. It represents one of the first explorations by the De Stijl art movement in three dimensions. It features several Rietveld joints.
Zig-Zag Chair (1934)
[edit]
The Zig-Zag Chair was designed by Rietveld in 1934. It is a minimalist design without legs, made by 4 flat wooden tiles that are merged in a Z-shape using Dovetail joints. It was designed for the Rietveld Schröder House in Utrecht.
Visual arts
[edit]
Glaze (painting technique) (15th century)
[edit]
Glazing is a technique employed by painters since the invention of modern oil painting. Early Netherlandish painters in the 15th century were the first to make oil the usual painting medium, and explore the use of layers and glazes, followed by the rest of Northern Europe, and only then Italy.[14]
Proto-Realism (15th–17th centuries)
[edit]
Two aspects of realism were rooted in at least two centuries of Dutch tradition: conspicuous textural imitation and a penchant for ordinary and exaggeratedly comic scenes. Two hundred years before the rise of literary realism, Dutch painters had already made an art of the everyday – pictures that served as a compelling model for the later novelists. By the mid-1800s, 17th-century Dutch painting figured virtually everywhere in the British and French fiction we esteem today as the vanguard of realism.
Proto-Surrealism (1470s–1510s)
[edit]
Hieronymus Bosch is considered one of the prime examples of Pre-Surrealism. The surrealists relied most on his insights. In the 20th century, Bosch's paintings (e.g. The Garden of Earthly Delights, The Haywain, The Temptation of St. Anthony and The Seven Deadly Sins and the Four Last Things) were cited by the Surrealists as precursors to their own visions.
Modern still-life painting (16th–17th century)
[edit]
Still-life painting as an independent genre or specialty first flourished in the Netherlands in the last quarter of the 16th century, and the English term derives from stilleven: still life, which is a calque, while Romance languages (as well as Greek, Polish, Russian and Turkish) tend to use terms meaning dead nature.
Naturalistic landscape painting (16th–17th century)
[edit]
The term "landscape" derives from the Dutch word landschap (and the German Landschaft), which originally meant "region, tract of land" but acquired the artistic connotation, "a picture depicting scenery on land" in the early 16th century. After the fall of the Roman Empire, the tradition of depicting pure landscapes declined and the landscape was seen only as a setting for religious and figural scenes. This tradition continued until the 16th century when artists began to view the landscape as a subject in its own right. The Dutch Golden Age painting of the 17th century saw the dramatic growth of landscape painting, in which many artists specialized, and the development of extremely subtle realist techniques for depicting light and weather.
Genre painting (15th century)
[edit]
The Flemish Renaissance painter Pieter Brueghel the Elder chose peasants and their activities as the subject of many paintings. Genre painting flourished in Northern Europe in his wake. Adriaen van Ostade, David Teniers, Aelbert Cuyp, Jan Steen, Johannes Vermeer and Pieter de Hooch were among many painters specializing in genre subjects in the Netherlands during the 17th century. The generally small scale of these artists' paintings was appropriate for their display in the homes of middle class purchasers.
Marine painting (17th century)
[edit]
Marine painting began in keeping with medieval Christian art tradition. Such works portrayed the sea only from a bird's eye view, and everything, even the waves, was organized and symmetrical. The viewpoint, symmetry and overall order of these early paintings underlined the organization of the heavenly cosmos from which the earth was viewed. Later Dutch artists such as Hendrick Cornelisz Vroom, Cornelius Claesz, Abraham Storck, Jan Porcellis, Simon de Vlieger, Willem van de Velde the Elder, Willem van de Velde the Younger and Ludolf Bakhuizen developed new methods for painting, often from a horizontal point of view, with a lower horizon and more focus on realism than symmetry.[15][16]
Vanitas (17th century)
[edit]
The term vanitas is most often associated with still life paintings that were popular in seventeenth-century Dutch art, produced by the artists such as Pieter Claesz. Common vanitas symbols included skulls (a reminder of the certainty of death); rotten fruit (decay); bubbles, (brevity of life and suddenness of death); smoke, watches, and hourglasses, (the brevity of life); and musical instruments (the brevity and ephemeral nature of life). Fruit, flowers and butterflies can be interpreted in the same way, while a peeled lemon, as well as the typical accompanying seafood was, like life, visually attractive but with a bitter flavor.
Civil group portraiture (17th century)
[edit]
Group portraits were produced in great numbers during the Baroque period, particularly in the Netherlands. Unlike in the rest of Europe, Dutch artists received no commissions from the Calvinist Church which had forbidden such images or from the aristocracy which was virtually non-existent. Instead, commissions came from civic and businesses associations. Dutch painter Frans Hals used fluid brush strokes of vivid color to enliven his group portraits, including those of the civil guard to which he belonged. Rembrandt benefitted greatly from such commissions and from the general appreciation of art by bourgeois clients, who supported portraiture as well as still-life and landscape painting. Notably, the world's first significant art and dealer markets flourished in Holland at that time.
Tronie (17th century)
[edit]
In the 17th century, Dutch painters (especially Frans Hals, Rembrandt, Jan Lievens and Johannes Vermeer) began to create uncommissioned paintings called tronies that focused on the features and/or expressions of people who were not intended to be identifiable. They were conceived more for art's sake than to satisfy conventions. The tronie was a distinctive type of painting, combining elements of the portrait, history, and genre painting. This was usually a half-length of a single figure which concentrated on capturing an unusual mood or expression. The actual identity of the model was not supposed to be important, but they might represent a historical figure and be in exotic or historic costume. In contrast to portraits, "tronies" were painted for the open market. They differ from figurative paintings and religious figures in that they are not restricted to a moral or narrative context. It is, rather, much more an exploration of the spectrum of human physiognomy and expression and the reflection of conceptions of character that are intrinsic to psychology's pre-history.
Rembrandt lighting (17th century)
[edit]
Rembrandt lighting is a lighting technique that is used in studio portrait photography. It can be achieved using one light and a reflector, or two lights, and is popular because it is capable of producing images which appear both natural and compelling with a minimum of equipment. Rembrandt lighting is characterized by an illuminated triangle under the eye of the subject, on the less illuminated side of the face. It is named for the Dutch painter Rembrandt, who often used this type of lighting in his portrait paintings.
Mezzotint (1642)
[edit]
The first known mezzotint was done in Amsterdam in 1642 by Utrecht-born German artist Ludwig von Siegen. He lived in Amsterdam from 1641 to about 1644, when he was supposedly influenced by Rembrandt.[17][18]
Aquatint (1650s)
[edit]
The painter and printmaker Jan van de Velde is often credited to be the inventor of the aquatint technique, in Amsterdam around 1650.[18]
Pronkstilleven (1650s)
[edit]
Pronkstilleven (pronk still life or ostentatious still life) is a type of banquet piece whose distinguishing feature is a quality of ostentation and splendor. These still lifes usually depict one or more especially precious objects. Although the term is a post-17th century invention, this type is characteristic of the second half of the seventeenth century. It was developed in the 1640s in Antwerp from where it spread quickly to the Dutch Republic. Flemish artists such as Frans Snyders and Adriaen van Utrecht started to paint still lifes that emphasized abundance by depicting a diversity of objects, fruits, flowers and dead game, often together with living people and animals. The style was soon adopted by artists from the Dutch Republic.[19] A leading Dutch representative was Jan Davidsz. de Heem, who spent a long period of his active career in Antwerp and was one of the founders of the style in Holland.[20][21] Other leading representatives in the Dutch Republic were Abraham van Beyeren, Willem Claeszoon Heda and Willem Kalf.[19]
Proto-Expressionism (1880s)
[edit]
Vincent van Gogh's work is most often associated with Post-Impressionism, but his innovative style had a vast influence on 20th-century art and established what would later be known as Expressionism, also greatly influencing fauvism and early abstractionism. His impact on German and Austrian Expressionists was especially profound. "Van Gogh was father to us all," the German Expressionist painter Max Pechstein proclaimed in 1901, when Van Gogh's vibrant oils were first shown in Germany and triggered the artistic reformation, a decade after his suicide in obscurity in France. In his final letter to Theo, Van Gogh stated that, as he had no children, he viewed his paintings as his progeny. Reflecting on this, the British art historian Simon Schama concluded that he "did have a child of course, Expressionism, and many, many heirs."
M. C. Escher's graphic arts (1920s–1960s)
[edit]
Dutch graphic artist Maurits Cornelis Escher, usually referred to as M. C. Escher, is known for his often mathematically inspired woodcuts, lithographs, and mezzotints. These feature impossible constructions, explorations of infinity, architecture and tessellations. His special way of thinking and rich graphic work has had a continuous influence in science and art, as well as permeating popular culture. His ideas have been used in fields as diverse as psychology, philosophy, logic, crystallography and topology. His art is based on mathematical principles like tessellations, spherical geometry, the Möbius strip, unusual perspectives, visual paradoxes and illusions, different kinds of symmetries and impossible objects. Gödel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadter discusses the ideas of self-reference and strange loops, drawing on a wide range of artistic and scientific work, including Escher's art and the music of J. S. Bach, to illustrate ideas behind Gödel's incompleteness theorems.
Miffy (Nijntje) (1955)
[edit]
Miffy (Nijntje) is a small female rabbit in a series of picture books drawn and written by Dutch artist Dick Bruna.
Music
[edit]
Franco-Flemish School (Netherlandish School) (15th–16th century)
[edit]
In music, the Franco-Flemish School or more precisely the Netherlandish school refers to the style of polyphonic vocal music composition in the Burgundian Netherlands in the 15th and early 16th centuries, and to the composers who wrote it.
Venetian School (Venetian polychoral style) (16th century)
[edit]
The Venetian School of polychoral music was founded by the Netherlandish composer Adrian Willaert.
Hardcore (electronic dance music genre) (1990s)
[edit]
Hardcore or hardcore techno is a subgenre of electronic dance music originating in Europe from the emergent raves in the 1990s. It was initially designed at Rotterdam in Netherlands, derived from techno.[22]
Hardstyle (electronic dance music genre) (1990s–2000s)
[edit]
Hardstyle is an electronic dance genre mixing influences from hardtechno and hardcore. Hardstyle was influenced by gabber. Hardstyle has its origins in the Netherlands where artists like DJ Zany, Lady Dana, DJ Isaac, DJ Pavo, DJ Luna and The Prophet, who produced hardcore, started experimenting while playing their hardcore records.
Agriculture
[edit]
Brussels sprout (13th century)
[edit]
Forerunners to modern Brussels sprouts were likely cultivated in ancient Rome. Brussels sprouts as we now know them were grown possibly as early as the 13th century in the Low Countries (may have originated in Brussels). The first written reference dates to 1587. During the 16th century, they enjoyed a popularity in the Southern Netherlands that eventually spread throughout the cooler parts of Northern Europe.
Orange-coloured carrot (16th century)
[edit]
Through history, carrots weren't always orange. They were black, purple, white, brown, red and yellow. Probably orange too, but this was not the dominant colour. Orange-coloured carrots appeared in the Netherlands in the 16th century.[23] Dutch farmers in Hoorn bred the color. They succeeded by cross-breeding pale yellow with red carrots. It is more likely that Dutch horticulturists actually found an orange rooted mutant variety and then worked on its development through selective breeding to make the plant consistent. Through successive hybridisation the orange colour intensified. This was developed to become the dominant species across the world, a sweet orange.
Belle de Boskoop (apple) (1856)
[edit]
Belle de Boskoop is an apple cultivar which, as its name suggests, originated in Boskoop, where it began as a chance seedling in 1856. There are many variants: Boskoop red, yellow or green. This rustic apple is firm, tart and fragrant. Greenish-gray tinged with red, the apple stands up well to cooking. Generally Boskoop varieties are very high in acid content and can contain more than four times the vitamin C of 'Granny Smith' or 'Golden Delicious'.[24]
Karmijn de Sonnaville (apple) (1949)
[edit]
Karmijn de Sonnaville is a variety of apple bred by Piet de Sonnaville, working in Wageningen in 1949. It is a cross of Cox's Orange Pippin and Jonathan, and was first grown commercially beginning in 1971. It is high both in sugars (including some sucrose) and acidity. It is a triploid, and hence needs good pollination, and can be difficult to grow. It also suffers from fruit russet, which can be severe. In Manhart's book, "apples for the 21st century", Karmijn de Sonnaville is tipped as a possible success for the future. Karmijn de Sonnaville is not widely grown in large quantities, but in Ireland, at The Apple Farm, 8 acres (3.2 ha) it is grown for fresh sale and juice-making, for which the variety is well suited.
Elstar (apple) (1950s)
[edit]
Elstar apple is an apple cultivar that was first developed in the Netherlands in the 1950s by crossing Golden Delicious and Ingrid Marie apples. It quickly became popular, especially in Europe and was first introduced to America in 1972.[25] It remains popular in Continental Europe. The Elstar is a medium-sized apple whose skin is mostly red with yellow showing. The flesh is white, and has a soft, crispy texture. It may be used for cooking and is especially good for making apple sauce. In general, however, it is used in desserts due to its sweet flavour.
Groasis Waterboxx (2010)
[edit]
The Groasis Waterboxx is a device designed to help grow trees in dry areas. It was developed by former flower exporter Pieter Hoff, and won Popular Science's "Green Tech Best of What's New" Innovation of the year award for 2010.
Cartography and geography
[edit]
Method for determining longitude using a clock (1530)
[edit]
The Dutch-Frisian geographer Gemma Frisius was the first to propose the use of a chronometer to determine longitude in 1530. In his book On the Principles of Astronomy and Cosmography (1530), Frisius explains for the first time how to use a very accurate clock to determine longitude.[26] The problem was that in Frisius’ day, no clock was sufficiently precise to use his method. In 1761, the British clock-builder John Harrison constructed the first marine chronometer, which allowed the method developed by Frisius.
Triangulation and the systematic use of triangulation networks (1533 and 1615)
[edit]
Triangulation had first emerged as a map-making method in the mid-sixteenth century when the Dutch-Frisian mathematician Gemma Frisius set out the idea in his Libellus de locorum describendorum ratione (Booklet concerning a way of describing places).[27][28][29][30][31][32] Dutch cartographer Jacob van Deventer was among the first to make systematic use of triangulation, the technique whose theory was described by Gemma Frisius in his 1533 book.
The modern systematic use of triangulation networks stems from the work of the Dutch mathematician Willebrord Snell (born Willebrord Snel van Royen), who in 1615 surveyed the distance from Alkmaar to Bergen op Zoom, approximately 70 miles (110 kilometres), using a chain of quadrangles containing 33 triangles in all[33][34][35] – a feat celebrated in the title of his book Eratosthenes Batavus (The Dutch Eratosthenes), published in 1617.
Mercator projection (1569)
[edit]
The Mercator projection is a cylindrical map projection presented by the Flemish geographer and cartographer Gerardus Mercator in 1569. It became the standard map projection for nautical purposes because of its ability to represent lines of constant course, known as rhumb lines or loxodromes, as straight segments which conserve the angles with the meridians.[36]
First modern world atlas (1570)
[edit]
Flemish geographer and cartographer Abraham Ortelius generally recognized as the creator of the world's first modern atlas, the Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (Theatre of the World). Ortelius's Theatrum Orbis Terrarum is considered the first true atlas in the modern sense: a collection of uniform map sheets and sustaining text bound to form a book for which copper printing plates were specifically engraved. It is sometimes referred to as the summary of sixteenth-century cartography.[37][38][39][40]
First printed atlas of nautical charts (1584)
[edit]
The first printed atlas of nautical charts (De Spieghel der Zeevaerdt or The Mirror of Navigation / The Mariner's Mirror) was produced by Lucas Janszoon Waghenaer in Leiden. This atlas was the first attempt to systematically codify nautical maps. This chart-book combined an atlas of nautical charts and sailing directions with instructions for navigation on the western and north-western coastal waters of Europe. It was the first of its kind in the history of maritime cartography, and was an immediate success. The English translation of Waghenaer's work was published in 1588 and became so popular that any volume of sea charts soon became known as a "waggoner", the Anglicized form of Waghenaer's surname.[41][42][43][44][45][46][47]
Concept of atlas (1595)
[edit]
Gerardus Mercator was the first to coin the word atlas to describe a bound collection of maps through his own collection entitled "Atlas sive Cosmographicae meditationes de fabrica mvndi et fabricati figvra". He coined this name after the Greek god who held The Sky up, later changed to holding up The Earth.[40][48]
Charting of the far southern skies (southern constellations) (1595–97)
[edit]
The constellations around the South Pole were not observable from north of the equator, by Babylonians, Greeks, Chinese or Arabs. The modern constellations in this region were defined during the Age of Exploration, notably by Dutch navigators Pieter Dirkszoon Keyser and Frederick de Houtman at the end of sixteenth century. These twelve Dutch-created southern constellations represented flora and fauna of the East Indies and Madagascar. They were depicted by Johann Bayer in his star atlas Uranometria of 1603.[49] Several more were created by Nicolas Louis de Lacaille in his star catalogue, published in 1756.[50] By the end of the Ming dynasty, Xu Guangqi introduced 23 asterisms of the southern sky based on the knowledge of western star charts.[51] These asterisms have since been incorporated into the traditional Chinese star maps. Among the IAU's 88 modern constellations, there are 15 Dutch-created constellations (including Apus, Camelopardalis, Chamaeleon, Columba, Dorado, Grus, Hydrus, Indus, Monoceros, Musca, Pavo, Phoenix, Triangulum Australe, Tucana and Volans).
Continental drift hypothesis (1596)
[edit]
The speculation that continents might have 'drifted' was first put forward by Abraham Ortelius in 1596. The concept was independently and more fully developed by Alfred Wegener in 1912. Because Wegener's publications were widely available in German and English and because he adduced geological support for the idea, he is credited by most geologists as the first to recognize the possibility of continental drift. During the 1960s geophysical and geological evidence for seafloor spreading at mid-oceanic ridges established continental drift as the standard theory or continental origin and an ongoing global mechanism.
Chemicals and materials
[edit]
Bow dye (1630)
[edit]
While making a coloured liquid for a thermometer, Cornelis Drebbel dropped a flask of Aqua regia on a tin window sill, and discovered that stannous chloride makes the color of carmine much brighter and more durable. Though Drebbel himself never made much from his work, his daughters Anna and Catharina and his sons-in-law Abraham and Johannes Sibertus Kuffler set up a successful dye works. One was set up in 1643 in Bow, London, and the resulting color was called bow dye.
Dyneema (1979)
[edit]
Dutch chemical company DSM invented and patented the Dyneema in 1979. Dyneema fibres have been in commercial production since 1990 at their plant at Heerlen. These fibers are manufactured by means of a gel-spinning process that combines extreme strength with incredible softness. Dyneema fibres, based on ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), is used in many applications in markets such as life protection, shipping, fishing, offshore, sailing, medical and textiles.
Communication and multimedia
[edit]
Compact cassette (1962)
[edit]
In 1962 Philips invented the compact audio cassette medium for audio storage, introducing it in Europe in August 1963 (at the Berlin Radio Show) and in the United States (under the Norelco brand) in November 1964, with the trademark name Compact Cassette.[52][53][54][55][56]
Laserdisc (1969)
[edit]
Laserdisc technology, using a transparent disc,[57] was invented by David Paul Gregg in 1958 (and patented in 1961 and 1990).[58] By 1969, Philips developed a videodisc in reflective mode, which has great advantages over the transparent mode. MCA and Philips decided to join forces. They first publicly demonstrated the videodisc in 1972. Laserdisc entered the market in Atlanta, on 15 December 1978, two years after the VHS VCR and four years before the CD, which is based on Laserdisc technology. Philips produced the players and MCA made the discs.
Compact disc (1979)
[edit]
The compact disc was jointly developed by Philips (Joop Sinjou) and Sony (Toshitada Doi). In the early 1970s, Philips' researchers started experiments with "audio-only" optical discs, and at the end of the 1970s, Philips, Sony, and other companies presented prototypes of digital audio discs.
Bluetooth (1990s)
[edit]
Bluetooth, a low-energy, peer-to-peer wireless technology was originally developed by Dutch electrical engineer Jaap Haartsen and Swedish engineer Sven Mattisson in the 1990s, working at Ericsson in Lund, Sweden. It became a global standard of short distance wireless connection.
Wi-fi (1990s)
[edit]
In 1991, NCR Corporation/AT&T Corporation invented the precursor to 802.11 in Nieuwegein. Dutch electrical engineer Vic Hayes chaired IEEE 802.11 committee for 10 years, which was set up in 1990 to establish a wireless networking standard. He has been called the father of Wi-Fi (the brand name for products using IEEE 802.11 standards) for his work on IEEE 802.11 (802.11a & 802.11b) standard in 1997.
DVD (1995)
[edit]
The DVD optical disc storage format was invented and developed by Philips and Sony in 1995.
Ambilight (2002)
[edit]
Ambilight, short for "ambient lighting", is a lighting system for televisions developed by Philips in 2002.
Blu-ray (2006)
[edit]
Philips and Sony in 1997 and 2006 respectively, launched the Blu-ray video recording/playback standard.
Computer science and information technology
[edit]
Dijkstra's algorithm (1956)
[edit]
Dijkstra's algorithm, conceived by Dutch computer scientist Edsger Dijkstra in 1956 and published in 1959, is a graph search algorithm that solves the single-source shortest path problem for a graph with non-negative edge path costs, producing a shortest path tree. Dijkstra's algorithm is so powerful that it not only finds the shortest path from a chosen source to a given destination, it finds all of the shortest paths from the source to all destinations. This algorithm is often used in routing and as a subroutine in other graph algorithms.
Dijkstra's algorithm is considered as one of the most popular algorithms in computer science. It is also widely used in the fields of artificial intelligence, operational research/operations research, network routing, network analysis, and transportation engineering.
Foundations of concurrent programming (1960s)
[edit]
The academic study of concurrent programming (concurrent algorithms in particular) started in the 1960s, with Edsger Dijkstra (1965) credited with being the first paper in this field, identifying and solving mutual exclusion.[59] A pioneer in the field of concurrent computing, Per Brinch Hansen considers Dijkstra's Cooperating Sequential Processes (1965) to be the first classic paper in concurrent programming. As Brinch Hansen notes: ‘Here Dijkstra lays the conceptual foundation for abstract concurrent programming.’[60]
Shunting-yard algorithm (1960)
[edit]
In computer science, the shunting-yard algorithm is a method for parsing mathematical expressions specified in infix notation. It can be used to produce output in Reverse Polish notation (RPN) or as an abstract syntax tree (AST). The algorithm was invented by Edsger Dijkstra and named the "shunting yard" algorithm because its operation resembles that of a railroad shunting yard. Dijkstra first described the Shunting Yard Algorithm in the Mathematisch Centrum report.
Schoonschip (early computer algebra system) (1963)
[edit]
In 1963/64, during an extended stay at SLAC, Dutch theoretical physicist Martinus Veltman designed the computer program Schoonschip for symbolic manipulation of mathematical equations, which is now considered the very first computer algebra system.
Mutual exclusion (mutex) (1965)
[edit]
In computer science, mutual exclusion refers to the requirement of ensuring that no two concurrent processes are in their critical section at the same time; it is a basic requirement in concurrency control, to prevent race conditions. The requirement of mutual exclusion was first identified and solved by Edsger W. Dijkstra in his seminal 1965 paper titled Solution of a problem in concurrent programming control,[61][62] and is credited as the first topic in the study of concurrent algorithms.[59]
Semaphore (programming) (1965)
[edit]
The semaphore concept was invented by Dijkstra in 1965 and the concept has found widespread use in a variety of operating systems.[63]
Sleeping barber problem (1965)
[edit]
In computer science, the sleeping barber problem is a classic inter-process communication and synchronization problem between multiple operating system processes. The problem is analogous to that of keeping a barber working when there are customers, resting when there are none and doing so in an orderly manner. The sleeping barber problem was introduced by Edsger Dijkstra in 1965.[63]
Banker's algorithm (deadlock prevention algorithm) (1965)
[edit]
The Banker's algorithm is a resource allocation and deadlock avoidance algorithm developed by Edsger Dijkstra that tests for safety by simulating the allocation of predetermined maximum possible amounts of all resources, and then makes an "s-state" check to test for possible deadlock conditions for all other pending activities, before deciding whether allocation should be allowed to continue. The algorithm was developed in the design process for the THE multiprogramming system and originally described (in Dutch) in EWD108.[64] The name is by analogy with the way that bankers account for liquidity constraints.
Dining philosophers problem (1965)
[edit]
In computer science, the dining philosophers problem is an example problem often used in concurrent algorithm design to illustrate synchronization issues and techniques for resolving them. It was originally formulated in 1965 by Edsger Dijkstra as a student exam exercise, presented in terms of computers competing for access to tape drive peripherals. Soon after, Tony Hoare gave the problem its present formulation.[65][66]
Dekker's algorithm (1965)
[edit]
Dekker's algorithm is the first known correct solution to the mutual exclusion problem in concurrent programming. Dijkstra attributed the solution to Dutch mathematician Theodorus Dekker in his manuscript on cooperating sequential processes. It allows two threads to share a single-use resource without conflict, using only shared memory for communication. It is also the first published software-only, two-process mutual exclusion algorithm.
THE multiprogramming system (1968)
[edit]
The THE multiprogramming system was a computer operating system designed by a team led by Edsger W. Dijkstra, described in monographs in 1965–66[67] and published in 1968.[68]
Van Wijngaarden grammar (1968)
[edit]
Van Wijngaarden grammar (also vW-grammar or W-grammar) is a two-level grammar that provides a technique to define potentially infinite context-free grammars in a finite number of rules. The formalism was invented by Adriaan van Wijngaarden to rigorously define some syntactic restrictions that previously had to be formulated in natural language, despite their formal content. Typical applications are the treatment of gender and number in natural language syntax and the well-definedness of identifiers in programming languages. The technique was used and developed in the definition of the programming language ALGOL 68. It is an example of the larger class of affix grammars.
Structured programming (1968)
[edit]
In 1968, computer programming was in a state of crisis. Dijkstra was one of a small group of academics and industrial programmers who advocated a new programming style to improve the quality of programs. Dijkstra coined the phrase "structured programming" and during the 1970s this became the new programming orthodoxy. Structured programming is often regarded as "goto-less programming".
EPROM (1971)
[edit]
An EPROM or erasable programmable read only memory, is a type of memory chip that retains its data when its power supply is switched off. Development of the EPROM memory cell started with investigation of faulty integrated circuits where the gate connections of transistors had broken. Stored charge on these isolated gates changed their properties. The EPROM was invented by the Amsterdam-born Israeli electrical engineer Dov Frohman in 1971, who was awarded US patent 3660819[69] in 1972.
Self-stabilization (1974)
[edit]
Self-stabilization is a concept of fault-tolerance in distributed computing. A distributed system that is self-stabilizing will end up in a correct state no matter what state it is initialized with. That correct state is reached after a finite number of execution steps.[70]
Predicate transformer semantics (1975)
[edit]
Predicate transformer semantics were introduced by Dijkstra in his seminal paper "Guarded commands, nondeterminacy and formal derivation of programs".
Guarded Command Language (1975)
[edit]
The Guarded Command Language (GCL) is a language defined by Edsger Dijkstra for predicate transformer semantics.[71] It combines programming concepts in a compact way, before the program is written in some practical programming language.
Van Emde Boas tree (VEB tree) (1975)
[edit]
A Van Emde Boas tree (or Van Emde Boas priority queue, also known as a vEB tree, is a tree data structure which implements an associative array with m-bit integer keys. The vEB tree was invented by a team led by Dutch computer scientist Peter van Emde Boas in 1975.[72]
ABC (programming language) (1980s)
[edit]
ABC is an imperative general-purpose programming language and programming environment developed at CWI, Netherlands by Leo Geurts, Lambert Meertens, and Steven Pemberton. It is interactive, structured, high-level, and intended to be used instead of BASIC, Pascal, or AWK. It is not meant to be a systems-programming language but is intended for teaching or prototyping.
The language had a major influence on the design of the Python programming language (as a counterexample); Guido van Rossum, who developed Python, previously worked for several years on the ABC system in the early 1980s.[73][74]
Dijkstra-Scholten algorithm (1980)
[edit]
The Dijkstra–Scholten algorithm (named after Edsger W. Dijkstra and Carel S. Scholten) is an algorithm for detecting termination in a distributed system.[75][76] The algorithm was proposed by Dijkstra and Scholten in 1980.[77]
Smoothsort (1981)
[edit]
Smoothsort[78] is a comparison-based sorting algorithm. It is a variation of heapsort developed by Edsger Dijkstra in 1981. Like heapsort, smoothsort's upper bound is O(n log n). The advantage of smoothsort is that it comes closer to O(n) time if the input is already sorted to some degree, whereas heapsort averages O(n log n) regardless of the initial sorted state.
Amsterdam Compiler Kit (1983)
[edit]
The Amsterdam Compiler Kit (ACK) is a fast, lightweight and retargetable compiler suite and toolchain developed by Andrew Tanenbaum and Ceriel Jacobs at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam. It is MINIX's native toolchain. The ACK was originally closed-source software (that allowed binaries to be distributed for MINIX as a special case), but in April 2003 it was released under an open-source BSD license. It has frontends for programming languages C, Pascal, Modula-2, Occam, and BASIC. The ACK's notability stems from the fact that in the early 1980s it was one of the first portable compilation systems designed to support multiple source languages and target platforms.[79]
Eight-to-fourteen modulation (1985)
[edit]
EFM (Eight-to-Fourteen Modulation) was invented by Dutch electrical engineer Kees A. Schouhamer Immink in 1985. EFM is a data encoding technique – formally, a channel code – used by CDs, laserdiscs and pre-Hi-MD MiniDiscs.
MINIX (1987)
[edit]
MINIX (from "mini-Unix") is a Unix-like computer operating system based on a microkernel architecture. Early versions of MINIX were created by Andrew S. Tanenbaum for educational purposes. Starting with MINIX 3, the primary aim of development shifted from education to the creation of a highly reliable and self-healing microkernel OS. MINIX is now developed as open-source software. MINIX was first released in 1987, with its complete source code made available to universities for study in courses and research. It has been free and open-source software since it was re-licensed under the BSD license in April 2000. Tanenbaum created MINIX at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam to exemplify the principles conveyed in his textbook, Operating Systems: Design and Implementation (1987), that Linus Torvalds described as "the book that launched me to new heights".
Amoeba (operating system) (1989)
[edit]
Amoeba is a distributed operating system developed by Andrew S. Tanenbaum and others at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam. The aim of the Amoeba project was to build a timesharing system that makes an entire network of computers appear to the user as a single machine. The Python programming language was originally developed for this platform.[80]
Python (programming language) (1989)
[edit]
Python is a widely used general-purpose, high-level programming language.[81][82] Its design philosophy emphasizes code readability, and its syntax allows programmers to express concepts in fewer lines of code than would be possible in languages such as C++ or Java.[83][84] The language provides constructs intended to enable clear programs on both a small and large scale. Python supports multiple programming paradigms, including object-oriented, imperative and functional programming or procedural styles. It features a dynamic type system and automatic memory management and has a large and comprehensive standard library.
Python was conceived in the late 1980s and its implementation was started in December 1989 by Guido van Rossum at CWI in the Netherlands as a successor to the ABC language (itself inspired by SETL) capable of exception handling and interfacing with the Amoeba operating system. Van Rossum is Python's principal author, and his continuing central role in deciding the direction of Python is reflected in the title given to him by the Python community, benevolent dictator for life (BDFL).
Vim (text editor) (1991)
[edit]
Vim is a text editor written by the Dutch free software programmer Bram Moolenaar and first released publicly in 1991. Based on the Vi editor common to Unix-like systems, Vim carefully separated the user interface from editing functions.[citation needed] This allowed it to be used both from a command line interface and as a standalone application in a graphical user interface.[citation needed]
Blender (1995)
[edit]
Blender is a professional free and open-source 3D computer graphics software product used for creating animated films, visual effects, art, 3D printed models, interactive 3D applications and video games. Blender's features include 3D modeling, UV unwrapping, texturing, raster graphics editing, rigging and skinning, fluid and smoke simulation, particle simulation, soft body simulation, digital sculpting, computer animation, match moving, camera tracking, rendering, video editing and compositing. Alongside the modelling features it also has an integrated game engine. Blender has been successfully used in the media industry in several parts of the world including Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Russia, Sweden, and the United States.
The Dutch animation studio Neo Geo and Not a Number Technologies (NaN) developed Blender as an in-house application, with the primary author being Ton Roosendaal. The name Blender was inspired by a song by Yello, from the album Baby.[85]
EFMPlus (1995)
[edit]
EFMPlus is the channel code used in DVDs and SACDs, a more efficient successor to EFM used in CDs. It was created by Dutch electrical engineer Kees A. Schouhamer Immink, who also designed EFM. It is 6% less efficient than Toshiba's SD code, which resulted in a capacity of 4.7 gigabytes instead of SD's original 5 GB. The advantage of EFMPlus is its superior resilience against disc damage such as scratches and fingerprints.
Economics
[edit]
First megacorporation (1602)
[edit]
The Dutch East India Company was arguably the first megacorporation, possessing quasi-governmental powers, including the ability to wage war, imprison and execute convicts, negotiate treaties, coin money and establish colonies. Many economic and political historians consider the Dutch East India Company as the most valuable and powerful corporation in the world history.
The VOC existed for almost 200 years from its founding in 1602, when the States-General of the Netherlands granted it a 21-year monopoly over Dutch operations in Asia until its demise in 1796. During those two centuries (between 1602 and 1796), the VOC sent almost a million Europeans to work in the Asia trade on 4,785 ships, and netted for their efforts more than 2.5 million tons of Asian trade goods. By contrast, the rest of Europe combined sent only 882,412 people from 1500 to 1795, and the fleet of the English (later British) East India Company, the VOC's nearest competitor, was a distant second to its total traffic with 2,690 ships and a mere one-fifth the tonnage of goods carried by the VOC. The VOC enjoyed huge profits from its spice monopoly through most of the 17th century.[86]
Dutch auction (17th century)
[edit]
A Dutch auction is also known as an open descending price auction. Named after the famous auctions of Dutch tulip bulbs in the 17th century, it is based on a pricing system devised by Nobel Prize–winning economist William Vickrey. In the traditional Dutch auction, the auctioneer begins with a high asking price which is lowered until some participant is willing to accept the auctioneer's price. The winning participant pays the last announced price. Dutch auction is also sometimes used to describe online auctions where several identical goods are sold simultaneously to an equal number of high bidders. In addition to cut flower sales in the Netherlands, Dutch auctions have also been used for perishable commodities such as fish and tobacco.
Concept of corporate governance (17th century)
[edit]
Isaac Le Maire, an Amsterdam businessman and a sizeable shareholder of the VOC, became the first recorded investor to actually consider the corporate governance's problems. In 1609, he complained of the VOC's shoddy corporate governance. On 24 January 1609, Le Maire filed a petition against the VOC, marking the first recorded expression of shareholder activism. In what is the first recorded corporate governance dispute, Le Maire formally charged that the directors (the VOC's board of directors – the Heeren XVII) sought to "retain another's money for longer or use it ways other than the latter wishes" and petitioned for the liquidation of the VOC in accordance with standard business practice.[87][88][89]
The first shareholder revolt happened in 1622, among Dutch East India Company (VOC) investors who complained that the company account books had been "smeared with bacon" so that they might be "eaten by dogs." The investors demanded a "reeckeninge," a proper financial audit.[90] The 1622 campaign by the shareholders of the VOC is a testimony of genesis of CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) in which shareholders staged protests by distributing pamphlets and complaining about management self enrichment and secrecy.[91]
Modern concept of foreign direct investment (17th century)
[edit]
The construction in 1619 of a train-oil factory on Smeerenburg in the Spitsbergen islands by the Noordsche Compagnie, and the acquisition in 1626 of Manhattan Island by the Dutch West India Company are referred to as the earliest cases of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) in Dutch and world history. Throughout the seventeenth century, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the Dutch West India Company (GWIC/WIC) also began to create trading settlements around the globe. Their trading activities generated enormous wealth, making the Dutch Republic one of the most prosperous countries of that time. The Dutch Republic's extensive arms trade occasioned an episode in the industrial development of early-modern Sweden, where arms merchants like Louis de Geer and the Trip brothers, invested in iron mines and iron works, another early example of outward foreign direct investment.
First capitalist nation-state (17th century)
[edit]
Some economic historians consider the Netherlands as the first predominantly capitalist nation.[92][93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101] The development of European capitalism began among the city-states of Italy, Flanders, and the Baltic. It spread to the European interstate system, eventually resulting in the world's first capitalist nation-state, the Dutch Republic of the seventeenth century.[102] The Dutch were the first to develop capitalism on a nationwide scale (as opposed to earlier city states).
First modern economic miracle (1585–1714)
[edit]
The Dutch economic transition from a possession of the Holy Roman Empire in the 1590s to the foremost maritime and economic power in the world has been called the "Dutch Miracle" (or "Dutch Tiger") by many economic historians, including K. W. Swart.[103] During their Golden Age, the provinces of the Northern Netherlands rose from almost total obscurity as the poor cousins of the industrious and heavily urbanised southern regions (Southern Netherlands) to become the world leader in economic success.[104][105][106][107] Its manufacturing towns grew so quickly that by the middle of the century the Netherlands had supplanted France as the leading industrial nation of the world.[108][109]
Dynamic macroeconomic model (1936)
[edit]
Dutch economist Jan Tinbergen developed the first national comprehensive macroeconomic model, which he first built for the Netherlands and after World War II later applied to the United States and the United Kingdom.
Fairtrade certification (1988)
[edit]
The concept of fair trade has been around for over 40 years, but a formal labelling scheme emerged only in the 1980s. At the initiative of Mexican coffee farmers, the world's first Fairtrade labeling organisation, Stichting Max Havelaar, was launched in the Netherlands on 15 November 1988 by Nico Roozen, Frans van der Hoff and Dutch ecumenical development agency Solidaridad. It was branded "Max Havelaar" after a fictional Dutch character who opposed the exploitation of coffee pickers in Dutch colonies.
Finance
[edit]
Concept of bourse (13th century)
[edit]
An exchange, or bourse, is a highly organized market where (especially) tradable securities, commodities, foreign exchange, futures, and options contracts are sold and bought. The term bourse is derived from the 13th-century inn named Huis ter Beurze in Bruges, Low Countries, where traders and foreign merchants from across Europe conducted business in the late medieval period.[110] The building, which was established by Robert van der Buerze as a hostelry, had operated from 1285. Its managers became famous for offering judicious financial advice to the traders and merchants who frequented the building. This service became known as the "Beurze Purse" which is the basis of bourse, meaning an organised place of exchange.
Foundations of stock market (1602)
[edit]
The seventeenth-century Dutch merchants laid the foundations for modern stock market.[112] The Dutch merchants were also the pioneers in developing the basic techniques of stock trading. Although bond sales by municipalities and states can be traced to the thirteenth century, the origin of modern stock exchanges that specialize in creating and sustaining secondary markets in corporate securities goes back to the formation of the Dutch East India Company in the year 1602.[113][114][115][116]
Foundations of corporate finance (17th century)
[edit]
What is now known as corporate finance has its modern roots in financial management policies of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) in the 17th century and some basic aspects of modern corporate finance began to appear in financial activities of Dutch businessmen in the early 17th century.
Foundations of investment banking (17th century)
[edit]
The Dutch were the pioneers in laying the basis for investment banking, allowing the risk of loans to be distributed among thousands of investors in the early seventeenth century.[117]
Foundations of central banking (1609)
[edit]
Prior to the 17th century most money was commodity money, typically gold or silver. However, promises to pay were widely circulated and accepted as value at least five hundred years earlier in both Europe and Asia. The Song dynasty was the first to issue generally circulating paper currency, while the Yuan dynasty was the first to use notes as the predominant circulating medium. In 1455, in an effort to control inflation, the succeeding Ming dynasty ended the use of paper money and closed much of Chinese trade. The medieval European Knights Templar ran an early prototype of a central banking system, as their promises to pay were widely respected, and many regard their activities as having laid the basis for the modern banking system. The Bank of Amsterdam (Amsterdamsche Wisselbank or literally Amsterdam Exchange Bank) established in 1609 is considered to be the precursor to modern central banks, if not the first true central bank.[118][119][120][121][122][123][124][125]
Short selling (1609)
[edit]
Financial innovation in Amsterdam took many forms. In 1609, investors led by Isaac Le Maire formed history's first bear syndicate to engage in short selling, but their coordinated trading had only a modest impact in driving down share prices, which tended to be robust throughout the 17th century.
Concept of dividend policy (1610)
[edit]
In the first decades of the 17th century, the VOC was the first recorded company ever to pay regular dividends. To encourage investors to buy shares, a promise of an annual payment (called a dividend) was made. An investor would receive dividends instead of interest and the investment was permanent in the form of shares in the company. Between 1600 and 1800 the Dutch East India Company (VOC) paid annual dividends worth around 18 percent of the value of the shares.
First European banknote (1661)
[edit]
In 1656, King Charles X Gustav of Sweden signed two charters creating two private banks under the directorship of Johan Palmstruch (though before having been ennobled he was called Johan Wittmacher or Hans Wittmacher), a Riga-born merchant of Dutch origin. Palmstruch modeled the banks on those of Amsterdam where he had become a burgher. The first real European banknote was issued in 1661 by the Stockholms Banco of Johan Palmstruch, a private bank under state charter (precursor to the Sveriges Riksbank, the central bank of Sweden).
First book on stock trading (1688)
[edit]
Joseph de la Vega, also known as Joseph Penso de la Vega, was an Amsterdam trader from a Spanish Jewish family and a prolific writer as well as a successful businessman. His 1688 book Confusion de Confusiones (Confusion of Confusions) explained the workings of the city's stock market. It was the earliest book about stock trading, taking the form of a dialogue between a merchant, a shareholder and a philosopher. The book described a market that was sophisticated but also prone to excesses, and de la Vega offered advice to his readers on such topics as the unpredictability of market shifts and the importance of patience in investment.[126]
Concept of technical analysis (1688)
[edit]
The principles of technical analysis are derived from hundreds of years of financial market data. These principles in a raw form have been studied since the seventeenth century.[127] Some aspects of technical analysis began to appear in Joseph de la Vega's accounts of the Dutch markets in the late 17th century. In Asia, technical analysis is said to be a method developed by Homma Munehisa during the early 18th century which evolved into the use of candlestick techniques, and is today a technical analysis charting tool.[128][129]
Concept of behavioral finance (1688)
[edit]
Josseph de la Vega was in 1688 the first person to give an account of irrational behaviour in financial markets. His 1688 book Confusion of Confusions, has been described as the first precursor of modern behavioural finance, with its descriptions of investor decision-making still reflected in the way some investors operate today.
Concept of investment fund (1774)
[edit]
The first investment fund has its roots back in 1774. A Dutch merchant named Adriaan van Ketwich formed a trust named Eendragt Maakt Magt. The name of Ketwich's fund translates to "unity creates strength". In response to the financial crisis of 1772–1773, Ketwich's aim was to provide small investors an opportunity to diversify (Rouwenhorst & Goetzman, 2005). This investment scheme can be seen as the first near-mutual fund. In the years following, near-mutual funds evolved and become more diverse and complex.
Mutual fund (1774)
[edit]
The first mutual funds were established in 1774 in the Netherlands. Amsterdam-based businessman Abraham van Ketwich (a.k.a. Adriaan van Ketwich) is often credited as the originator of the world's first mutual fund.[130] The first mutual fund outside the Netherlands was the Foreign & Colonial Government Trust, which was established in London in 1868.
Foods and drinks
[edit]
Gibbing (14th century)
[edit]
Gibbing is the process of preparing salt herring (or soused herring), in which the gills and part of the gullet are removed from the fish, eliminating any bitter taste. The liver and pancreas are left in the fish during the salt-curing process because they release enzymes essential for flavor. The fish is then cured in a barrel with one part salt to 20 herring. Today many variations and local preferences exist on this process. The process of gibbing was invented by Willem Beuckelszoon[131] (aka Willem Beuckelsz, William Buckels[132] or William Buckelsson), a 14th-century Zealand Fisherman. The invention of this fish preservation technique led to the Dutch becoming a seafaring power.[133] This invention created an export industry for salt herring that was monopolized by the Dutch.
Doughnut (17th century)
[edit]
Some people believe it was the Dutch who invented doughnuts. A Dutch snack made from potatoes had a round shape like a ball, but, like Gregory's dough balls, needed a little longer time when fried to cook the inside thoroughly. These potato-balls developed into doughnuts when the Dutch finally made them into ring-shapes reduce frying time.[citation needed]
Gin (jenever) (1650)
[edit]
Gin is a spirit which derives its predominant flavour from juniper berries (Juniperus communis). From its earliest origins in the Middle Ages, gin has evolved over the course of a millennium from a herbal medicine to an object of commerce in the spirits industry. Gin was developed on the basis of the older Jenever, and become widely popular in Great Britain when William III of Orange, leader of the Dutch Republic, occupied the British throne with his wife Mary. Today, the gin category is one of the most popular and widely distributed range of spirits, and is represented by products of various origins, styles, and flavour profiles that all revolve around juniper as a common ingredient.
The Dutch physician Franciscus Sylvius is often credited with the invention of gin in the mid-17th century,[134][135] although the existence of genever is confirmed in Massinger's play The Duke of Milan (1623), when Dr. Sylvius would have been but nine years of age. It is further claimed that British soldiers who provided support in Antwerp against the Spanish in 1585, during the Eighty Years' War, were already drinking genever (jenever) for its calming effects before battle, from which the term Dutch Courage is believed to have originated.[136] The earliest known written reference to genever appears in the 13th century encyclopaedic work Der Naturen Bloeme (Bruges), and the earliest printed genever recipe from 16th century work Een Constelijck Distileerboec (Antwerp).[137]
Stroopwafel (1780s)
[edit]
A stroopwafel (also known as syrup waffle, treacle waffle or caramel waffle) is a waffle made from two thin layers of baked batter with a caramel-like syrup filling the middle. They were first made in Gouda in the 1780s. The traditional way to eat the stroopwafel is to place it atop of a drinking vessel with a hot beverage (coffee, tea or chocolate) inside that fits the diameter of the waffle. The heat from the rising steam warms the waffle and slightly softens the inside and makes the waffle soft on one side while still crispy on the other.
Cocoa powder (1828)
[edit]
In 1815, Dutch chemist Coenraad van Houten introduced alkaline salts to chocolate, which reduced its bitterness. In the 1820s, Casparus van Houten, Sr. patented an inexpensive method for pressing the fat from roasted cocoa beans.[138][139][140] He created a press to remove about half the natural fat (cacao butter) from chocolate liquor, which made chocolate both cheaper to produce and more consistent in quality.
Dutch-process chocolate (1828)
[edit]
Dutch-processed chocolate or Dutched chocolate is chocolate that has been treated with an alkalizing agent to modify its color and give it a milder taste compared to "natural cocoa" extracted with the Broma process. It forms the basis for much of modern chocolate, and is used in ice cream, hot cocoa, and baking. The Dutch process was developed in the early 19th century by Dutch chocolate maker Coenraad Johannes van Houten, whose father Casparus is responsible for the development of the method of removing fat from cacao beans by hydraulic press around 1828, forming the basis for cocoa powder.[139][140]
Law and jurisprudence
[edit]
Doctrine of the Freedom of the Seas (foundations of the Law of the Sea/UNCLOS) (1609)
[edit]
In 1609, Hugo Grotius, the Dutch jurist who is generally known as the father of modern international law, published his book Mare Liberum (The Free Sea), which first formulated the notion of freedom of the seas. He developed this idea into a legal principle.[141] It is said to be 'the first, and classic, exposition of the doctrine of the freedom of the seas' which has been the essence and backbone of the modern law of the sea.[142][143] It is generally assumed that Grotius first propounded the principle of freedom of the seas, although all countries in the Indian Ocean and other Asian seas accepted the right of unobstructed navigation long before Grotius wrote his De Jure Praedae (On the Law of Spoils) in the year of 1604. His work sparked a debate in the seventeenth century over whether states could exclude the vessels of other states from certain waters. Grotius won this debate, as freedom of the seas became a universally recognized legal principle, associated with concepts such as communication, trade and peace. Grotius's notion of the freedom of the seas would persist until the mid-twentieth century, and it continues to be applied even to this day for much of the high seas, though the application of the concept and the scope of its reach is changing.
Secularized natural law (foundations of modern international law) (1625)
[edit]
The publication of De jure belli ac pacis (On the Laws of War and Peace) by Hugo Grotius in 1625 had marked the emergence of international law as an 'autonomous legal science'.[144][145][146] Grotius's On the Law of War and Peace, published in 1625, is best known as the first systematic treatise on international law, but to thinkers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it seemed to set a new agenda in moral and political philosophy across the board. Grotius developed pivotal treatises on freedom of the seas, the law of spoils, the laws of war and peace and he created an autonomous place for international law as its own discipline. Jean Barbeyrac's Historical and Critical Account of the Science of Morality, attached to his translation of Samuel von Pufendorf's Law of Nature and Nations in 1706, praised Grotius as "the first who broke the ice" of "the Scholastic Philosophy; which [had] spread itself all over Europe" (1749: 67, 66).[147] Grotius' truly distinctive contribution to jurisprudence and philosophy of law (public international law or law of nations in particular) was that he secularized natural law.[148][149][150][151][152][153][154] Grotius had divorced natural law from theology and religion by grounding it solely in the social nature and natural reason of man.[142][143] When Grotius, considered by many to be the founder of modern natural law theory (or secular natural law), said that natural law would retain its validity 'even if God did not exist' (etiamsi daremus non-esse Deum), he was making a clear break with the classical tradition of natural law.[155][156][157][158]
Cannon shot rule (1702)
[edit]
By the end of the seventeenth century, support was growing for some limitation to the seaward extent of territorial waters. What emerged was the so-called "cannon shot rule", which acknowledged the idea that property rights could be acquired by physical occupation and in practice to the effective range of shore-based cannon: about three nautical miles. The rule was long associated with Cornelis van Bijnkershoek, a Dutch jurist who, especially in his De Dominio Maris Dissertatio (1702), advocated a middle ground between the extremes of Mare Liberum and John Selden's Mare Clausum, accepting both the freedom of states to navigate and exploit the resources of the high seas and a right of coastal states to assert wide-ranging rights in a limited marine territory.
Permanent Court of Arbitration (1899)
[edit]
The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is an international organization based in The Hague in the Netherlands. The court was established in 1899 as one of the acts of the first Hague Peace Conference, which makes it the oldest global institution for international dispute resolution.[159] Its creation is set out under Articles 20 to 29 of the 1899 Hague Convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes, which was a result of the first Hague Peace Conference. The most concrete achievement of the Conference was the establishment of the PCA as the first institutionalized global mechanism for the settlement of disputes between states. The PCA encourages the resolution of disputes that involve states, state entities, intergovernmental organizations, and private parties by assisting in the establishment of arbitration tribunals and facilitating their work. The court offers a wide range of services for the resolution of international disputes which the parties concerned have expressly agreed to submit for resolution under its auspices. Dutch-Jew legal scholar Tobias Asser's role in the creation of the PCA at the first Hague Peace Conference (1899) earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1911.
International Opium Convention (1912)
[edit]
The International Opium Convention, sometimes referred to as the Hague Convention of 1912, signed on 23 January 1912 at The Hague, was the first international drug control treaty and is the core of the international drug control system. The adoption of the convention was a turning point in multilateralism, based on the recognition of the transnational nature of the drug problem and the principle of shared responsibility.[160]
Marriage equality (legalization of same-sex marriage) (2001)
[edit]
Denmark was the first state to recognize a legal relationship for same-sex couples, establishing "registered partnerships" very much like marriage in 1989. In 2001, the Netherlands became the first nation in the world to grant same-sex marriages. The first laws enabling same-sex marriage in modern times were enacted during the first decade of the 21st century. As of 29 March 2014 , sixteen countries (Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark,[nb 2] France, Iceland, Netherlands,[nb 3] New Zealand,[nb 4] Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, United Kingdom,[nb 5] Uruguay) and several sub-national jurisdictions (parts of Mexico and the United States) allow same-sex couples to marry. Polls in various countries show that there is rising support for legally recognizing same-sex marriage across race, ethnicity, age, religion, political affiliation, and socioeconomic status.
Measurement
[edit]
Pendulum clock (first high-precision clock) (1656)
[edit]
The first mechanical clocks, employing the verge escapement mechanism with a foliot or balance wheel timekeeper, were invented in Europe at around the start of the 14th century, and became the standard timekeeping device until the pendulum clock was invented in 1656. The pendulum clock remained the most accurate timekeeper until the 1930s, when quartz oscillators were invented, followed by atomic clocks after World War 2.[161]
A pendulum clock uses a pendulum's arc to mark intervals of time. From their invention until about 1930, the most accurate clocks were pendulum clocks. Pendulum clocks cannot operate on vehicles or ships at sea, because the accelerations disrupt the pendulum's motion, causing inaccuracies. The pendulum clock was invented by Christiaan Huygens, based on the pendulum introduced by Galileo Galilei. Although Galileo studied the pendulum as early as 1582, he never actually constructed a clock based on that design. Christiaan Huygens invented pendulum clock in 1656 and patented the following year. He contracted the construction of his clock designs to clockmaker Salomon Coster, who actually built the clock.
Concept of the standardization of the temperature scale (1665)
[edit]
Various authors have credited the invention of the thermometer to Cornelis Drebbel, Robert Fludd, Galileo Galilei or Santorio Santorio. The thermometer was not a single invention, however, but a development. However, each inventor and each thermometer was unique – there was no standard scale. In 1665 Christiaan Huygens suggested using the melting and boiling points of water as standards.[162][163] The Fahrenheit scale is now usually defined by two fixed points: the temperature at which water freezes into ice is defined as 32 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), and the boiling point of water is defined to be 212 °F (100 °C), a 180-degree separation, as defined at sea level and standard atmospheric pressure. In 1742, Swedish astronomer Anders Celsius created a temperature scale which was the reverse of the scale now known by the name "Celsius": 0 represented the boiling point of water, while 100 represented the freezing point of water. From 1744 until 1954, 0 °C was defined as the freezing point of water and 100 °C was defined as the boiling point of water, both at a pressure of one standard atmosphere with mercury being the working material.
Spiral-hairspring watch (1675)
[edit]
The invention of the mainspring in the early 15th century allowed portable clocks to be built, evolving into the first pocketwatches by the 17th century, but these were not very accurate until the balance spring was added to the balance wheel in the mid-17th century. Some dispute remains as to whether British scientist Robert Hooke (his was a straight spring) or Dutch scientist Christiaan Huygens was the actual inventor of the balance spring. This innovation increased watches' accuracy enormously, reducing error from perhaps several hours per day[164] to perhaps 10 minutes per day,[165] resulting in the addition of the minute hand to the face from around 1680 in Britain and 1700 in France.
Mercury thermometer (1714)
[edit]
Various authors have credited the invention of the thermometer to Cornelis Drebbel, Robert Fludd, Galileo Galilei or Santorio Santorio. The thermometer was not a single invention, however, but a development. Though Galileo is often said to be the inventor of the thermometer, what he produced were thermoscopes. The difference between a thermoscope and a thermometer is that the latter has a scale.[166] The first person to put a scale on a thermoscope is variously said to be Francesco Sagredo[167] or Santorio Santorio[168] in about 1611 to 1613. Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit began constructing his own thermometers in 1714, and it was in these that he used mercury for the first time.
Fahrenheit scale (1724)
[edit]
Various authors have credited the invention of the thermometer to Cornelis Drebbel, Robert Fludd, Galileo Galilei or Santorio Santorio. The thermometer was not a single invention, however, but a development. However, each inventor and each thermometer was unique – there was no standard scale. In 1665 Christiaan Huygens suggested using the melting and boiling points of water as standards, and in 1694 Carlo Renaldini proposed using them as fixed points on a universal scale. In 1701 Isaac Newton proposed a scale of 12 degrees between the melting point of ice and body temperature. Finally in 1724 Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit produced a temperature scale which now (slightly adjusted) bears his name. He could do this because he manufactured thermometers, using mercury (which has a high coefficient of expansion) for the first time and the quality of his production could provide a finer scale and greater reproducibility, leading to its general adoption. By the end of the 20th century, most countries used the Celsius scale rather than the Fahrenheit scale, though Canada retained it as a supplementary scale used alongside Celsius. Fahrenheit remains the official scale for Jamaica, the Cayman Islands, Belize, the Bahamas, Palau and the United States and associated territories.
Snellen chart (1862)
[edit]
The Snellen chart is an eye chart used by eye care professionals and others to measure visual acuity. Snellen charts are named after Dutch ophthalmologist Hermann Snellen who developed the chart in 1862. Vision scientists now use a variation of this chart, designed by Ian Bailey and Jan Lovie.
String galvanometer (1902)
[edit]
Previous to the string galvanometer, scientists used a machine called the capillary electrometer to measure the heart's electrical activity, but this device was unable to produce results at a diagnostic level. Dutch physiologist Willem Einthoven developed the string galvanometer in the early 20th century, publishing the first registration of its use to record an electrocardiogram in a Festschrift book in 1902. The first human electrocardiogram was recorded in 1887, however only in 1901 was a quantifiable result obtained from the string galvanometer.
Schilt photometer (1922)
[edit]
In 1922, Dutch astronomer Jan Schilt invented the Schilt photometer, a device that measures the light output of stars and, indirectly, their distances.
Medicine
[edit]
Clinical electrocardiography (first diagnostic electrocardiogram) (1902)
[edit]
In the 19th century it became clear that the heart generated electric currents. The first to systematically approach the heart from an electrical point-of-view was Augustus Waller, working in St Mary's Hospital in Paddington, London. In 1911 he saw little clinical application for his work. The breakthrough came when Willem Einthoven, working in Leiden, used his more sensitive string galvanometer, than the capillary electrometer that Waller used. Einthoven assigned the letters P, Q, R, S and T to the various deflections that it measured and described the electrocardiographic features of a number of cardiovascular disorders. He was awarded the 1924 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine for his discovery.[169][170][171][172][173][174][175][176]
Einthoven's triangle (1902)
[edit]
Einthoven's triangle is an imaginary formation of three limb leads in a triangle used in electrocardiography, formed by the two shoulders and the pubis.[177] The shape forms an inverted equilateral triangle with the heart at the center that produces zero potential when the voltages are summed. It is named after Willem Einthoven, who theorized its existence.[178]
First European blood bank (1940)
[edit]
When German bombers attacked The Hague in 1940 while Willem Johan Kolff was there, he organised the first blood bank in continental Europe. It was located in the Zuidwal hospital in The Hague.[179] Eleven patients were given blood transfusions in The Hague, six of whom survived. Donated blood was also used for victims of the bombardment of Rotterdam, whither it was transported by civilian car.[180]
Rotating drum dialysis machine (first practical artificial kidney) (1943)
[edit]
An artificial kidney is a machine and its related devices which clean blood for patients who have an acute or chronic failure of their kidneys. The first artificial kidney was developed by Dutchman Willem Johan Kolff. The procedure of cleaning the blood by this means is called dialysis, a type of renal replacement therapy that is used to provide an artificial replacement for lost kidney function due to renal failure. It is a life support treatment and does not treat disease.[181][182][183][184][185][186][187][188][189][190][191][192][193]
Artificial heart (1957)
[edit]
On 12 December 1957, Kolff implanted an artificial heart into a dog at Cleveland Clinic. The dog lived for 90 minutes. In 1967, Dr. Kolff left Cleveland Clinic to start the Division of Artificial Organs at the University of Utah and pursue his work on the artificial heart. Under his supervision, a team of surgeons, chemists, physicists and bioengineers developed an artificial heart and made it ready for industrial production. To help manage his many endeavors, Dr. Kolff assigned project managers. Each project was named after its manager. Graduate student Robert Jarvik was the project manager for the artificial heart, which was subsequently renamed the Jarvik-7. Based on lengthy animal trials, this first artificial heart was successfully implanted into the thorax of patient Barney Clark in December 1982. Clark survived 112 days with the device.
Military
[edit]
Norden bombsight (1920s)
[edit]
The Norden bombsight was designed by Carl Norden, a Dutch engineer educated in Switzerland who emigrated to the U.S. in 1904. In 1920, he started work on the Norden bombsight for the United States Navy. The first bombsight was produced in 1927. It was essentially an analog computer, and bombardiers were trained in great secrecy on how to use it. The device was used to drop bombs accurately from an aircraft, supposedly accurate enough to hit a 100-foot circle from an altitude of 21,000 feet – but under actual combat situations, such an accuracy was never achieved.
Submarine snorkel (1939)
[edit]
A submarine snorkel is a device that allows a submarine to operate submerged while still taking in air from above the surface. It was invented by the Dutchman J.J. Wichers shortly before World War II and copied by the Germans during the war for use by U-boats. Its common military name is snort.
Goalkeeper CIWS (1975)
[edit]
Goalkeeper is a close-in weapon system (CIWS) still in use as of 2015. It is autonomous and completely automatic short-range defense of ships against highly maneuverable missiles, aircraft and fast maneuvering surface vessels. Once activated the system automatically performs the entire process from surveillance and detection to destruction, including selection of priority targets.
Musical instruments
[edit]
Metronome (1812)
[edit]
The first (mechanical) metronome was invented by Dietrich Nikolaus Winkel in Amsterdam in 1812, but named (patented) after Johann Maelzel, who took the idea and popularized it.[194][195][196][197][198][199][200]
Fokker organ (1950)
[edit]
Dutch musician-physicist Adriaan Fokker designed and had built keyboard instruments capable of playing microtonal scales via a generalized keyboard. The best-known of these is his 31-tone equal-tempered organ, which was installed in Teylers Museum in Haarlem in 1951. It is commonly called the Fokker organ.
Kraakdoos (1960s)
[edit]
The Kraakdoos or Cracklebox is a custom-made battery-powered noise-making electronic device. It is a small box with six metal contacts on top, which when pressed by fingers generates unusual sounds and tones. The human body becomes a part of the circuit and determines the range of sounds possible – different players generate different results. The concept was first conceived by Michel Waisvisz and Geert Hamelberg in the 1960s, and developed further in the 1970s when Waisvisz joined the STEIM foundation in Amsterdam.
Moodswinger (2006)
[edit]
The Moodswinger is a twelve-string electric zither with an additional third bridge designed by Dutch luthier Yuri Landman. The rod functions as the third bridge and divides the strings into two sections to add overtones, creating a multiphonic sound.
Springtime (guitar) (2008)
[edit]
The Springtime is an experimental electric guitar with seven strings and three outputs. Landman created the instrument in 2008.
Philosophy and social sciences
[edit]
Neostoicism (1580s)
[edit]
Neostoicism was a syncretic philosophical movement, joining Stoicism and Christianity. Neostoicism was founded by Dutch-Flemish humanist Justus Lipsius, who in 1584 presented its rules, expounded in his book De Constantia (On Constancy), as a dialogue between Lipsius and his friend Charles de Langhe. The eleven years (1579–1590) that Lipsius spent in Leiden (Leiden University) were the period of his greatest productivity. It was during this time that he wrote a series of works designed to revive ancient Stoicism in a form that would be compatible with Christianity. The most famous of these is De Constantia (1584). Neostoicism had an influence on many seventeenth and eighteenth-century writers including Montesquieu, Bossuet, Francis Bacon, Joseph Hall, Francisco de Quevedo and Juan de Vera y Figueroa.
Modern pantheism (1670s)
[edit]
Pantheism was popularized in the modern era as both a theology and philosophy based on the work of the 17th-century Dutch Jew philosopher Baruch Spinoza, whose Ethics was an answer to Descartes' famous dualist theory that the body and spirit are separate. Spinoza is regarded as the chief source of modern pantheism. Spinoza held that the two are the same, and this monism is a fundamental quality of his philosophy. He was described as a "God-intoxicated man," and used the word God to describe the unity of all substance. Although the term pantheism was not coined until after his death, Spinoza is regarded as its most celebrated advocate.
Spinozism (1660s–1670s)
[edit]
Spinozism is the monist philosophical system of the Dutch-Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza which defines "God" as a singular self-subsistent substance, with both matter and thought as its attributes.
Affect (philosophy) (1670s)
[edit]
Affect (affectus or adfectus in Latin) is a concept used in the philosophy of Spinoza and elaborated by Henri Bergson, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari that emphasizes bodily experience. The term "affect" is central to what became known as the "affective turn" in the humanities and social sciences.
Mandeville's paradox (1714)
[edit]
Mandeville's paradox is named after Bernard Mandeville, who shows that actions which may be qualified as vicious with regard to individuals have benefits for society as a whole. This is already clear from the subtitle of his most famous work, The Fable of The Bees: ‘Private Vices, Publick Benefits’. He states that "Fraud, Luxury, and Pride must live; Whilst we the Benefits receive.") (The Fable of the Bees, ‘The Moral’).
Mathematical intuitionism (1907–1908)
[edit]
Mathematical intuitionism was founded by the Dutch mathematician and philosopher Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer. In the philosophy of mathematics, intuitionism, or neointuitionism (opposed to preintuitionism), is an approach where mathematics is considered to be purely the result of the constructive mental activity of humans rather than the discovery of fundamental principles claimed to exist in an objective reality. That is, logic and mathematics are not considered analytic activities wherein deep properties of objective reality are revealed and applied, but are instead considered the application of internally consistent methods used to realize more complex mental constructs, regardless of their possible independent existence in an objective reality.
Religion and ethics
[edit]
Devotio Moderna (1370s–1390s)
[edit]
Devotio Moderna, or Modern Devotion, was a movement for religious reform, calling for apostolic renewal through the rediscovery of genuine pious practices such as humility, obedience and simplicity of life. It began in the late fourteenth-century, largely through the work of Gerard Groote, and flourished in the Low Countries and Germany in the fifteenth century, but came to an end with the Protestant Reformation. Gerard Groote, father of the movement, founded the Brethren of the Common Life; after his death, disciples established a house of Augustinian Canons at Windesheim (near Zwolle, Overijssel). These two communities became the principal exponents of Devotio Moderna. Martin Luther studied under the Brethren of the Common Life at Magdeburg before going on to the University of Erfurt. Another famous member of the Brethren of the Common Life was Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam.
Devotio Moderna, an undogmatic form of piety which some historians have argued helped to pave the road for the Protestant Reformation, is most known today through its influence on Thomas à Kempis, the author of The Imitation of Christ a book which proved highly influential for centuries.
Mennonites (1536)
[edit]
The Mennonites are a Christian group based around the church communities of Anabaptist denominations named after Menno Simons (1496–1561) of Friesland. Through his writings, Simons articulated and formalized the teachings of earlier Swiss founders. The teachings of the Mennonites were founded on their belief in both the mission and Ministry of Jesus Christ, which they held to with great conviction despite persecution by various Roman Catholic and Protestant states.
Dutch Reformed Church (1571)
[edit]
The Dutch Reformed Church (in Dutch: Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk or NHK) was a Reformed Christian denomination. It developed during the Protestant Reformation, with its base in what became known as the Roman Catholic Church. It was founded in the 1570s and lasted until 2004, the year it merged with the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Kingdom of the Netherlands to form the Protestant Church in the Netherlands.
Arminianism (1620)
[edit]
Arminianism is based on the theological ideas of Dutch Reformed theologian Jacobus Arminius (1560–1609) and his historic supporters known as the Remonstrants. His teachings held to the five solae of the Reformation, but they were distinct from the particular teachings of Martin Luther, Zwingli, John Calvin, and other Protestant Reformers. Arminius (Jacobus Hermanszoon) was a student of Beza (successor of Calvin) at the Theological University of Geneva.
Many Christian denominations have been influenced by Arminian views on the will of man being freed by grace prior to regeneration, notably the Baptists in the 16th century, the Methodists in the 18th century and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. John Wesley was influenced by Arminianism. Also, Arminianism was an important influence in Methodism, which developed out of the Wesleyan movement. Some assert that Universalists and Unitarians in the 18th and 19th centuries were theologically linked with Arminianism.
First synagogue to be established in the (Americas) New World (1636)
[edit]
The first synagogue of the New World, Kahal Zur Israel Synagogue, is founded in Recife, Brazil by the Dutch Jews. The Kahal Zur Israel Synagogue in Recife, Brazil, erected in 1636, was the first synagogue erected in the Americas. Its foundations have been recently discovered, and the 20th-century buildings on the site have been altered to resemble a 17th-century Dutch synagogue.[201]
Jansenism (1640s)
[edit]
Jansenism was a Catholic theological movement, primarily in France, that emphasized original sin, human depravity, the necessity of divine grace, and predestination. The movement originated from the posthumously published work (Augustinus) of the Dutch theologian Cornelius Jansen, who died in 1638. It was first popularized by Jansen's friend Abbot Jean Duvergier de Hauranne, of Saint-Cyran-en-Brenne Abbey, and after Duvergier's death in 1643, was led by Antoine Arnauld. Through the 17th and into the 18th centuries, Jansenism was a distinct movement within the Catholic Church. The theological centre of the movement was the convent of Port-Royal Abbey, Paris, which was a haven for writers including Duvergier, Arnauld, Pierre Nicole, Blaise Pascal, and Jean Racine.
First Jewish congregation to be established in (the United States) North America (1654)
[edit]
Congregation Shearith Israel, the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue in the City of New Amsterdam, was founded in 1654, the first Jewish congregation to be established in North America. Its founders were twenty-three Jews, mostly of Spanish and Portuguese origin, who had been living in Recife, Brazil. When the Portuguese defeated the Dutch for control of Recife, and brought with them the Inquisition, the Jews of that area left. Some returned to Amsterdam, where they had originated. Others went to places in the Caribbean such as St. Thomas, Jamaica, Surinam and Curaçao, where they founded sister Sephardic congregations. One group of twenty-three Jews, after a series of unexpected events, landed in New Amsterdam. After being initially rebuffed by anti-Semitic Governor Peter Stuyvesant, Jews were given official permission to settle in the colony in 1655. These pioneers fought for their rights and won permission to remain. This marks the founding of the Congregation Shearith Israel.[202]
Scientific instruments
[edit]
Telescope (optical telescope) (1608)
[edit]
The first historical records of a telescope appear in patents filed 1608 by Hans Lippershey and Jacob Metius.[203][204][205][206][207][208][209][210] A description of Lippershey's instrument quickly reached Galileo Galilei, who created an improved version in 1609, with which he made the observations found in his Sidereus Nuncius of 1610.
Huygens eyepiece (1670s)
[edit]
Huygens eyepieces consist of two plano-convex lenses with the plane sides towards the eye separated by an air gap. The lenses are called the eye lens and the field lens. The focal plane is located between the two lenses. It was invented by Christiaan Huygens in the late 1660s and was the first compound (multi-lens) eyepiece.[211][212][213][214][215] Huygens discovered that two air spaced lenses can be used to make an eyepiece with zero transverse chromatic aberration. These eyepieces work well with the very long focal length telescopes (in Huygens day they were used with single element long focal length non-achromatic refracting telescopes, including very long focal length aerial telescopes). This optical design is now considered obsolete since with today's shorter focal length telescopes the eyepiece suffers from short eye relief, high image distortion, chromatic aberration, and a very narrow apparent field of view. Since these eyepieces are cheap to make they can often be found on inexpensive telescopes and microscopes.[216] Because Huygens eyepieces do not contain cement to hold the lens elements, telescope users sometimes use these eyepieces in the role of "solar projection", i.e. projecting an image of the Sun onto a screen. Other cemented eyepieces can be damaged by the intense, concentrated light of the Sun.
Microorganisms (1670s)
[edit]
Using an improved simple microscope, in 1673 Antonie van Leeuwenhoek becomes the first to discover, observe, describe, study and conduct scientific experiments with single-celled organisms, which he originally referred to as animalcules, and which now referred to as micro-organisms or microbes.[217][218][219][220][221] For these observations he created at least 25 simple microscopes, of differing types, of which only nine survive. His simple microscopes were made of silver or copper frames, holding specially shaped single glass sphere that acted as a small lens. The smaller the sphere, the more it magnified. Those that have survived are capable of magnification up to 275 times. It is suspected that Van Leeuwenhoek possessed units that could magnify up to 500 times.
Cycloidal pendulum (1673)
[edit]
The cycloid pendulum was invented by Christiaan Huygens in 1673. Its purpose is to eliminate the lack of isochronism of the ordinary simple pendulum. This is achieved by making the mass point move on a cycloid instead of a circular arc.[222][223][224][225][226][227][228]
Pyrometer (1739)
[edit]
The pyrometer, invented by Pieter van Musschenbroek, is a temperature measuring device. A simple type uses a thermocouple placed either in a furnace or on the item to be measured. The voltage output of the thermocouple is read from a meter. Many different types of thermocouple are available, for measuring temperatures from −200 °C to above 1500 °C.[229]
Leyden jar (first practical capacitor) (1745–1746)
[edit]
A Leyden jar, or Leiden jar, is a device that "stores" static electricity between two electrodes on the inside and outside of a glass jar. It was the original form of a capacitor (originally known as a "condenser"). It was invented independently by German cleric Ewald Georg von Kleist on 11 October 1745 and by Dutch scientist Pieter van Musschenbroek of Leiden (Leyden) in 1745–1746. The invention was named for the city. The Leyden jar was used to conduct many early experiments in electricity, and its discovery was of fundamental importance in the study of electricity. Previously, researchers had to resort to insulated conductors of large dimensions to store a charge. The Leyden jar provided a much more compact alternative. Like many early electrical devices, there was no particular use for the Leyden jar at first, other than to allow scientists to do a greater variety of electrical experiments. Benjamin Franklin, for example, used a Leyden jar to store electricity from lightning in his famous kite experiment in 1752. By doing so he proved that lightning was really electricity.
The idea for the Leyden jar was discovered independently by two parties: German scientist and jurist Ewald Georg von Kleist, and Dutchmen Pieter van Musschenbroek and Andreas Cunaeus. These scientists developed the Leyden jar while working under a theory of electricity that saw electricity as a fluid, and hoped to develop the jar to "capture" this fluid. In 1744 von Kleist lined a glass jar with silver foil, and charged the foil with a friction machine. Kleist was convinced that a substantial electric charge could be collected when he received a significant shock from the device. The effects of this "Kleistian jar" were independently discovered around the same time by Dutch scientists Pieter van Musschenbroek and Cunaeus at the University of Leiden. Van Musschenbroek communicated on it with the French scientific community where it was called the Leyden jar.[230][231][232][233][234][235][236]
Eisinga Planetarium (1781)
[edit]
The Eisinga Planetarium (Royal Eise Eisinga Planetarium) was built by Eise Eisinga in his home in Franeker, Friesland. It took Eisinga seven years to build his planetarium, completing it in 1781. The orrery still exists and is the world's oldest working planetarium.
Kipp's apparatus (1860)
[edit]
Kipp's apparatus, also called a Kipp generator, is designed for preparation of small volumes of gases. It was invented around 1860 by Dutch pharmacist Petrus Jacobus Kipp and widely used in chemical laboratories and for demonstrations in schools into the second half of the 20th century.
Phase contrast microscope (1933)
[edit]
In optical microscopy many objects such as cell parts in protozoans, bacteria and sperm tails are essentially fully transparent unless stained (and therefore killed). The difference in densities and composition within these objects however often gives rise to changes in the phase of light passing through them, hence they are sometimes called "phase objects". Using the phase-contrast technique makes these structures visible and allows the study of living specimens. This phase contrast technique proved to be such an advancement in microscopy that Dutch physicist Frits Zernike was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1953.
Magnetic horn (1961)
[edit]
The magnetic horn (also known as the Van der Meer horn) is a high-current, pulsed focusing device, invented by the Dutch physicist Simon van der Meer at CERN. It selects pions and focuses them into a sharp beam. Its original application was in the context of neutrino physics, where beams of pions have to be tightly focused. When the pions then decay into muons and neutrinos or antineutrinos, an equally well-focused neutrino beam is obtained. The muons were stopped in a wall of 3000 tons of iron and 1000 tons of concrete, leaving the neutrinos or antineutrinos to reach the Gargamelle bubble chamber.
Sports and games
[edit]
Kolf (forerunner of modern golf) (13th century)
[edit]
A golf-like game (kolf in Dutch) is recorded as taking place on 26 Februar
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 81
|
https://www.dreamdestinations.com/blog-main/category/Veterans
|
en
|
Veterans — Blog — Dream Destinations
|
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1572650166012-IIE4WSWAH16TV8JJNT7R/favicon.ico?format=100w
|
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1572650166012-IIE4WSWAH16TV8JJNT7R/favicon.ico?format=100w
|
[
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1579896181803-J115KNQY8BNRPGOB9K9W/DreamDestinations-Logo2.jpg?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1551971768811-A44484RFHIKQI8SD50MG/_MG_0178.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1539187624873-6IA6CRFGZRMMFE5MZ6P6/Iron+Gates+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/97113af3-5ab5-41e0-a03f-d9c979b53d8b/Dummy+Paratrooper+dropped+on+D+Day.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/025decb3-2eae-4be2-a044-ecd8c7e378a5/Churchill+War+Rooms.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/58273d99-3384-4926-b9fb-2aff57dcf24a/D%2BDay%2BMuseum%2BPortsmouth.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/0e2f8660-0be1-4398-9dc3-02228c988aac/SAM_4453.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/4011aff9-a263-45f0-bc9c-f0fe1fdf2970/Omaha+Beach+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/156fa21d-cf2c-4354-a784-3471aef3bdfa/IMG_0313.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/55190500-fb28-4829-9d89-c62481951113/Picture6.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/cd97fba2-1abd-466d-975f-f38df6b590ed/Picture5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/66d90105-cd81-4c20-b113-95c3f4fb0961/Omaha+Beach+Bunker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/6028d4ee-3cd2-4913-bccc-66e0a5ee3883/Picture5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/724bfe0f-bf3b-4f89-bceb-1081dc40babe/Omaha+Beach+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8f7f1ad5-8776-41f1-8d99-cac1964ab696/Omaha+Beach+3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/45d75518-0541-4140-9746-2bd71001bb62/SAM_4387.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/5ea3a92d-ed76-4fec-b52d-6d98edf1e524/Picture4.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/558a04e5-b977-4067-acc7-e660f91b8ad2/Picture3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/d7bbfb53-0802-474c-9e63-2318593dab71/Picture2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/a2b9f2a2-a660-4f4a-b41c-c662d2867f7e/Picture14.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/07fd942a-372c-4630-8778-5b6f74b01299/Picture10.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7b2c298c-f2ac-422c-aa0b-4f5d65ffaba8/Picture5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/0f4dc6a5-24b2-4515-bac2-8ec9a48db5b5/Picture7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/110181e1-bf10-41d7-beee-dd8003142f66/SAM_4441.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/646717dc-1149-4cc1-ad2b-6ab08facab54/WW%2BII%2BPlane.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/fea1da1d-f287-49f9-b613-fa526248584e/SAM_4448.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/487aabd9-538d-4a7a-9bc5-c99469c9d12e/SAM_4449.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/4f39666e-5b07-4608-8b32-573fe133a2d8/SAM_4457.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/a7cf924f-6a4a-4cab-9a57-7e95a324bcbc/SAM_4459.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/51a3c083-ff29-4fc4-ab67-d9040f0ffd53/Picture11.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7a3af75b-9a9e-4025-9195-93ee1546fc1f/Picture12.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/2742d3ed-fede-4abb-911f-caaa2f6cd536/Picture17.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/33e56bac-c67f-4a3a-bd01-8a359e1cb2f1/Picture14.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/e62bf619-d1c4-462b-b06b-b343a1610742/Picture3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/22abd444-7ab5-4ac2-826d-bfa48cbb98a3/Picture6.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f5328841-f74e-49b9-8892-bc60972784f7/Picture13.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/61e76f4c-e60f-4afa-ad8c-3effd73a1739/Picture2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/81d70de8-f7e1-4598-b83f-7df3458f2f25/Lester+Holt+and+Hank.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/52077796-b183-412c-ae9b-cac0436a67b8/anne+silver+sea+edit.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/c1472f4c-64cb-4981-b1ce-db5bf6eb94af/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284926403-YDMLBU73VSRYZDN7PG5Q/Pointe+du+Hoc+Site+Map",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283236745-36TLZKPG5X2RLPSJMADU/Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591288273325-JXN17SGUDTE0XFNIBQTV/Pointe+du++Hoc.++.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591282695838-G6XDYA1YSWI13OD4P3KA/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Cliffs",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283898799-FSWKAW9PO7VH60XDMQ65/Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591287107854-D373X08EQ7X1J7JZ4W19/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Sign.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591288828485-JH0WDBBBTK4UFLB2RIXY/DUKW+Landing+Craft.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284111581-DHK1F8UKR1D5IN80BFHL/Craters+on+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284165687-I7I615NMTMJIVFPJVGSQ/Craters+on+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284252010-0CM1M0Y4ES4C3OZ35DL7/Inside+on+of+the+gun+postion+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284339457-8BCISYJA3T49CNTCEUEX/Gun+Bunker+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284582229-EQ1OHZU9J9MQ1OH4AIJ5/Gun+Bunker+with+Ranger+Monument",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284754974-L3YDNHDIN104COLLQFQG/Bunker+on+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284486879-6HUJBZZJY9OJE2TXGC6E/Bunkers+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284797404-PR7DJ6D0LCM3P78YBGUV/Bunker+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284406513-OQAEJR31OS7R6C2ZDMJ4/Firing+Position+pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591290530430-YGP3STU3Z4QRI19GD40H/155+mm+Cannon+on+display+at+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591288481915-1U2B6HAS46VZESMVTOMX/Pointe+de+la+Perc%C3%A9e.+++%282%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283493174-DW2VAR5SNW0BFTAYCWL6/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283721999-E30WW34X85J6MGN21R9A/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument+Insciption.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284851396-F0GCSEXV4ZOMM6UA40GY/Bayonet+Monument+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591291172045-SBA56YT2KP5E8RP74QE4/Coin+we+handed+out+to+our+tour+members",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8f2cfad0-7029-4955-bb4e-16a16e3a52c8/anne+silver+sea+edit.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591289350671-285XEZHW4B2J3RYUZ22D/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/73ac74b9-cc77-4419-a3db-0737a99fcaa0/Henry+Schrader+Gravestone+Marker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/55a15cec-def0-4ec3-bdca-163b98558216/Unkown+Soldier+.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/becbf802-c335-4c1b-b5e9-1c4e7e420004/American+Cemetery+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/9c150d39-99ae-41a6-ac7e-0290d2775fdc/American+Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8a3dc216-eac5-42eb-a099-cc69fcd47f60/_MG_0303.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/3cdbfd65-cbfd-4ce4-9388-765e935ddd18/Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1b3dc406-7257-4594-9dbc-b93d498d0ca8/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/2267be78-311d-47a7-a82e-c5c5569c2629/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument+Insciption.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/6800b8bb-ae0d-4c44-970a-370c4f76f05a/_MG_0406.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/3bcfccc8-5af8-404d-b0c3-78fc065d5857/SAM_4428.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/c4b19716-b702-4644-95b4-5b6d38a68463/Utah+Beach+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/98380a4f-58f2-4156-b273-1309a63db6ef/Picture7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/020a1570-068e-447e-b0d0-4b8be562d788/Picture1.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/b8bf0870-e62e-4907-87dd-90e55ef42b2b/Picture2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/6e888da0-f66a-42c4-b0cb-d4927b71b7f1/Scan_20200904+%287%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f186358e-99f4-458b-b431-78b358c7f8bb/Track+Swim+B6.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/742d29ff-2534-4894-a9e0-e1cab9534a4e/Picture4.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/d9e4e0de-2464-43d9-a3e4-d81403d752ee/IMG_3193.jpeg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/154c3bdc-3223-4c45-8c05-dea6febe16f7/Picture5+%282%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/09550cfc-cd38-4e41-a5f9-82664294fb5e/Churchill+War+Rooms.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/657f9ff5-3676-42b1-9b71-3e9ff5d55841/2014+Tour+Group.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/2b74885a-a98b-46ef-82fe-d30df811de36/_MG_0425.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8b4b91ab-a81b-47e4-9d2a-4c82c7420318/Dummy+Paratrooper+dropped+on+D+Day.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/dde2b96f-f04c-43fa-ac20-330ed3aed1a1/Picture52.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/904fb49b-cf3e-41da-bc53-5d0c445d3794/SAM_4453.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/a6543c80-4dac-4a07-8dbc-64bc79a72962/Pointe+du++Hoc.++.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/75087502-fff0-4769-9540-ae5c6819eafa/IMG_9519.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/11709087-7b39-4bf4-a752-2f05f6be6d2a/SAM_4427.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/e6fa6162-df6a-4be9-b168-5aa276db2222/Ponte+du+Hoc+3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/290357ae-0220-446c-b7cd-1ed847340492/Picture5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f1a17afc-b32c-4abd-9dcc-79ed841a7f08/Picture9.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/6ebfe74c-43f6-4a02-8db0-6a8ab2afccfd/Picture10.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/d55dca09-ce78-40ee-b03e-4346710b04f4/Picture6.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/ff7ab4fe-0a33-416d-b06c-e2dac499e1a8/Omaha+Beach+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/16c5f6df-a417-455c-98a8-481bd303242a/Omaha+Beach+3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/07c7a0b8-1a54-4027-bce7-b558229ee429/Picture3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/399e5218-5912-4d55-952d-ec496c6be8d8/Picture2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/b10fca4b-5743-4dd6-9784-187e90f93c65/SAM_4438.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/829066fc-7b63-43e3-8164-33e2b0b3f892/SAM_4444.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/75e218eb-aeb5-448e-8618-f7dd7b2a5d81/SAM_4457.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f444325f-9784-46fd-993f-9a9e46430a56/Picture5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7d80a4b3-57c4-4014-a0fc-f686ff97b59d/Picture16.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/4f545495-dc67-4128-824c-5787618ae48d/Picture15.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/ae31ca68-c176-428c-a19d-6fa2c04d507e/Picture11.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1001dec7-3dd8-447c-b311-0bc3500684fe/Picture14.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/53a98266-7813-4ad4-8c60-48216c512f39/SAM_4387.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/89e4c66f-01c4-4030-8005-bd0d054ffc02/SAM_4418.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/b551f11f-72b1-418a-ab7c-a38aa8d05d12/SAM_4320.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/a357cb6e-5497-4ca2-864c-248929c432f2/Ammoraches+Port.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/712d5d1e-6d00-487a-a5f4-5cda30d027a9/_MG_0247.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/5f833f87-3668-49f0-83a1-a2ef98bbb4c0/SAM_4381.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/3ed9ebc2-6dfe-434c-a158-6bc6922956e5/SAM_4322.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8a25417b-6f0b-49ab-a593-5694cbee0bbe/_MG_0273.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/769c17d1-e03b-4798-a8be-25aaa2ed6cca/German+Gun+Battery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8fa2ea5b-a1de-42e3-b099-77e89eb20fdf/Picture57.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/76e9664f-bfcb-4a7d-a620-5dac57902275/Picture31.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7c4265b1-7a77-4f53-a042-5b47253a86c3/Picture30.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/012746a9-2154-45a4-a48c-b9503463a177/SAM_4459.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/b56a8cfc-30d2-491b-9cad-005d9d62715a/SAM_4456.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7a2fae75-8d36-4b88-80c2-3345385e4100/SAM_4458.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/fea697a8-c146-4d67-b266-a04c174fdc40/SAM_4448.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/72423baf-2333-4f44-9dc0-6c4c4ca34dec/Picture27.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/50b944d4-d59d-4e1b-afdc-6a6c588ff4a6/Picture23.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/ac326a0a-4de8-4d71-bbbd-3d324db50ed8/Picture22.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/fe1c0f8f-84ce-45d3-8fd8-2d80f9eaea44/Picture21.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/0fbafeca-34d7-453b-905d-4b5cb7f7aa91/Picture18.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/98e0eefb-974f-4336-8818-23fbdc9020d7/Picture26.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/fad5c482-0470-4f57-a1ed-a7a70fa05c65/Picture20.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/aa8afb6e-ca6d-4cfe-81dd-6e74194c5074/IMG_9574.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7e9c6d94-8374-4d91-a460-e069429278fc/IMG_9702.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/c2456fc0-a15f-45c2-aba9-c64df944e84e/Picture7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/92bbd4a4-9193-456e-9a6b-b86897417135/American+Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/79247e4c-d245-4014-a026-a4bfae686723/American+Cemetery+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/8ef7cfff-39dc-4607-acdf-56eb757c38a6/IMG_9686.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/66c34d2d-6534-4d9e-8a8a-aa74db40de6e/Picture15.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/b648e2db-4319-40f9-aa83-7b4dda8cc6a8/anne+silver+sea+edit.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f80f40fc-b5b4-4f9e-ad2e-55046d28b736/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1dcb895d-ee77-4d12-b918-beb7c076f2de/American+Cemetery+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f3d50793-cc13-4630-a721-89b76e9de84b/Picture5+2%285%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/9d49092e-3e8b-4ec3-8f5c-b211dd86e699/American+Cemetery+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/5877b62c-5777-4fe5-b31c-e84fd58384b5/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7cee442d-eea1-4de0-a3dc-d40f8fd42cd9/Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/88e60fd0-dd03-4de6-887e-0544db9d5e49/Image+%2817%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/50fe122d-c96f-4ba0-b2d0-914c84108b70/Henry+Schrader+Gravestone+Marker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/7a1eecce-9b2e-4e43-983c-77d99f6ae53d/Picture7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/f7d6f6b6-d79f-42d5-9bd8-524e078c5a82/Picture5+2%283%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1c44b6fc-a295-47fd-b721-b45b07398c19/Image+%2817%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/40a9848b-74ee-4529-84eb-5bd611c7d255/Picture19.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/a0e2a82a-7117-4566-90ba-5771a752260d/Berlin+Wall+Chunk.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/3f2eb729-22c1-45ea-bef1-5a9ce907407e/Picture5+%282%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/a3994088-7050-4612-80f3-2054d3b81841/Picture17.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/5b281972-5d9d-42ff-b467-02e55c03f7fe/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623285173387-3SAFUW29K0KOP0DUJL8F/Picture16.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623285239195-2UH5QEC989A2TI5SNCO1/Picture17.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623327127863-BFNQF6X2SLOGFHQE58OW/Picture1.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623284957200-YVLLI9MWV72XHY7D7RUF/Picture2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623284880887-966XDQ7P2IZQYZE9FICL/Picture6.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623285418466-ABDQ2UT9J25KBGTD1NOK/American+Cemetery+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623285509346-IE8E4FZ20W85G19Y5YTR/Denmark.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623337296716-VPZMFN5THL0DFC00GCCJ/Switzerland.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623340926283-U6V5J9YYILKVU0PMNRRP/Picture1.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623295287922-2EEGCJJIR6T9240DL94X/Union+Jack.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623327811855-UZOBM09X2CN29FPXCET5/Union+Jack+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623328184394-LNVTCNS6TSZVU9I0B15W/Belgium+Flag.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623328435443-RSUXJN1W6AGLGN6YRDZS/Italy.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623329380924-K4Y62HHYXS94YO9ZK7RF/Solvakia.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623328295958-6G9Y240SV0JHFBLQ8UEH/Croatia.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623337796012-RAIPA6GCUWGKU44P3T5D/Picture24.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623337915210-J23EZ28ZX1JE0E82S7V3/IMG_0486.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623337165773-3IMS58KSDRAY09T0EKXG/slide+23.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623327852139-XTUWA48NV7JLBYIZ9IUV/Turkey.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623338782358-NEXDMIRKRPT7HTI9KZRM/Greek+Flag.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623338823760-MP7ZHXCLCAW7KLA33QRM/Lucerne+Flags.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623338873592-ABIIQLZWDF87NABREXRS/Vienna.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623339223098-MZLZW0KGC8H18BSMJRIK/Multiple+Flags+EU+Croatia.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623328692243-LG30MFALNI00U6VFFV06/Hungary+Coat+of+Arms.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623339297361-RBOYOX0LP7FWJS0GCH72/Prague+Crest+Flag.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623339323795-6OR0TOHG0XPSLSAK3P1M/Double+Eagle.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623339354693-TD91U7Y8MK6WWX5OGK04/Russian+Crest+Peterhof.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1623284802029-V6PVQ42SNVAT4E8P9QR2/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1622126453775-NB02ZLHLP9G04UK5SC70/American+Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1622126514984-3NP4IWIW67DCIE5ICLUH/Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1622126622088-INLG9YXKVCH8FI73OWNB/Henry+Schrader+Gravestone+Marker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1622126715030-F2PUTBYKY1YKAHCOERCH/Picture5+2%285%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605112456275-CD1FWW3F0FWF1SJQQAOR/71+Class+Coin",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605105751548-UH8ILNOPWSPLI2V8UX1I/MG%2BHank%2BSchrader",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605105322367-Z5SX0HAKHOXY157TM9XF/Henry+Schrader+Gravestone+Marker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605110706351-ZIR79QDHT0TY83DZZ64O/IMG_0032.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605110893169-LEYAVOSVCD3QIFGK4V34/Mindy",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605110584641-NL5XCR0U02HREOBBJRXF/IMG_0034.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605107548068-TSQ9L4CUC65QRAA156N6/D+Day+Men.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605105849093-ESBOWF8QRWP9ATZDQS4I/71+River+Cruise+Group.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605105987553-F2DLZ87JQRL63LSXV3EF/71+AmaWaterways+Cruise+Group",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605107800240-SHVBUWDUY4EBSCATAS6E/Mary+and+Jack",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605108964297-UNQM12T3RG107CMJ9KRJ/IMG_8974.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605107644257-QS68GXIK9YEU7VPWJ9K1/Mark+in+Budapest",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605109113420-U6I129DNXZHZID8EV0CZ/Jeff+and+Hank.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605107349687-SNM7C79I3LEWK6N4CG09/D+Day++2019",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605106596978-FFPV9XXQ5FXVSBL86V06/John+%2871%29+and+Irene",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605106653718-URR5QFG0HFIRIYU8XKV6/Jerry+and+Mary",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605111424487-MZ58ISICZXXN4QYF794R/Anne+and+Hank",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605107056938-XW9ECO6IQCYAP0WEWKTT/Hank%2Band%2BMarium%2BSchrader%2BWedding%2B1942.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605105536474-E2SHUBU1QO3LOBGIRITR/Marium+and+Hank+Schrader",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605114951443-YDBWBJ3QVQEZY8QBOOBV/Mom+by+Kentucky+tree",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1605111340653-8961X7PRW6GNG86CMXE3/Graduation+Day",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1593709324512-CEG9V0ZWWJMR103CNB01/Hank+Schrader+West+Point+Graduation+9+June+1971",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284926403-YDMLBU73VSRYZDN7PG5Q/Pointe+du+Hoc+Site+Map",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283236745-36TLZKPG5X2RLPSJMADU/Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591288273325-JXN17SGUDTE0XFNIBQTV/Pointe+du++Hoc.++.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591282695838-G6XDYA1YSWI13OD4P3KA/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Cliffs",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283898799-FSWKAW9PO7VH60XDMQ65/Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591287107854-D373X08EQ7X1J7JZ4W19/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Sign.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591288828485-JH0WDBBBTK4UFLB2RIXY/DUKW+Landing+Craft.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284111581-DHK1F8UKR1D5IN80BFHL/Craters+on+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284165687-I7I615NMTMJIVFPJVGSQ/Craters+on+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284252010-0CM1M0Y4ES4C3OZ35DL7/Inside+on+of+the+gun+postion+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284339457-8BCISYJA3T49CNTCEUEX/Gun+Bunker+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284582229-EQ1OHZU9J9MQ1OH4AIJ5/Gun+Bunker+with+Ranger+Monument",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284754974-L3YDNHDIN104COLLQFQG/Bunker+on+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284486879-6HUJBZZJY9OJE2TXGC6E/Bunkers+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284797404-PR7DJ6D0LCM3P78YBGUV/Bunker+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284406513-OQAEJR31OS7R6C2ZDMJ4/Firing+Position+pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591290530430-YGP3STU3Z4QRI19GD40H/155+mm+Cannon+on+display+at+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591288481915-1U2B6HAS46VZESMVTOMX/Pointe+de+la+Perc%C3%A9e.+++%282%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283493174-DW2VAR5SNW0BFTAYCWL6/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591283721999-E30WW34X85J6MGN21R9A/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument+Insciption.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591284851396-F0GCSEXV4ZOMM6UA40GY/Bayonet+Monument+Pointe+du+Hoc",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591291172045-SBA56YT2KP5E8RP74QE4/Coin+we+handed+out+to+our+tour+members",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1591289350671-285XEZHW4B2J3RYUZ22D/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590692784669-7FZOE8HVQK0NK9YI4W8D/Dummy+Paratrooper+dropped+on+D+Day.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590683127903-YXE6PRAJBDC5JO0RNIWT/Churchill+War+Rooms.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590687556272-3MQ5743KPHOTKZ3KVQHF/D+Day+Museum+Portsmouth",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590688719378-775PWGW3R5R0AC00VM8N/Omaha+and+Utah+Units",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590684344845-5RUVLL7SWN7TFYSS7LB9/Omaha+Beach+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590692118632-FO7WSQ7W0CHZZZ48DAOF/Big+Red+One+Hero+at+the+American+Cemetery+2019",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590687320428-QUFSTUJV6U1HH8PUVQP5/Omaha+Beach+as+seen+from+the+American+Cemetery",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590687390139-1BHWUDO7YF8F4U3BWHBN/Bluffs+in+Normandy+Omaha+Beach+Sector",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685201990-CX3LX3MK7PWG0J5CYZT4/Omaha+Beach+Bunker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590684072458-6LGAKIGPHIJAB172KSOH/Wn+72+88+mm+cannon+bunker+with+the+29th+Division+Memorial+on+top",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590684290747-KVCCOXMK92Q9TDMMNLYK/29+th+Division+Omaha+Beach+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590684465856-HDLCMVTHGU33EDFMKKQL/Omaha+Beach+Soldier+Monument",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590688154366-0MPY25PWKQIM2UJYKVGR/Sherman+Tank+Outfitted+to+swim",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685088096-POPXW99SJA04GBSL4NYT/Omaha+Beach+Draw",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590683976030-E1Q32KKNDM7AB20U2P9B/Les+Braves+Omaha+Beach+Memorial",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590684604478-SBLGB4LYYIN5F8ZZ16T1/Omaha+Beach+Monument",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685787648-93E9SVVRP11IA7AIC7CL/Utah+Beach",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590683484707-93F1A1L3ED9K22HMV66X/Picture7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689456586-ZLCSFNX3UWKBP5K1NXEN/Iron+Mike",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590687168772-TCFM6JJEPIJJIQMFA88L/WW+II+Plane",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689024234-3RFT93K2Z5B0NBNHN0SM/Thompson+45+cal.+submachine+gun",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689135639-MVJ66C98KVVTJZL6JGYT/Carbine+prepared+to+jump",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689215356-6LTCYOMOPNZGBBICYN3L/Paratrooper",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689308982-NH2FWLZEA5J6SCHQYHPE/Airborne+Museum+Plan",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685639797-FFWZPR63GM6BACNQP4ZC/Higgins+Landing+Craft",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685687616-B0FR1L4753BGYD85SEDY/Soliers+Storming+Ashore+Scupture+Utah+Beach",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590688292751-OBAHXKDF4G83TAD0K13H/Leading+the+Way+Monument",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685953248-YSEAI3D3GN7EYQBVMTAN/Sherman+Tank+at+Utah+Beach",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689756962-VBWAIFVAYW63J979NL9T/Omaha+Beach+Memorial",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685493612-6FCEFRMQ3C19Y8M5SBWS/Saliors+Monument+Utah+Beach",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590685868571-UAU0BWU4D4SFIE978KH1/Utah+Beach+Memorial",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689701087-K39512EMMET7O1N66IVX/Omaha+Bech+Memorial",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689875290-IBSRU5XKTSMITJICWPZS/Lester+Holt+and+Hank+2019+Utah+Beach",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590689845016-F746V4YZOPBER1XVT332/Hank+Schrader.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590069906784-8WV4R8ILOAT0EZPBUXAZ/Henry+Schrader+Gravestone+Marker.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590070189804-W8GZUWMFZIRBR4XUQCCE/Unkown+Soldier+.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590070351658-TNVQQ8TTK7DAEGS1H69P/American+Cemetery+2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590070379020-8PZ53M545CITSQD1WKXK/American+Cemetery.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590071830311-0SSQ5HROLQERP19OZ770/_American+Cemetery+Normandy+2019",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590070471807-GWN6OYKTBB4KSKZMX57W/American+Cemetery+Luxembourg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590071390021-8KZAD7DZ6IVUG6DKMASX/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590071453174-HBZEPKB5M5TVAI9YTCNN/Pointe+Du+Hoc+Bayonet+Monument+Insciption.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590072002197-JS931C5LS0SRSA71KTYK/Ranger+Momument+Pointe+du+Hoc+2019",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590072664982-MYPAXJCZC7WTITHGU2RC/Utah+Beach+Monument.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1590071217843-TSWF81IWW1D7WHEMI5DH/Picture5+2%285%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1573134038939-AR6CZPDM510KEZTK6JE6/Image+%2818%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1541628538699-BC4U9DZRSAJX1GJYH13A/D+Day+Men.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1541627466490-Y6XY5XJS8MG272SMYAQ3/71+River+Cruise+Group.JPG",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1541626378771-AT2C7SYCFANQBQ0K97SA/Mindy+Dahl.jpeg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1541640896849-N0DIGZ9NWE51ITGW1Q3O/Denise+%26+Mark+Thomas+in+his+Coast+Guard+Dress+Mess+and+Kilit",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1541626689586-YYO9LSZ2KT50G048EPIB/Picture7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1541626904925-ZTYDQNUC05PX6B8PFJZT/Picture5+%282%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/cc090527-a634-491b-ac90-3a4681685efc/Attachment-1.jpeg",
"https://seal-houston.bbb.org/seals/blue-seal-250-52-bbb-90047997.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Hank Schrader"
] |
2019-03-07T00:00:00
|
en
|
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5918854fcd0f68c07c377c68/1572650166012-IIE4WSWAH16TV8JJNT7R/favicon.ico?format=100w
|
Dream Destinations
|
https://www.dreamdestinations.com/blog-main/category/Veterans
|
Omaha and Utah Beaches 6 June 1944
By Hank Schrader, USMA ’71, Europe Destination & Europe River Cruise Expert
Anne Schrader, Certified Travel Counselor & Certified Luxury Cruise Specialist
www.dreamdestinations.com
I first published this in 2020. With the 80th Anniversary of that horrible day which changed history, and so many suvivors who will sadly not be here much longer, I hope this is a fitting tribute to those brave souls who helped liberate Europe. May we never forget!
In November 1943, the Big Three (Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill) agreed in a conference in Tehran, that the Allied Western Forces of the United States and Britain would invade France in 1944 and open a second front against the German Fortress Europe.
The clock was now ticking for the D Day invasion of France. It was a race between German defenders and the Allied invasion force.
The ideal strategy was simple for the planners of the D Day amphibious invasion—attack lightly defended beaches, secure the beach, and move men and supplies quickly inland. Next, establish or capture a port quickly to reinforce with more men and supplies. Then, defeat the German forces and win the war.
Executing it proved to be one of the most difficult military tasks every attempted.
During the massive planning operations, Pas du Calais (the most favorable landing site) and Normandy were under consideration. Both had enough good characteristics to work for an amphibious landing. But Normandy was the best choice for two reasons. There were: 1) in 1943 it was a lightly defended part of the German Atlantic Wall and 2) the Germans anticipated an attack at Pas du Calais and fortified it and constantly moved more soldiers into defensive positions.
The German Defenders
The Germans realized they weren’t prepared to properly defend the vast Atlantic Wall in 1943. The German commander, General Gerd von Rundstedt, drafted a report to Hitler about the scant fortifications and poor quality units defending the area. Hitler responded by adding General Erwin Rommel (known popularly as the “Desert Fox” for his Africa campaign) to oversee improving the defenses.
The Germans knew an invasion was coming—they just didn’t know where or when. The choice that the Germans believed the Allies would select was an invasion of Pas de Calais, as it was the most logical invasion site—only 20 miles from England and had 20 miles of good landing beaches. The allies bolstered that illusion by creating a fake force under the command of LTG George Patton, complete with fake equipment, field barracks and even a docking area near Dover. They relentlessly bombed the Calais area in the build-up phase, as well as other targets in France. In an unusual operation, they also dropped dummies by parachutes, to harass and confuse the Germans.
Field Marshal Rommel was also convinced Calais was the prime invasion site and deployed the 208,000 man 15th Army to defend this area. The deception plan of D Day was working as hoped for the Allies.
The first priority for the Germans was protecting the major harbors, as any invading forces would need constant supplies, more men and equipment.
After securing these major ports, they then began building “Widerstandnesten” (resistance nests) along the beaches. These were a series of pillboxes, gun positions, anti-aircraft weapons and trenches. The beaches were littered with obstacles, mines (over 4 million mines) to enhance these resistance nests. Inland, flooded lowlands and stakes were planted in the ground to cut into gliders during landings and make possible airborne landing zones potential death traps.
A key concept for the Germans was to stop the invasion on the beaches, so all defensive resources were placed at or near the beach areas and no defense in depth was planned. There were reserve units to stop breakthroughs but the best reserve unit of panzer tanks could only be released by Hitler. If the Allies could breach these tough defenses, and cut off the reserve forces, they had a good chance of success.
By June 1944 all the beaches used for the D Day landings in Normandy had at least some of these defensive measures in places.
Unknown to the allies, the best defended beach in Normandy was Omaha.
The stage was set for that fateful day 6 June 1944.
Concept of the Overlord Operation
You might be surprised to know the last successful armed assault across the English Channel happened in 1066 (yes, the famous Battle of Hastings). 8 centuries later, this was about to change.
Amphibious landings are complex operations. Trying to attack with 5 divisions over a 50 mile front in Normandy from a base in England would require naval forces, air forces and army units from British, Canadian and American forces. The allied armies and massive equipment needed to ensure success only added to the complexity. 150,000 soldiers would be required, with a fleet of 5,333 ships and an air armada of over 12,921 planes.
Synchronizing an operation of this size remains one of the most amazing military feats in the history of the world.
An Overview of the Invasion
On the beach, 270 desperate engineer soldiers were trying to open 16 pathways for the tanks to get off the beach from the obstacles. They had 27 minutes to achieve their mission according to the plan; only 1 pathway is opened on time. Most of the engineers are dead or wounded by the end of their 27 minute first mission.
The landing waves continued. Rifle and machinegun bullets constantly flew around; mortar and artillery shells rained down; explosions, screams, destroyed and abandoned equipment and vehicles litter the beaches (especially the destroyed burning tanks); and confusion was everywhere. The only reasons most survived was there was just too many of them for the Germans to shoot everyone and the heavy smoke that offered some concealment to the exposed soldiers.
Without tank support, the original plan to take the heavily fortified draws was not a good option for soldiers only armed with light weapons.
At 0730, several hundred surviving soldiers were huddled against the seawall, and the outlook was bleak. Most of their leaders had been killed or wounded.
In the west, Brigadier General Norman “Dutch” Cota, assistant division commander of the 29th Division, landed in the second wave and sprinted to the wall around 0730. As he rallied the soldiers, he realized going up the draws, according to the original plan wouldn’t work. The only good option was to climb the less defended bluffs. He would be awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for his superb leadership and personal bravery for rallying the disorgananized soldiers pinned down on Omaha Beach.
He found a group of rangers, led by LTC Max Schneider (commander of the 5th Ranger Battalion) and told them of his plan and then yelled out “Rangers Lead the Way”, which has become the official ranger moto. Within an hour, the rangers and soldiers from the 29th reached the top. The German defenses were oriented to the sea and Cota’s growing band of soldiers captured the Vierville draw (D-1) about 2 hours later by attacking them from their rear. It took the engineer soldiers 8 hours to clear the Vierville draw of mines and other obstacles.
The beach head was still an intense killing zone at about 0830. Several thousand soldiers were stranded and easy targets for the Germans. A frustrated destroyer skipper (Lt. Commander Ralph Ramey), defied his orders, steamed his destroyed as close as possible and began to blast the cliffs with his 5 inch guns. Soon, all the other destroyers followed. Within 30 minutes, they had destroyed 6 gun emplacements. The tide was turning. With less effective fire raining down on the trapped men, leaders began moving soldiers up the bluffs and into the draws. The crowded beaches were slowly clearing.
With men still vulnerable on the beach, and landing craft prohibited from landed more soldiers as there was no space, soldiers were trying to fight their way off the killing zone. In 2 hours of intense fighting, by 1100, the beach started to clear up as the men were making progress against the Germans. Some landing craft commanders again defied orders and started to land more troops. These soldiers and equipment were still under fire, but it was not as intense as at 0630. The reinforcements help rally all in harm’s way--momentum now was on the American side.
By 1300, Gen. Bradley, who had considered abandoning Omaha and land the remaining soldiers at Utah, received a message that troops who had been previously pinned down on the beach were moving up the heights behind the beach area. Victory now seemed possible.
3 hours later, the Colleville Draw was in American hands. Now three of the four draws were under American control. Not until about 2000, would the 4th draw, Les Moulins, be captured.
Our Final Thoughts
D Day was a success but what really stands out to me is the resolve of the soldiers, sailors and airmen who made the operation work. Heroic, innovative and resourceful, these military forces should be honored for their deeds. They did not really see themselves as heroes--most just wanted to live to see 7 June 1944.
The war’s end would not come for 336 days of more combat. It would have never happened so soon, if these forces had not taken the first step on 6 June 1944 that ultimately ended the German occupation of Europe.
We have led two tours in Normandy in 2014 and 2019 and those experiences have made this operation much more real for me. We owe a debt of gratitude to these folks—their sacrifice and courage will stay with me for the rest of my life.
If you have never been to Normandy and seen the D Day Beaches, I would encourage you to go.
We are travel experts, ocean and river cruise experts, and Europe destination experts. We have first-hand knowledge of almost anywhere you want to visit in Europe. We know our products and the vendors who sell them to you. We have designed special tours for dozens of clients, led several and will continue to find just the right vacation that will exceed your expectations. As you can see, our full service agency can get you to almost anywhere you desire to travel and provide you a great experience and vacation.
When you are spending your hard earned money for a vacation, you want an advisor who can match you with the right trip. You want someone who will understand your expectations and fuel your anticipation (or excitement) to get you the best possible trip experience.
Whatever your Dream Destinations are, we are here to help you get the best possible vacation based on what is important to you! We will provide you high quality, expertly planned travel. Please give me a call 713-397-0188 (Hank) or email me at hschrader@dreamdestinations.com. We want to help you: Savor life…make memories…Visit Dream Destinations! Your journey begins here!
On the fateful day, Lt. Col James Rudder led 225 men in an assault on the cliffs of Pointe du Hoc.
But to understand this superb combat unit, we must return to the days of 1943, where Rudder formed the Rangers. The 2nd Ranger Battalion was activated on April 1, 1943 at Camp Forrest, Tullahoma, Tennessee. They were volunteer units. Each soldier had to possess superb physical qualities and sharp mental skills. They also trained in Florida. Each ranger became skilled in all types of weapons, hand-to-hand combat and handling difficult terrain. The unit was deployed to Scotland next. Here they trained on scaling cliffs and trained with British Commandos.
The rangers were organized into 6 line companies, A to F per battalion sized units. Each company consisted of 65 men and 3 officers. The companies were organized into 2 platoons.
The Plan
The plan was for part of the 2nd Ranger Battalion to assault the cliffs of Pointe du Hoc at 0630 and take possession of the German position by 0700. This group was named Force A.
Force A had 3 ranger companies in the task organization. Company D was to scale the cliffs from the west; Companies E and F were to scale the cliffs from the east. They would then destroy the cannons once on top of Pointe du Hoc. After destroying the weapons, they were to establish a defensive perimeter on Pointe du Hoc and prevent the Germans from moving reinforcements down the coastal highway that connected Grandcamp and Vierville.
The rangers were to hold the ground until relieved by the 116th Infantry Division. Relief was scheduled for noon on 6 June 1944.
Force B, Charlie Company of the 2nd Rangers, was to assault and capture the area on the far right flank of the Omaha Beach on exit D-1. Their objective was Pointe de la Percée.
Force C, was comprised of the entire 5th Ranger Battalion, along with A and B companies of the 2nd Rangers. Here were their missions:
1). If the initial landing force failed, Force C was designated to assault and capture Pointe du Hoc, by landing at Omaha and moving inland to take Pointe du Hoc.
Or
2) If the mission of Force A was successful, they were scheduled to also land at Pointe du Hoc as reinforcements, assuming the objective was taken by 0700.
A Landing that Started Off Wrong
At 0445 the rangers of Force A were loaded into landing crafts that held 22 men per landing craft. The men and supplies were loaded into 10 landing craft and 4 DUKW's amphibious vehicles. As they approached the beachhead, they were 3 miles off course, and LTC Rudder realized the error—they were headed to Pointe de la Percée, the objective of Force B.
The landing craft had to travel exposed broadside back to the correct landing site instead of only the front exposed to direct enemy fire. By the time they arrived at the objective, 1 landing craft and 2 DUKW’s were sunk.
They were due to start their assault at 0630, but the currents and navigation errors delayed the landing until 0710. Since the plan called for the assault to begin at 0630, the naval bombardment stopped at 0625. This allowed the Germans to regroup and take up some defensive positions.
The Germans, however, were slow to reorganize, and this aided the assault.
The first landing crafts made it to Pointe du Hoc at 0710. Their landing area was only 30 yards wide and the tide was rising. There was no time to assault from both the west and east sides of Pointe du Hoc—they all had to go up the cliffs from the east side.
Some equipment was not useable. The 75-foot mechanized ladders mounted on the amphibious vehicles couldn’t get into positions to be used—it was too slippery for the tracks to get into position (there were only 2 available as they were transported by the DUKW’s and 2 were already sunk). They had lost ammo supplies. Ropes, men, radios and all their other equipment were soaked.
The only thing in their favor—the intense shelling and bombing had caused some of the cliff face to collapse into rubble piles. In a few places, the climb would only be 60 feet.
The rangers were going to scale the cliffs under their own power using ropes and rope ladders.
Over the Top and Success of Force A
Scaling the cliffs was one of the most impressive military feats ever successfully accomplished by a US unit in combat. Companies D, E and F landed and scaled the cliffs by using rocket-fired grappling hooks attached to ropes. They developed the scaling techniques primarily by trial and error during their training sessions. Their training was intense and it paid off—under pressure and enemy fire these soldiers responded, despite incredible odds against their success.
The landing problems resulted in an assault only from the east side of Pointe du Hoc. Some of the soaked ropes didn’t reach the top, but finally some worked correctly. They only had 15 casualties in the initial assault. The German defenders cut ropes, threw potato mashers and fired on the exposed soldiers. The rangers countered with mortar fire and small arms fire at the German positions above. Also 2 US destroyers fired their guns effectively at the cliff side German defenders.
5 minutes after landing, some rangers were already on top of the cliffs. Within 15 minutes of landing, the majority of Rudder’s assault force had made it on top of Pointe du Hoc.
Once up top, small groups of rangers went off to accomplish their missions. They were stunned by the results of the bombardments—one soldier said it looked like the craters of the moon. It looked nothing like the mock-ups and photos of the site.
Meanwhile, Force B (Company C, of the 2nd Ranger Battalion) was assaulting at Omaha and later would capture Pointe de la Percée. Their landing was at Charlie (farthest western sector of Omaha) on Omaha Beach, at 0645 in the second landing wave. They landed after Company A, 116th Regiment was being torn apart on Dog Green (now more famously known as the Bedford Boys, as 19 from the town in VA were killed in the D Day assault on 6 June). They too came under intense fire from 3 Widerstandnesten or Wn (resistance nests) defensive positions, Wn 71, Wn 72 and Wn 73. They fought their way to the seawall.
There were two possible plans for Force B. If the D-1 Draw was clear, move up the draw and attack Pointe de la Percée and eliminate Wn 74 (plan 1). Plan 2 was to climb up the cliffs (the worst option).
Force B lacked most of the specialized climbing gear that was allocated to Force A. With the draw not yet captured, the only option was climb the cliffs. Hugging the cliffs, they found a section to climb. PFC Otto Stephens climbed first, using his bayonet to dig hand holds. He and 2 other rangers established a rope for the remaining rangers, so they would be able to climb up.
The situation was so bad on Omaha, that the Force B commander, Captain Goranson, decided he had no other option than to attack Wn 73 and then proceed to attack Wn 74 on Pointe de la Percée. This turned out to be a great combat decision—Wn 73 was a really effective fighting position and Wn 74 was primarily a radar position, guarded by 2 anti-aircraft guns and several machinegun nests.
Only 29 of his 64 Rangers were able to fight—the rest were killed or wounded. The remaining 29 men began slowly clearing the trenches of Wn 73. They were later joined with 20 soldiers from 116th who also climbed the ropes. All worked together, clearing the trenches, to eliminate their lethal machinegun nests and other defensive positions.
At around 1400, Captain Goranson, after leading the men to clear the German defensive positions and block German reinforcements, led a patrol to Pointe de la Percée. He found it abandoned, with the defensive positions Wn 74 destroyed by naval fire as they approached. He returned to link up with Force C. Around night fall, Force B had only 12 men able to fight.
Force C
Force C was reluctantly waiting off shore, hoping to reinforce LTC Rudder and Force A at Pointe du Hoc. The soldiers bobbed up and down in the rough seas. There was no signal received by the Battalion Commander, LTC Max Schneider, from Force A—he had ordered his landing crafts to lay-to offshore. Schneider knew how important it was to reinforce Force A at Pointe du Hoc.
There was no more time left; at 0740 six landing crafts with the rangers landed at Omaha beach at Dog White. They were met with intense fire. LTC Schneider, the only ranger officer with combat experience, moved the rest of the force to landing zone Dog Red. This was a pivotal decision during the early phases of the invasion landings at Omaha. He managed to get most of his force intact over the exposed 200 yards to the seawall—brush fires helped obscure the defenders from accurate fire upon his landing unit.
Getting a well-trained, elite unit almost intact to relative safety was a key factor in the fight for Omaha.
Shortly thereafter, he met up with BG Cota, Executive Officer of the 29th Division. It is here where Cota, urging the men off the beach, yelled out “Rangers lead the way!” They made it up the bluffs and probably were the key reason in the 29th Division sector succeeded in accomplishing their mission in taking their assigned sector of Omaha beach. LTC Schneider led his men through the obstacles, past the barbed wire and up the cliffs. They continued the assault to their initial objective near Vierville and later linked up with the remainder of Force B. They had been in almost 10 hours of constant combat.
However, they were badly shot up and could not effectively reinforce Rudder’s men at Pointe du Hoc on 6 June 1944 but they still wanted to try. Key leaders denied them the chance on 6 June 1944. The 29th Division had lost so many men, it needed the rangers to help defend the small beach head positions inland. Despite LTC Schneider’s pleas to go reinforce the stranded rangers, he was ordered to stay and help defend the beach head.
3 ranger companys at Pointe du Hoc were not as important as securing Omaha—a tough but correct command decision.
Hanging On at Pointe du Hoc
Rudder had signaled that he had landed late and taken Pointe du Hoc, but the message was garbled and not understood by the commanders at sea. They committed the reserve rangers (Force C) to land at Omaha beach. By the time he communicated success, and ask for help, the reply was “no reinforcements”.
Rudder’s group was now on their own.
Later that day, the Germans started their counterattacks. By night fall, Rudder’s men were forced back into defensive positions in a small 200 yard perimeter.
At 2100, 1st platoon of A Company, who had been unable to link up with the rest of the 5th Ranger Bn., had fought their way to Ponte du Hoc and linked up with Rudder’s men, with a force of 23 soldiers. They would be his only reinforcements on 6 June.
By 7 June, Rudder had a fighting force of fewer of 100 of the original 225 who had begun the assault. Ammunition and food were running low. He did get some reinforcements from the sea. About 60 men from the 1st Platoon of Fox Company of the 5th Rangers and a dismounted cannon platoon, help reinforced Rudder’s men and evacuate some wounded soldiers.
Rudder held on until 8 June, when the 5th Rangers and men from the 29th Division finally linked up with his force. His men had withstood 5 counterattacks.
The Price for Victory
The 2nd Ranger Battalion (a total force of about 488) had 77 killed and 152 wounded and 38 listed as missing. At the time of the relief, Rudder’s original force of 225 had less than 75 men capable of fighting.
Rudder was wounded twice in the battle and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross (DSC). Thirteen other Rangers were awarded the DSC for their roles at Pointe du Hoc and the other ranger missions.
The 5th Ranger Battalion (again about 488 men, according to the Table of Organization & Equipment (TO&E)) had 23 men killed, 89 wounded and 2 missing.
Both the 2nd Ranger Bn. and the 5th Bn. were awarded the Presidential Unit Citation and the French Croix de Guerre.
WW II Cemeteries and Monuments in Europe
By Hank Schrader, USMA ’71
Photos Anne Schrader, Army Wife
www.dreamdestinations.com
In a few days, it will be Memorial Day in 2024 on 26 May. I can think of no better way for Anne and I to share a little bit about the holiday and tell you about the final resting place of the fallen during the battles of WW II in Europe. I first wrote this in 2020 but it seems very important to send it out again in a revised form. May we all have a respectful Memorial Day, as this is our small tribute to those who made the ultimate sacrifice.
The Memorial Day holiday has its origins from the end of the US Civil War—it was originally called Decoration Day. Although the correct purpose of this holiday is to recognize those who actually died while on active service, for most American it also includes those who served their country and have passed on. I know I personally honor my Dad on Memorial Day, even though he did not die on active duty but later in life after his retirement.
WW II American Cemeteries and Monuments in Europe
We cannot think of a better way to recognize the courage and sacrifice made by our Armed Forces in World War II, than to tell you about the Cemeteries and Monuments dedicated to our Armed Forces in Europe.
There are 13 American cemeteries and 3 monuments in Europe. According to the American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC), there are 89,033 soldiers honored in the 13 cemeteries. 73,177 are buried; 15,856 are listed as missing. There are 3 monuments maintained by the commission—one in England and 2 in Normandy, France.
To help us learn more about these tributes for our fallen and missing soldiers of WW II, I have organized this by country to help make their unbelievable sacrifice a little more understandable.
This is a hard blog to write—the sheer numbers are staggering. Despite this tragic tale, these places are dignified and respectful. It is like Arlington Cemetery where my father and mother are buried—they use similar markers for each deceased, regardless of rank, but each has his or her legacy engraved on the markers. Here is what a marker looks like in Arlington National Cemetery:
American Cemeteries in Belgium
There are 2 American Cemeteries in Belgium. The Ardennes American Cemetery contains 5,317 buried, with 65 percent of those being fallen airmen of the U.S. Army Air Forces. There are also tributes to the 463 reported missing in action. This cemetery served as the central identification point for all of the Europe Theater of Operations towards the end of the war and continued that mission of identification until 1960.
The Henri-Chapelle American Cemetery has 7,992 soldiers buried here and there is recognition for 450 missing in action. The majority of the fallen Americans are from two major efforts of WW II. The first battles were a result of the U.S. First Army's drive in September 1944 through northern France, Belgium, Holland and Luxembourg into Germany, and the second group of dead were from the Battle of the Bulge.
The American Cemetery in England
Cambridge American Cemetery is the only American Cemetery in England. The site was donated by Cambridge University. 3,812 are buried here; there is also tributes to the 5,127 reported missing in action. Most were crew members who died in the Battle of the Atlantic or in bombardments of Europe later in the war. In 2014, a visitor center was opened to help explain this critical phase of WW II. It even has a downloadable app to help visitors learn more about this vital war effort.
American Cemeteries in France
There are 6 American Cemeteries in France.
The Brittany American Cemetery is located near the eastern edge of Brittany. Here are buried 4,409 dead soldiers and there is recognition for 500 reported missing in action. Most of these military members died fighting in the Normandy and Brittany campaigns of 1944.
The Epinal American Cemetery is located near the Moselle River. It has 5,254 buried here, most of whom lost their lives in the drive by the 7th Army towards Germany in the northeastern portion of France. It also recognizes 424 missing in action.
The Lorraine American Cemetery contains the largest number of US soldiers killed in Europe—there are 10,489 buried here. Another 444 were reported missing in action and their names are listed on the plaques displayed here. Most of the dead here were killed while driving the German forces from the fortress city of Metz, France toward the Siegfried Line and the Rhine River.
The Normandy American Cemetery, perhaps the best known of all WW II cemeteries by Americans, is the final resting place for 9,385 killed and 1,557 reported missing during this campaign. It lies just yards from the Omaha Beach area. Walking this area is special—the rows of dignified markers honor these dead. It was the first cemetery established in Europe by the Americans. When I was walking this hallowed ground, it is a stark reminder of what it took to invade Europe—the sheer number of markers is just overwhelming.
Anne and I led a tour here in 2014 for the 70th Anniversary of D Day (June 6, 1944) and a tour in 2019 for the 75th Anniversary. During the 2014 ceremonies, each gave site was marked with a small American and French flag. It was indeed memorable and touching and a fine tribute to our lost soldiers. Here are 3 pictures from our 2014 and 2019 tours:
Honor and Integrity
West Point teaches us to become leaders of character. Many of us, and even our children and spouses often cite perhaps the best-known line of the Cadet Pray “Make us chose the harder right, instead of the easier wrong, and never to be content with a half truth when the whole can be won” as a great guiding principal of their lives.
You are always tested throughout an Army career, with chances to cut corners or just try to avoid the whole truth. Most of the time, it was just clear-cut—this is wrong regardless of the consequences.
I once faced a very difficult decision as a new S-3 (Operations Officer). I was a major. On our first field training exercise, I had to develop an operations order (you military folks know this as the 5-paragraph operations order). I prepared the order, showed it to my Battalion Commander (an LTC) and he made some major revisions to clear up the instructions. He was an awesome ops guy—he took my correct instructions to all the units and made them textbook perfect. With the updated order, I then had to brief our Brigade Commander (Bde) about the plans.
The briefing went better than I could have expected, it was a sure homerun. Our Bde Commander then stated it was the “best op order he had ever heard” and praised me for writing such a great ops order. Without hesitation, I responded “Sir, this is not my work alone, my Bn Commander rewrote a lot of it.” In a highly competitive environment of field grade officers, this could have cost me a chance for promotion to LTC. I can never be sure, but that day forward there could be no doubt from anyone in the 7th Infantry Division (Light) I would not take credit for something I didn’t do or have help with.
I know I made the right decision—the truth is always the proper path regardless of the consequences—I like to say, “bad news never gets better with age”.
Courage
Courage is a hard thing to define. Maybe it is a lack of fear, maybe it’s overcoming fear. I guess in some form it is confronting a difficult situation seeking a solution. The higher the difficulty of the situation (in the military we often refer to this as conditions), the resolve required for a successful outcome is a measure of courage. There is both mental courage and physical courage.
The Cadet prayer defines courage as “Endow us with courage that is born of loyalty to all that is noble and worthy, that scorns to compromise with vice and injustice and knows no fear when truth and right are in jeopardy.” This part of the prayer talks about the mental challenges of courage. It requires a lot of judgement to decide what is “noble and worthy” and excellent critical thinking skills.
It takes courage to assess what is wrong and fix it—we often don’t like confrontations. True leadership is making corrections and retraining to attain or surpass the desired outcomes. The result is a better trained unit and will ultimately save lives as a deterrent or in actual conflict. The right approach results in unit cohesion and superbly trained soldiers. On way I approached this was not to present problems to my superiors, but to present a problem and a possible solution. As you can imagine, it was a constant in my military career.
As a major (O 4), while the Chief of Investigations and Assistance of the 7th Infantry Division (Light), I routinely advised the 2-star Division Commander (0-8) about situations and violations of regulations. Most senior officers I had to confront were very receptive and appreciative to resolve problems before they became issues. I was not as fortunate with a One-star (07) who was incorrectly punishing a soldier and was not following the regulations for the situation. He refused to take my advice and berated me repeatedly—he felt it was his prerogative and I was not going to usurp his power or decisions. I calmly replied, “Sir, you can either take my advice, or you will receive a call from your 2-star commander who will order you to comply.” He refused. 20 minutes later, the 2-star commander called him and ordered him to comply.
This was about me taking power and decision making from superior officers—it was about doing what was right and following our written regulations, but it did require courage on my part to do what was right and confront a superior officer. You should realize that that is one way our Army is great—even high-ranking officers or senior enlisted are not above the regulations.
We know all about physical courage under fire. We often recognize these feats with medals—the Bronze Star with V device (Valor), the Silver Star, the Distinguished Service Cross, and the Medal of Honor and with combat badges. As the popular saying of today is, these heroes ran towards the sound of gunfire, not away from it.
I always are in awe of these soldiers—I never served in an offical combat zone and respect and admire those who served and displayed courage under fire.
My hope in writing this blog is to recount how the events of the D Day invasion changed world history in Europe and in many ways shaped our present-day world. It is also to recognize the sacrifice of the soldiers, sailors, and airmen of the allies to stop the aggression and occupation of Europe by the Third Reich of Germany.
Once you understand the consequences of this day in history, I think you will be compelled to visit Normandy to see for yourself the area of conflict that these brave, scared souls achieved on that fateful day.
This was a history changing day, so let’s learn together about this massive invasion, why it was so important, and why you should see the key sights in the Normandy battlefield beaches area.
What was the state of war in June 1944 in Europe?
The war was not going well for Germany in June 1944, as they were being pushed back on the Eastern Front by the Russian Army. They also knew that there was an invasion coming from England—they were defending one active front and trying to prepare for a second active front.
In November 1943, the Big Three (Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill) agreed in a conference in Tehran, that the Western Forces of the United States and Britain would invade France in 1944 and open a second front against the German Fortress Europe.
The clock was now ticking for the D Day invasion of France. It was a race between German defenders and the Allied invasion force.
The ideal strategy was simple for the planners of the D Day amphibious invasion—attack lightly defended beaches, secure the beach, and move men and supplies quickly inland.
Next, establish or capture a port to reinforce with more men and supplies.
Then, defeat the German forces and win the war.
Executing it proved to be one of the most difficult military tasks ever attempted.
During the massive planning operations, Pas du Calais (the most favorable landing site) and Normandy were under consideration. Both had enough good characteristics to work for an amphibious landing. But Normandy was the best choice, 1) as in 1943 it was a lightly defended part of the German Atlantic Wall and 2) the Germans anticipated an attack at Pas du Calais and fortified it and moved more soldiers into defensive positions.
The German Defenders
The Germans realized they weren’t prepared to properly defend the vast Atlantic Wall in 1943. The German commander, General Gerd von Rundstedt, drafted a report to Hitler about the scant fortifications and poor-quality units defending the area. Hitler responded by adding General Erwin Rommel (known popularly as the “Desert Fox” for his Africa campaign) to oversee improving the defenses.
The Germans knew an invasion was coming—they just didn’t know where or when. The choice that the Germans believed the Allies would select was an invasion of Pas de Calais, as it was the most logical invasion site—only 20 miles from England and had 20 miles of good landing beaches.
The allies bolstered that illusion by creating a fake force under the command of LTG George Patton, complete with fake equipment, field barracks and even docking areas near Dover. They relentlessly bombed the Calais area in the build-up phase, as well as other targets in France.
In an unusual operation, they also dropped dummies by parachutes, to harass and confuse the Germans.
A key concept for the Germans was to stop the invasion on the beaches, so all defensive resources were placed at or near the beach areas and no defense in depth was planned. There were reserve units to stop breakthroughs, but the best reserve unit of panzer tanks could only be released by Hitler. If the Allies could breach these tough defenses, and cut off the reserve forces, they would have a good chance of success.
By June 1944 all the beaches used for the D Day landings in Normandy had at least some of these defensive measures in places.
Unknown to the allies, the best defended beach in Normandy was Omaha.
The stage was set for that fateful day 6 June 1944.
Concept of the Overlord Operation
You might be surprised to know the last successful armed assault across the English happened in 1066 (yes, the famous Battle of Hastings). 8 centuries later, this was about to change.
Amphibious landings are complex operations. Trying to attack with 5 divisions over a 50-mile front in Normandy, from a base in England, would require naval forces, air forces and army units from British, Canadian, and American forces. The allied armies and massive equipment needed to ensure success only added to the complexity. 150,000 soldiers would be required, with a fleet of 5,333 ships and an air armada of over 12,921 planes.
Synchronizing an operation of this size remains one of the most amazing military feats in the history of the world.
An Overview of the Invasion
Operation Overlord, the code name for the D Day invasion, was a complicated multipart attack. To soften up and destroy some of the defending German forces, the area was bombed for about 6 weeks prior to the invasion.
On the early morning hours of 6 June 1944, American and British paratroopers parachuted and later landed in gliders to secure the western flank (American forces) and the eastern flank (British forces).
Then, prior to the start of the landings, a naval bombardment of about 30 minutes in duration started, followed by an aerial bombardment.
Next, the amphibious landings took place on the 5 objective beaches. The 3 beaches in the British Second Army sector, were Gold, Juno, and Sword. They were attacked by British and Canadian units.
The 2 American beaches, under the U. S. First Army (commanded by Lt. General Omar Bradley), were Omaha and Utah
Reflecting on the Significance of D Day
Some historians claim this was the most important day in the history of the last 100 years. The victory of the successful invasion was symbolic, strategic, and operationally sealed the fate of the Nazi regime. It would also change the course of world history.
Symbolically, it put forces governed by democratic systems into the decisive ending of the war—essentially Russia and their totalitarian regime would not control all of Europe if the Western Allies had not invaded and Russia defeated the Germans alone.
Strategically, the war in Europe expanded with a second front, and the resources of the American, British, and Canadian forces executed the “Germany First” political strategy to finish off the German Army and then on to defeat Japan in Asia.
Operationally, it relieved pressure on Russia on the Eastern Front and required the Germans to defend with over 400,000 soldiers on a second front.
The result of the successful invasion made America a world power and led to the stability and wealth of future Europe. Totalitarianism was not going to be the model of all Western European countries, yet some would suffer under the rule of Russia’s Iron Curtain in the war’s aftermath. This ideological conflict would quickly develop into the Cold War after the end of World War II.
D Day also was a key event in the global balance of power of nations. The resolve of the British in 1941 to return to the European continent was a crucial part of the conduct of the war prior to America entering into the conflict. After D Day and the conclusion of WW II, America emerged as the most powerful nation in the world, followed by Russia. Britain was the third most powerful nation. All 3 of these nations projected their influence on the world stage today, but it was especially true at the war’s end.
Ultimately, it ended in the Yalta conference with the Big Three to discuss the postwar reorganization of Europe. Despite promises by Stalin to allow democratic elections in territory such as Poland, he broke all his assurances of the agreement. The start of the Cold War was on.
So, Why Visit the Key D Day Sites
Strategy and higher-level planning provide resources for an invasion of this magnitude, but it is the soldier on the ground that executes the planning. How they achieved their tasks, and the terrain can not be fully understood until you actually visit the site of the conflict.
There is probably no Europe battlefield as well preserved as the D Day landing areas and fighting sites in Normandy.
Here are some sites we recommend you visit:
Pointe du Hoc
Pointe du Hoc is actually not changed much at all since 1944—the gun emplacements, the bomb craters, and the steep cliffs the rangers had to climb under intense fire, make their exploits come to life—how did they take this area given the natural defenses of this place? Those of us, who are ranger qualified like me, realize at best a 100-foot climb of a 90-degree slope to the top of the bluff peninsula with a full combat load of equipment would be a daunting physical challenge under any circumstances, but to do it under fire is a testament to the sheer bravery and intense training of the soldiers who accomplished this mission.
I don’t think you can visit here and not feel that freedom is not free—it is earned by sacrifice.
Our Final Thoughts
D Day was a success but what really stands out to me is the resolve of the soldiers, sailors and airmen who made the operation work. Heroic, innovative and resourceful, these military forces should be honored for their deeds. They did not really see themselves as heroes--most just wanted to live to see 7 June 1944.
The war’s end would not come for 336 days of more combat. It would have never happened so soon, if these forces had not taken the first step on 6 June 1944 that ultimately ended the German occupation of Europe and opened a second front.
History was made that day, as the future of Europe would require the Allies defeating the Germans. Europe changed from occupied lands and countries to some free democratic countries and some under communist control. Today’s Europe could have been quite different if the invasion had failed.
We have led two tours in Normandy in 2014 and 2019 and those experiences have made this operation much more real for me. We owe a debt of gratitude to these folks—their sacrifice and courage will stay with me for the rest of my life.
If you have never been to Normandy and seen the D Day Beaches, I would encourage you to go.
We are travel experts, ocean and river cruise specialists, and Europe destination experts. We have first-hand knowledge of almost anywhere you want to visit in Europe. We know our products and the vendors who sell them to you. We have designed special tours for dozens of clients, led several and will continue to find just the right vacation that will exceed your expectations.
When you are spending your hard-earned money for a vacation, you want an advisor who can match you with the right trip. You want someone who will understand your expectations and fuel your anticipation (or excitement) to get you the best possible trip experience. And, you want someone who can help you with the decision making process. We think we have all these qualities.
Whatever your Dream Destinations are, we are here to help you get the best possible vacation based on what is important to you! We will provide you high quality, expertly planned travel. Please give me a call 713-397-0188 (Hank) or email me at hschrader@dreamdestinations.com. We want to help you: Savor life…make memories…Visit Dream Destinations! Your journey begins here!
This is a departure from our usual blog about travel to help recognize the contribution of our Armed Forces to our Nation.
As many of you know, I served for 20 years as an Infantry officer and was proud to help defend our country.
So, I thought I would provide you some facts about today’s military in my humble salute to the men and women who defend our country and perhaps help you remember the service and sacrifice of those who defend our freedom.
It is probably best to start by explaining the major military recognition celebrations in America and then concentrate on the Armed Forces Day.
There is a lot of confusion to the exact purpose of three major recognition days for all US military members and former members. Armed Forces Day honors those currently serving in the military. Memorial Day honors those who have died while on duty in the military services. Veterans Day is a tribute to all who have previously served in our armed forces.
Armed Forces Day is celebrated on the 3rd Saturday of May, as part of Armed Forces week. It honors the Army, the Air Force, the new Space Force, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard.
The first 5 service branches are organized under the Department of Defense, while the Coast Guard is part of the Department of Homeland Security. There are more than 1.4 million on active service and more than 1.1 million national guard and reservists.
In 1949, Armed Forces Day was first established when the Army, Navy and Air Force were organized under the Department of Defense, instead of each service just marking their own individual recognition day. The Marines did not come under this initial new holiday, and keep their separate celebration. They later joined in. In 1961, Armed Forces Day became a National Holiday.
Each year Armed Forces Day has a unique theme—some past themes are Dedication and Duty, Freedom and Patriotism.
Some Interesting Facts About our Armed Forces
The Department of Defense (DOD) is the largest employer in the US—there are about 1.4 million on active duty, 1.1 million serving in National guard and Reserve units and 700,00 civilians working in the DOD.
Here are the numbers of active duty—Army over 482,000; Navy over 343,000; Air Force over 328,000; Marine Corps over 179,000; Coast Guard over 44,000 and Space Force over 1,600.
Here are the numbers of reserve forces—Army National Guard over 337,000; Army Reserve over 184,000; Air National Guard over 108,000, Air Force Reserve over 70,000, Navy Reserve over 57,000, Marine Corp Reserve over 35,000 and about 7,000 in the Coast Guard Reserve..
31 of 44 Presidents served in the Military—30 were officers (James Buchanan was enlisted) and Teddy Roosevelt earned the Medal of Honor for action in the Spanish-American War.
Within 48 hours, the US Military is capable to reach any place on earth to provide disaster relief and international aid.
Only 28% of American aged 17-23 are eligible to serve in the military.
Many do not realize how few folks served in our military compared to the overall population--.4 percent (1,4 million are currently serving)
Our military is more educated than the general population. 99% of the military have successfully completed their high school education, while only 60% of the general population of the US have a high school diploma.
In many ways, the military has been leaders in our country by desegregating before other public institutions and opening full opportunities to women.
My Final Thoughts
Words do not adequately honor those who served, suffered, died, were wounded and sometimes disabled—they are for the most part the best our society has among its citizens.
They learned to work for a common goal, perform their assigned mission despite harsh conditions, sometimes under hostile fire and responded when no other organization could or would.
They are often deployed for long periods of time, away from their families, who support them during their long hours and often absences. We must also remember their families who support their soldiers, sailors, and airmen.
Please just remember them—maybe attend a parade, display your flag, visit a cemetery, thank a member, or just think about a service member.
Let’s be sure their bravery, strength and sacrifice do not go unnoticed—we owe a debt of gratitude to them and their families to help keep us safe.
Thanks for reading!
Henry Carl “Hank” Schrader, Jr Major (Infantry) Retired
Veterans Day 2022
Hank Schrader, USMA '71, Retired US Army Major Infantry Officer
www.dreamdestinations.com
Tomorrow is Veteran Day, 11 November 2022. This is a day to recognize the service and sacrifice of the folks who pledged to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic” by raising their right hand and were required to recite these words of allegiance to our country.
Counting my 4 years at West Point, I spent 24 years of my life in a uniform and serving my country. It was an awesome experience and I’m glad I made that choice. It was a honor to serve our country.
Military service changes all who serve, and most aspects are positive. We gained maturity quickly, learned many new skills, tested our resolve, became resilient, learned how to handle extreme stress and trauma, and made sacrifices to defend our country. Not all of us handled it the same—some still have problems associated with their service.
It’s been 31 years since I served. I went on to teach and coach for another 20 years before working full time in our travel business. The lessons learned from my military experience govern all aspects of my life—character and action count more than words.
A phrase from the West Point cadet prayer has always been very meaningful to me, as it has served as a summary of how I wanted to live my life and I thought you might like to know about it. Here it is
“Encourage us in our endeavor to live above the common level of life. Make us choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong, and never to be content with a half truth when the whole truth can be won.
Endow us with courage that is born of loyalty to all that is noble and worthy, that scorns to compromise with vice and injustice and knows no fear when truth and right are in jeopardy.”
Those are difficult goals to achieve and my personal guidelines to live by every day. I have tried to and hope I have been successful but there is always room for improvement.
Just reading my thoughts and seeing how my service changed me, you can understand better how each who has donned the uniform might have developed in their lives. They have done more than defend our country. They usually set higher standards, have good work ethics, and make us a better nation.
Less than 1 % of the population of the US (0.727% in a Google search) are on active duty now. According to the US Census Bureau, there are 18.2 million veterans. AARP reports that about 13 million are 50 years or older like me.
We did not all serve under the same conditions. My father served in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. I never served in a combat deployment.
While I can’t verify how totally accurate these numbers are, here are some reasonable figures for the personal cost of the 4 major wars including WW II from 1941 to present:
WW II 1.076,245 dead and wounded;
Korea 128,650 dead and wounded;
Vietnam 211,454 dead and wounded;
the War on Terror (Afghanistan and Iraq Wars) 57,614 dead and wounded.
I think these sobering figures say how lucky my Dad was to survive 7 years of combat for our nation by being deployed in 3 of these 4 conflicts.
In many ways it is ironic the public perception of military service during my service. At 18 years old as a cadet at West Point, I was called a “Baby Killer” by an angry group of Vietnam War protesters during the Armed Forces Parade in New York City in 1968. Later, the comments were almost always positive.
I guess those who protest fail to realize soldiers seldom make the decision to go to war; it is our political leaders who declare war or deploy troops. Yet we are the face of their decisions and a much more accessible target of public ire. Perhaps those who feel this way should remember we are defending their freedoms to protest government decisions.
I would be remiss if I didn’t cite the families who support our soldiers. It is a very personal journey; fear, and joy; never knowing if a loved one will come home each day. They deserve to be honored also for their sacrifice and loyalty to our nation by supporting their soldiers during their military service.
As a tribute to those who have served and are now serving, I thought I’d share with you some photos of military service, some personal, and some honoring the sacrifice of those who fought for our freedom from our travels in Europe.
Our next door neighbor, was a junior in college, and asked my Mom if she could let a bunch of her friends stay at our home for an upcoming weekend. Without thinking why they were visiting Liz, my Mom said sure. Later in the day, she called up Liz and asked why so many were coming to visit. They were there to protest the war in Vietnam. She politely explained to Liz her husband was deployed and at war.
This story is a microcosm of events of that era—neighbors didn’t have the same beliefs and the service members and their families often suffered. Some men wore wigs to hide their short hair. Others were spat upon, or had items thrown on them. Sometimes, service members were not permitted to wear their uniforms off base. It was a sad state of affairs.
Transition from 1973 to 1980
Slowly the war faded from memory and the news. By 1975, Vietnam was under Communist rule after North Vietnam fell. The draft ended. Gradually respect for the military returned but many questioned if all the loss of life of good soldiers was worth the effort in Vietnam.
We almost had to intervene in the Yom Kippur War in October of 1973 when Israel was attacked by Arab force (it was the 4th conflict between these two forces). Trust me, there was a plan but we didn’t have to go.
But even in these transitional times, the military regrouped and confronted our advisories in Korea, and Europe. Many soldiers stood watch at contested borders to ward off aggression of the Russians and North Korean forces. There were many miserable days and nights as they stood watch and most of our citizens have no idea what they went through. It is hard to comprehend for those living in comfort in the US.
Then the Iran Revolution of 1979 brought a significant change in the Middle East--the rise of Fundamentalism Islam rulers. 52 Americans were taken hostage and held until the 20 January Inauguration of our new President in 1981.
Suddenly, the military was important to our country. One of the plights of serving in the military is we are often ignored until trouble brews and then, like in the movies, we destroy our adversaries in a couple of days. It is a common misconception and not the real world. It is never as easy as you see in the movies. Sometimes you get the fear, the lack of sleep, and the harsh conditions but seldom is it like the dirty world soldiers fight, die and operate in during conflicts.
On 24 April 1980, the military attempted a rescue, known as Operation Eagle Claw, where one civilian and 8 service members died. Some of my class mates were part of that operation. This is the real world—a risky operation that didn’t work but courageously carried out by a combined combat force of our service members. This is the real world soldiers live in during their service.
The 1980s
By now, the services were growing stronger with the all-volunteer services. Units got better, equipment improved and doctrine was refined.
In one of the ultimate ironies, I was on the invasion list of Operation Just Cause, the invasion by the US of Panama to overthrow Noriega. Many of my classmates served in high ranking positions in the 7th ID (my unit), the 75th Rangers and the 82nd Airborne. I never deployed. So, what is the ironic fact—I was stationed 3 years in Panama and now I was going to invade a country I spent 3 years in the military!
Perhaps, no single event tells the story of that era like the fall of Berlin Wall. It was the symbolic end of the Cold War. I actually have a small concrete piece of the wall—not worth much money wise, but to me, it represents a lot. We did our job.
The Service Ethos
Another misconception, we are not braggarts, who love to tell war stories. It is my opinion, that most serve with little fanfare, do their duty and don’t really expect any real recognition except by their peers, or during extraordinary bravery, a medal. To most, it is about their comrades and how they worked together, usually in harsh conditions, at the will of our civilian leaders.
Many combat veterans really don’t revel in telling war stories—they are proud of what they did, but also realize the sacrifice of war, as many of their buddies didn’t come home. They are not a number like you see on the news—they were people who had a family who will never be the same. These folks never forget these losses. You usually have to drag it out of them, as they prefer to not brag—it is a humble tribute to all for their collective efforts. Many don’t understand why their buddies died and they were spared.
It is also about the bond that few really get to experience and it is why so many prior service folks are instantly comfortable with other military folks—they don’t have to explain their experiences, or worry about the barracks humor or exposing their real feelings because the others understand—they often feel the same.
In the civilian world, they call it about protecting your friends back; in the military we call it protecting your 6—a reference to your 6 point of contact in a parachute landing, which is your butt! We often use a lot of jargon, foreign to others, but quite meaningful to us.
We often do revel in telling funny stories about how we were in the wrong uniform, or got lost during training and fixed it, or just learn to accept our fate in the harsh training of boot camp or Beast Barracks at West Point. Molding service members into a cohesive unit often requires bizarre events in the life of a new soldier and they are so strange and memorable that they become great stories, sometimes embellished a little for even a little more dramatic effect.
The 1990s to 2021
We won a huge victory in the 1991 Gulf War with a coalition of 28 nations. The majority of the forces were American, but it was also the rise of more fundamental unrest in what many in the military call the sand countries (primarily Iran and Afghanistan) after we toppled the regime in Iran. Suddenly, our country in mass seemed to respect our military.
On September 11, 2001, with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, our country united and it lead to the invasion of Afghanistan.
By 2003, we were at war again in the Second Persian Gulf War, which was largely a British-American invasion of Iraq.
20 years later, it seems we finally are at peace after surges, countless deployments, and a lot of lost soldiers.
The cost to these soldiers has been horrific—according to a report in NPR, we have lost 7,057 service members who died during military operations since 9/11. During this same period, active duty and veterans of these conflicts have reached 4 times that number—it now stands at 30,177.
This is a real struggle and I don’t have a real solution but many organizations and government programs are trying to address this serious problem. Perhaps now you understand how stressful it is to serve in our nation’s military, especially at time of war.
My Final Thoughts
I hope in some small way I have communicated what it has been like in the military for the last 54 or so years.
As it has been said by others, we didn’t just read about history—we made it.
We protected our country, and obeyed the orders of our superiors and civilian leaders.
Most never sought much recognition—it is a quite pride of a job well done. Many suffered and still are suffering.
We should do more to help them.
Every time you enjoy the wonderful life most of us live in this country, our freedoms, our rights, and the chance for a better life, just remember someone, somewhere is standing watch to protect us. Many service members think it was and is an honor to serve our country.
On this Veteran’s Day, may we remember those who watch over us. We should be proud of our protectors—it is not an easy job.
We still have many problems to solve but that is what a democracy is all about—trying to reach a consensus. It is a messy process but you can feel assured about one thing—our armed forces are ready to protect us when needed.
I hope I have told their story in a way that will make you reflect on the true meaning of Veteran’s Day.
May we never forget to honor these brave men and women!
Maj (Ret.) Henry “Hank Carl Schrader, Jr
It’s my class of 1971 West Point 50 year reunion. I’m sure I’ll see a few guys I haven’t seen in 50 years. That will be special and I owe a lot of them thanks. We laughed, cried suffered, triumphed and managed to make it through 47 months together from 1967 to 1971.
We quickly learned to help one another just to survive. I owe a great deal of thanks to those who helped me and pushed me to get better.
The same goes for my Army career. An Army Officer never does it alone—you lead but it is a team and I owe a great deal to the officers, NCOs and soldiers I served with in my 20 years. Many shaped me, helped me and trusted me the lead them and helped me grow and become a better person and soldier.
Along the way, I have another person to say thank you to—my lovely wife Martha Anne Schrader. Growth comes from partnership, trust and her unwavering way of challenging me. I often seem to fight it but she is about 99.9% right. Thank you dear—I often need it and you have given my life purpose. In short, you Rock! I try to say thank you every day to her but I’m sure I missed a few, so to make up thanks for making my life better.
Next my school and coaching career. No finer thing can be said about teaching and coaching—you influence lives but again they all must trust you and allow you to help them grow up. Thanks for giving me the chance to teach and coach—we did it together but you had to let me have the chance.
Last but not least, thank you to all who have trusted us with their vacations. You have made our business great but it has always been a team effort.
We should all say thank you more. I’m sure I’ll miss saying it to someone I should have this weekend.
Maybe they will read this and remember I meant to say it but didn’t.
Again, thanks to all! I will try hard to say in person to everyone I see this weekend, but if I miss you know I still thank you! If you only read it—that’s OK also!
Please say thank you to someone today to make up for those I missed along the way!
THANK YOU TO All!!
Hank
My lifetime has been always associated with the Army in some form—it started as an Army Brat (my Dad was a career officer), as you read above I went to West Point and returned to teach in the physical education department.
I served 20 years in the Army and once a soldier, always a soldier—I have tried to help in various military organizations and causes since my retirement. It was an honor to serve.
50 years ago—in many ways a long time but most of all it seems as it was just yesterday.
So, I guess it is just fitting to tell you about the significance of 14 June in my life.
US Army Birthday
First, the US Army Birthday deserves recognition. On 14 June 1775, the Continental Congress authorized expert riflemen to serve the United States Colonies for one year. Another act on that day was special for me also, as the first and only branch authorized that day was the Infantry—my branch. Other branches were authorized on 16 June 1775 but my branch was first.
It was a difficult task that faced the members of the Second Continental Congress in 1775.
On 19 April 1775, the American Revolution had begun with the engagement at Lexington and Concord, a local rebellion of New Englanders against the British. They surrounded the British troops that occupied Boston and appealed to the delegates of the 13 colonies for help.
The delegates also learned that Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold had taken the British forts of Ticonderoga and Crown Point. It no longer was a local rebellion, the military action had changed the situation.
They decided to take the next step by establishing the Continental Army and transformed a local war of rebellion into a war of independence for the entire 13 colonies. They resolved to “raise 6 companies of expert rifleman immediately from Pennsylvania, 2 from Maryland and 2 from Virginia and, as soon as completed, shall march and join the army near Boston, to be there employed as light infantry, under command of the Chief Officer in that army”.
The US Army and the Infantry Branch were born on that June day. On this Monday 14 June 2021 both the US Army and the Infantry Branch will be 246 years old.
So, how many serve today in the Army? The active Army has about 480,900 in an all-volunteer force. There are also around 336,000 in the Army National Guard and 188,700 in the Army Reserves.
To all of you who have donned the US Army Uniform, thank you for serving our country—there is no doubt in my mind you have made it possible for us to enjoy the freedoms that come from living in America!
Happy Birthday US Army!
June 14—Flag Day
Memorial Day 2021
By Hank Schrader, USMA ’71
www.dreamdestinations.com
Perhaps the most misunderstood holiday in our country is Memorial Day. Memorial Day honors those who have died while on duty in the military services.
However, I am sad to say few folks understand the significance of this solemn day of remembrance. For many people in our country, it is the start of summer and a way to gather with friends and families for a break from work. It is also about selling and buying for many—deals are offered in a dizzying amount to all of us.
Somehow, to me, the whole patriotic purpose has been pushed into the background. It should be a little somber, about fallen comrades, but I guess that with less than 1% of our nation who have served in the Armed Forces, it is understandable. Maybe the best way for folks to understand is the loss of a family member—there is an emptiness that never goes away. We who have served feel the same way about our lost comrades.
Many will say to others—“Happy Memorial Day”, thinking it is an accurate way to say thanks. It really is not a happy time—it is more about refection and recognizing there is something in life more important than a happy holiday. It doesn’t mean we should not express some joy during Memorial Day—just let’s express the joy about those fallen lives and remember them for their sacrifice and the good times we got to share with them. Their loved ones and comrades feel their loss every day but especially on this day and we should also pay our respects, even if for just a couple of minutes or so.
The Memorial Day holiday has its origins from the end of the US Civil War—it was originally called Decoration Day. Although the correct purpose of this holiday is to recognize those who actually died while on active service, for most American it also includes those who served their country and have passed on. I know I personally honor my Dad on this Day, even though he did not die on active duty but later in life after his retirement. He was lucky—he served in 3 wars and made it out alive. Many he served with did not.
In some functions in the military, especially formal dinners, we always toast our fallen. Almost all who have served, know a comrade who made the ultimate sacrifice. It is deeply personal—usually a vibrant life taken way too soon. One of my classmates, a 3 star general, always carried a notecard with every soldier’s name who died during his command assignment in Iraq wherever he went. He told me it was a constant reminder of decisions he made during combat came with costs, and those costs were soldier’s lives. It is not an easy profession, leaders very often put their soldiers in harm’s way—it is unavoidable but necessary to accomplish the mission.
Maybe as a tribute to these fallen, I will tell you most often they reflected in their wartime service, the values of Army soldiers. These values are: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. While these are the official Army’s values, maybe they should be our national values. There would be no better way to honor these soldiers, if we could all live our daily lives embodying some or all of these values.
This is a hard blog to write—the sheer numbers are staggering from the 5 major conflicts from WW II to present that have affected my 71 years on this earth. According to Wikipedia, combat deaths were:
WW II (1941-1945) 291,557;
Vietnam War (1955-1975) 47,434;
Korean War (1950-1953) 33,686;
Iraq War (2003-2011) 4,424;
The War in Afghanistan (2001 to present) 1,833.
This does not count the other operations during my lifetime or the American Civil War and World War I. From 1775 to 2019, there is a total loss of 666,441+ by combat deaths and 673,929+ by other causes during these war periods. It also does not count the missing 44,031+ missing or the 1,498,240+ wounded.
Despite this tragic tale, most of these fallen are buried in our national cemeteries in the United States and Overseas and are the symbol to us of their sacrifice. These places are dignified and respectful.
This is something very personal—nothing has had as much impact on my life as serving in the military, attending West Point, and having members of my family serve in the military.
Since about 1940 or so, someone related to me has served our country and help keep it safe.
To all of you who read this and served in the military, thank you for your service—most will never know how much you contributed to the well-being of our country and keeping it safe.
So, I thought I’d tell you a little about the folks who keep our country safe and send my humble thanks to them in recognition of Veterans Day 2020.
A Little History about Veterans Day
Veteran’s Day is celebrated on 11 November each year. The significance of this date commemorates the end of the fighting in WW I. For students of history, like me, we like to say “on the 11th hour of the 11th day in the 11th month the guns fell silent”—an easy way to remember the exact date and time of the end of hostilities of WW I in 1918.
This original celebration has changed in America from an Armistice Day observance into Veterans Day, the holiday that we celebrate today.
Veterans of all our military forces should be recognized for keeping our country safe and this blog is a tribute to all who have honorably served our country.
Veterans have taken a simple Oath with a Huge Impact
Everyone who serves in the military takes an oath at a swearing in ceremony. They all swear to defend the country by these words, or similar words
“I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same”
While this not the entire oath, it is the key part—these folks are the front line of defending our way of life—pledging allegiance to the USA, and our Constitution.
Too many have paid the ultimate sacrifice with their life to make our country safe—they are special people who put others first—we have lost one member of my class in defense of our country.
For the vast majority, all the good traits that come from military service never leaves them. It is no wonder I am always drawn to these folks.
Our Family Service Traditions
Anne’s Dad, Alfred W Ludtke, served in World War II, as an officer of Gen MacArthur’s personal staff in the Philippines. After the war, he continued his service in the reserves and rose to the rank of LTC. Thank you A. W. for your service and sacrifice for country!
My dad, Major General (retired) Henry Carl Schrader, served for 33 years. He defended our country in WW II in Europe, was in the Korean War and last served in combat in Vietnam--a little over 7 years in combat. He was an engineer officer—loved to build things and he was excellent at it. You are my hero and inspiration Dad!
I had the honor in May of last year of helping continuing the family tradition by swearing in 2nd LT Dalton Andrews, Mindy’s son, during his graduation ceremonies from North Texas State University. He has started his active duty service as an Artillery Officer in January 2020.
Thanks for your service—you three young ones have made me proud (you can say those things when you are 71)—you helped and are helping to keep our country safe!
My West Point Class of 1971
Sometimes, the best way to describe how our country’s veterans help keep our country safe is to use examples from your own experience. Here are some of our class achievements (the data is about 95% to 99% accurate and any errors or omissions are mine alone but it still tells a great story of our class impact on the United States):
We graduated 729 men in our class of 1971.
According to our yearbook, here are the branches our classmates began their military service in: Air Defense Artillery 64; Adjutant General 4; Armor 81; Artillery Branch 148; Chemical Corps 1; Engineer 47; Finance 1; Infantry 243, Military Intelligence 33; Military Police 12; Medical Service 6; Ordnance 2; Signal 47; Transportation 7; and Quartermaster 1.
18 went into the Air Force and 3 joined the Navy. We had five foreign national cadets who returned to their countries.
We had 296 who retired from the armed forces, active or reserve (they served 20 years or more unless medically retired). Here is a breakdown of ranks achieved:
21 General officers {(3 Generals (4 stars--all foreign armies); 6 LTGs (3 stars), 6 MG (2 stars) and 6 BG (1 star)}; (one was an Air Force BG)
85 COL; 128 LTC; 30 MAJ; 1 CPT and 2 CAPTs in the Navy, (equivalent rank to an Army COL).
In the 5 to 40 years or so that the 729 members of my West Point graduating class of 1971 were on active duty, they helped keep the country safe by serving in 7 major conflicts.
Here is a list of those conflicts and the number of the class serving during these conflicts: Vietnam (12), Granada (2), Panama (9; 4 were Battalion Commanders), The Gulf War (26, 13 were Battalion Commanders), Bosnia (4, 1 was a Commanding General), Afghanistan (6, 2 were Commanding Generals) and Iraq (10, 3 were Commanding Generals).
For me, who did not serve in any of these conflicts, it is humbling to say the least.
They are perfect examples of selfless sacrifice—in the military you go where you are ordered to go. There are no excuses, you have a duty and an obligation. These guys are the rock stars of our class and I salute them!
We had 130 return to teach or support operations at West Point (some twice), to include 2 back-to-back Superintendents, and one was the Dean. 2 were Department Heads of Instruction (Math, and Law)
Six members of our class have been selected as Distinguished Graduates. The Association of Graduates (AOG) has only recognized three foreign nationals as Distinguished Grads and we have two of them in our class. Only three classes have six Distinguished Grads – 1950, 1951, and 1971. The Class of 1956 has seven.
Our class has some impressive members who have served in the Federal Government. They include: a US Senator; an Ambassador at Large, Department of State Coordinator for Counterterrorism; an Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics; an Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel & Manpower; an Acting Director, Federal Transportation Administration; a person who served in the Department of State, an Administrator, US International Development; 2 Senior Executive Services federal employees; and 3 working in Department of Veterans Affairs.
At the local government level we have 2 state representatives, 2 mayors, a county supervisor, 2 state judges, and several who have served in various state and city level departments.
We have 21 medical doctors in a variety of specialties, 6 dentists and 1 veterinarian.
Almost all members of the class have earned at least one or more post graduate degrees. We have 17 who have earned PHDs in disciplines other than the medical field (28 total in the medical fields)—a total of 35.
We have 25 who are lawyers (probably more) and many CEOs of various sized companies and enterprises.
Several hold patents, and have written books.
We have one Olympian – Lyle Nelson (Biathlon) who represented his country 4 times—holds record for most appearances in Olympics by any West Point grad. We have one member of the class in the Army Sports Hall of Fame and he is also in the US Lacrosse National Hall of Fame.
I think it is fair to say in the soon to be 50 years since we graduated, our class has helped to make the United States a better place from the service and achievements by members of the class of 1971.
You have truly achieved a multitude of service to the nation! As the class moto says it has truly been “Professionally Done”.
A Quick Salute to Those Who Have Trusted Their Travels to Us
After all, this is a travel blog, so here are the 71 folks who have traveled with us: Steve Marsh, John Howard, Jim West, Jerry Wright, John Bantsolas, Jeff Rock, Gerry Cummins, Gordy Schnabel, Jack Pingle, Art Baker, Danton Steele, Gerry James, Ken Hartlein, Marc Erlandson, Jim Buck, Tom Mannle, Bill Barkovic, Jack Chiles. Bob Fitton, Bill Mattfeld, Bruce Litwin, Glen Barefoot and Dave Hardman. We also have 2 more classmates who have trips planned with us in the future. Thanks to my 25 classmates that put their trust in us!
Here are some photos of their trips:
For those who do not know what an Arlington Lady is, every soldier who is buried at Arlington National Cemetery has a volunteer lady, who attends the service, to let our service members know their service is recognized and they are not buried alone. This is especially important for those who have sacrificed and may not have family members present. The ladies present cards of condolence to the next of kin from the military service chief and spouse on behalf of the service family, and from the Arlington Lady herself. One of the duties, is to try and remain composed, but after the ceremony, most of these ladies, cry their eyes out when alone—I know my Mom often did. I’m sure many think it could be me next getting the condolence card about a family member.
For these ladies, Memorial Day happened more than once a year—it happened every time they came to Arlington National Cemetery for a funeral.
I also know several wives of my 71 classmates have also served as Arlington Ladies.
They too, like all family members, deserve to hear “Thanks for keeping our country safe”
A Final Thought
Of all the services our government provides its citizens, there is none more important that defense of our nation and our way of life.
Today, less than 0.05% of our nation’s citizens are serving our country in the Armed Forces.
These men and women, deserve more than thanks for their service. Maybe next time you meet a veteran, why not say something like this “Thanks for keeping our country Safe!”
Trust me, those who have served will appreciate it more than you could ever understand—why not tell a vet or his family that you know your freedom and safety depends on those who serve?
For me it was an honor to serve and most vets I know feel the same way—they are proud and humble, who did what was required and made sacrifices for the common good.
To all my fellow veterans and their families and especially my 1971 West Point Classmates—Thanks for keeping our country safe!
Hank
On the fateful day, Lt. Col James Rudder led 225 men in an assault on the cliffs of Pointe du Hoc.
But to understand this superb combat unit, we must return to the days of 1943, where Rudder formed the Rangers. The 2nd Ranger Battalion was activated on April 1, 1943 at Camp Forrest, Tullahoma, Tennessee. They were volunteer units. Each soldier had to possess superb physical qualities and sharp mental skills. They also trained in Florida. Each ranger became skilled in all types of weapons, hand-to-hand combat and handling difficult terrain. The unit was deployed to Scotland next. Here they trained on scaling cliffs and trained with British Commandos.
The rangers were organized into 6 line companies, A to F per battalion sized units. Each company consisted of 65 men and 3 officers. The companies were organized into 2 platoons.
The Plan
The plan was for part of the 2nd Ranger Battalion to assault the cliffs of Pointe du Hoc at 0630 and take possession of the German position by 0700. This group was named Force A.
Force A had 3 ranger companies in the task organization. Company D was to scale the cliffs from the west; Companies E and F were to scale the cliffs from the east. They would then destroy the cannons once on top of Pointe du Hoc. After destroying the weapons, they were to establish a defensive perimeter on Pointe du Hoc and prevent the Germans from moving reinforcements down the coastal highway that connected Grandcamp and Vierville.
The rangers were to hold the ground until relieved by the 116th Infantry Division. Relief was scheduled for noon on 6 June 1944.
Force B, Charlie Company of the 2nd Rangers, was to assault and capture the area on the far right flank of the Omaha Beach on exit D-1. Their objective was Pointe de la Percée.
Force C, was comprised of the entire 5th Ranger Battalion, along with A and B companies of the 2nd Rangers. Here were their missions:
1). If the initial landing force failed, Force C was designated to assault and capture Pointe du Hoc, by landing at Omaha and moving inland to take Pointe du Hoc.
Or
2) If the mission of Force A was successful, they were scheduled to also land at Pointe du Hoc as reinforcements, assuming the objective was taken by 0700.
A Landing that Started Off Wrong
At 0445 the rangers of Force A were loaded into landing crafts that held 22 men per landing craft. They men and supplies were loaded into 10 landing craft and 4 DUKW's amphibious vehicles. As they approached the beachhead, they were 3 miles off course, and LTC Rudder realized the error—they were headed to Pointe de la Percée, the objective of Force B.
The landing craft had to travel exposed back to the correct landing site. By the time they arrived at the objective, 1 landing craft and 2 DUKW’s were sunk.
They were due to start their assault at 0630, but the currents and navigation errors delayed the landing until 0710. Since the plan called for the assault to begin at 0630, the naval bombardment stopped at 0625. This allowed the Germans to regroup and take up some defensive positions.
The Germans, however, were slow to reorganize, and this aided the assault.
The first landing crafts made it to Pointe du Hoc at 0710. Their landing area was only 30 yards wide and the tide was rising. There was no time to assault from both the west and east sides of Pointe du Hoc—they all had to go up the cliffs from the east side.
Some equipment was not useable. The 75-foot mechanized ladders mounted on the amphibious vehicles couldn’t get into positions to be used—it was too slippery for the tracks to get into position (there were only 2 available as they were transported by the DUKW’s and 2 were already sunk). They had lost ammo supplies. Ropes, men, radios and all their other equipment were soaked.
The only thing in their favor—the intense shelling and bombing had caused some of the cliff face to collapse into rubble piles. In a few places, the climb would only be 60 feet.
The rangers were going to scale the cliffs under their own power using ropes and rope ladders.
Over the Top and Success of Force A
Scaling the cliffs was one of the most impressive military feats ever successfully accomplished by a US unit in combat. Companies D, E and F landed and scaled the cliffs by using rocket-fired grappling hooks attached to ropes. They developed the scaling techniques primarily by trial and error during their training sessions. Their training was intense and it paid off—under pressure and enemy fire these soldiers responded, despite incredible odds against their success.
The landing problems resulted in an assault only from the east side of Pointe du Hoc. Some of the soaked ropes didn’t reach the top, but finally some worked correctly. They only had 15 casualties in the initial assault. The German defenders cut ropes, threw potato mashers and fired on the exposed soldiers. The rangers countered with mortar fire and small arms fire at the German positions above. Also 2 US destroyers fired their guns effectively at the cliff side German defenders.
5 minutes after landing, some rangers were already on top of the cliffs. Within 15 minutes of landing, the majority of Rudder’s assault force had made it on top of Pointe du Hoc.
Once up top, small groups of rangers went off to accomplish their missions. They were stunned by the results of the bombardments—one soldier said it looked like the craters of the moon. It looked nothing like the mock-ups and photos of the site.
Meanwhile, Force B (Company C, of the 2nd Ranger Battalion) was assaulting at Omaha and later would capture Pointe de la Percée. Their landing was at Charlie (farthest western sector of Omaha) on Omaha Beach, at 0645 in the second landing wave. They landed after Company A, 116th Regiment was being torn apart on Dog Green (now more famously known as the Bedford Boys, as 19 from the town in VA were killed in the D Day assault on 6 June). They too came under intense fire from 3 Widerstandnesten or Wn (resistance nests) defensive positions, Wn 71, Wn 72 and Wn 73. They fought their way to the seawall.
There were two possible plans for Force B. If the D-1 Draw was clear, move up the draw and attack Pointe de la Percée and eliminate Wn 74 (plan 1). Plan 2 was to climb up the cliffs (the worst option).
Force B lacked most of the specialized climbing gear that was allocated to Force A. With the draw not yet captured, the only option was climb the cliffs. Hugging the cliffs, they found a section to climb. PFC Otto Stephens climbed first, using his bayonet to dig hand holds. He and 2 other rangers established a rope for the remaining rangers, so they would be able to climb up.
The situation was so bad on Omaha, that the Force B commander, Captain Goranson, decided he had no other option than to attack Wn 73 and then proceed to attack Wn 74 on Pointe de la Percée. This turned out to be a great combat decision—Wn 73 was a really effective fighting position and Wn 74 was primarily a radar position, guarded by 2 anti-aircraft guns and several machinegun nests.
Only 29 of his 64 Rangers were able to fight—the rest were killed or wounded. The remaining 29 men began slowing clearing the trenches of Wn 73. They were later joined with 20 soldiers from 116th who also climbed the ropes. All worked together, clearing the trenches, to eliminate their lethal machinegun nests and other defensive positions.
At around 1400, Captain Goranson, after leading the men to clear the German defensive positions and block German reinforcements, led a patrol to Pointe de la Percée. He found it abandoned, with the defensive positions Wn 74 destroyed by naval fire as they approached. He returned to link up with Force C. Around night fall, Force B had only 12 men able to fight.
Force C
Force C was reluctantly waiting off shore, hoping to reinforce Rudder at Pointe du Hoc. His soldiers bobbed up and down in the rough seas. There was no signal received by the Battalion Commander, LTC Max Schneider, from Force A—he had ordered his landing crafts to lay-to offshore. Schneider knew how important it was to reinforce Force A at Pointe du Hoc.
There was no more time left; at 0740 six landing crafts with the rangers landed at Omaha beach at Dog White. They were met with intense fire. LTC Schneider, the only ranger officer with combat experience, moved the rest of the force to landing zone Dog Red. This was a pivotal decision during the early phases of the invasion landings at Omaha. He managed to get most of his force intact over the exposed 200 yards to the seawall—brush fires helped obscure the defenders from accurate fire upon his landing unit.
Getting a well-trained, elite unit almost intact to relative safety was a key factor in the fight for Omaha.
Shortly thereafter, he met up with BG Cota, Executive Officer of the 29th Division. It is here where Cota, urging the men off the beach, yelled out “Rangers lead the way!” They made it up the bluffs and probably were the key reason in the 29th Division sector succeeded in accomplishing their mission in taking their assigned sector of Omaha beach. LTC Schneider led his men through the obstacles, past the barbed wire and up the cliffs. They continued the assault to their initial objective near Vierville and later linked up with the remainder of Force B. They had been in almost 10 hours of constant combat.
However, they were badly shot up and could not effectively reinforce Rudder’s men at Pointe du Hoc on 6 June 1944 but they still wanted to try. Key leaders denied them the chance on 6 June 1944. The 29th Division had lost so many men, it needed the rangers to help defend the small beach head positions inland. Despite LTC Schneider’s pleas to go reinforce the stranded rangers, he was ordered to stay and help defend the beach head.
3 ranger companys were not as important as securing Omaha—a tough but correct command decision.
Hanging On at Pointe du Hoc
Rudder had signaled that he had landed late and taken Pointe du Hoc, but the message was garbled and not understood by the commanders at sea. They committed the reserve rangers (Force C) to land at Omaha beach. By the time he communicated success, and ask for help, the reply was “no reinforcements”.
Rudder’s group was now on their own.
Later that day, the Germans started their counterattacks. By night fall, Rudder’s men were forced back into defensive positions in a small 200 yard perimeter.
At 2100, 1st platoon of A Company, who had been unable to link up with the rest of the 5th Ranger Bn., had fought their way to Ponte du Hoc and linked up with Rudder’s men, with a force of 23 soldiers. They would be his only reinforcements on 6 June.
By 7 June, Rudder had a fighting force of fewer of 100 of the original 225 who had begun the assault. Ammunition and food were running low. He did get some reinforcements from the sea. About 60 men from the 1st Platoon of Fox Company of the 5th Rangers and a dismounted cannon platoon, help reinforced Rudder’s men and evacuate some wounded soldiers.
Rudder held on until 8 June, when the 5th Rangers and men from the 29th Division finally linked up with his force. His men had withstood 5 counterattacks.
The Price for Victory
The 2nd Ranger Battalion (a total force of about 488) had 77 killed and 152 wounded and 38 listed as missing. At the time of the relief, Rudder’s original force of 225 had less than 75 men capable of fighting.
Rudder was wounded twice in the battle and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross (DSC). Thirteen other Rangers were awarded the DSC for their roles at Pointe du Hoc and the other ranger missions.
The 5th Ranger Battalion (again about 488 men, according to the Table of Organization & Equipment (TO&E)) had 23 men killed, 89 wounded and 2 missing.
Both the 2nd Ranger Bn. and the 5th Bn. were awarded the Presidential Unit Citation and the French Croix de Guerre.
Omaha and Utah Beaches 6 June 1944
By Hank Schrader, USMA ’71, Europe Destination & Europe River Cruise Expert
www.dreamdestinations.com
In November 1943, the Big Three (Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill) agreed in a conference in Tehran, that the Allied Western Forces of the United States and Britain would invade France in 1944 and open a second front against the German Fortress Europe.
The clock was now ticking for the D Day invasion of France. It was a race between German defenders and the Allied invasion force.
The ideal strategy was simple for the planners of the D Day amphibious invasion—attack lightly defended beaches, secure the beach, and move men and supplies quickly inland. Next, establish or capture a port quickly to reinforce with more men and supplies. Then, defeat the German forces and win the war.
Executing it proved to be one of the most difficult military tasks every attempted.
During the massive planning operations, Pas du Calais (the most favorable landing site) and Normandy were under consideration. Both had enough good characteristics to work for an amphibious landing. But Normandy was the best choice for two reasons. There were: 1) in 1943 it was a lightly defended part of the German Atlantic Wall and 2) the Germans anticipated an attack at Pas du Calais and fortified it and constantly moved more soldiers into defensive positions.
The German Defenders
The Germans realized they weren’t prepared to properly defend the vast Atlantic Wall in 1943. The German commander, General Gerd von Rundstedt, drafted a report to Hitler about the scant fortifications and poor quality units defending the area. Hitler responded by adding General Erwin Rommel (known popularly as the “Desert Fox” for his Africa campaign) to oversee improving the defenses.
The Germans knew an invasion was coming—they just didn’t know where or when. The choice that the Germans believed the Allies would select was an invasion of Pas de Calais, as it was the most logical invasion site—only 20 miles from England and had 20 miles of good landing beaches. The allies bolstered that illusion by creating a fake force under the command of LTG George Patton, complete with fake equipment, field barracks and even a docking area near Dover. They relentlessly bombed the Calais area in the build-up phase, as well as other targets in France. In an unusual operation, they also dropped dummies by parachutes, to harass and confuse the Germans.
Field Marshal Rommel was also convinced Calais was the prime invasion site and deployed the 208,000 man 15th Army to defend this area. The deception plan of D Day was working as hoped for the Allies.
The first priority for the Germans was protecting the major harbors, as any invading forces would need constant supplies, more men and equipment.
After securing these major ports, they then began building “Widerstandnesten” (resistance nests) along the beaches. These were a series of pillboxes, gun positions, anti-aircraft weapons and trenches. The beaches were littered with obstacles, mines (over 4 million mines) to enhance these resistance nests. Inland, flooded lowlands and stakes were planted in the ground to cut into gliders during landings and make possible airborne landing zones potential death traps.
A key concept for the Germans was to stop the invasion on the beaches, so all defensive resources were placed at or near the beach areas and no defense in depth was planned. There were reserve units to stop breakthroughs but the best reserve unit of panzer tanks could only be released by Hitler. If the Allies could breach these tough defenses, and cut off the reserve forces, they had a good chance of success.
By June 1944 all the beaches used for the D Day landings in Normandy had at least some of these defensive measures in places.
Unknown to the allies, the best defended beach in Normandy was Omaha.
The stage was set for that fateful day 6 June 1944.
Concept of the Overlord Operation
You might be surprised to know the last successful armed assault across the English Channel happened in 1066 (yes, the famous Battle of Hastings). 8 centuries later, this was about to change.
Amphibious landings are complex operations. Trying to attack with 5 divisions over a 50 mile front in Normandy from a base in England would require naval forces, air forces and army units from British, Canadian and American forces. The allied armies and massive equipment needed to ensure success only added to the complexity. 150,000 soldiers would be required, with a fleet of 5,333 ships and an air armada of over 12,921 planes.
Synchronizing an operation of this size remains one of the most amazing military feats in the history of the world.
An Overview of the Invasion
On the beach, 270 desperate engineer soldiers were trying to open 16 pathways for the tanks to get off the beach from the obstacles. They have 27 minutes to achieve their mission according to the plan; only 1 pathway is opened on time. Most of the engineers are dead or wounded by the end of their 27 minute first mission.
The landing waves continued. Rifle and machinegun bullets constantly flew around; mortar and artillery shells rained down; explosions, screams, destroyed and abandoned equipment and vehicles litter the beaches (especially the destroyed burning tanks); and confusion was everywhere. The only reasons most survived was there was just too many of them for the Germans to shoot everyone and the heavy smoke that offered some concealment to the exposed soldiers.
Without tank support, the original plan to take the heavily fortified draws was not a good option for soldiers only armed with light weapons.
At 0730, several hundred surviving soldiers were huddled against the seawall, and the outlook was bleak. Most of their leaders had been killed or wounded.
In the west, General Norman Cota, commander of the 29th Division, landed and sprinted to the wall around 0730. As he rallied the soldiers, he realized going up the draws, according to the original plan wouldn’t work. The only good option was to climb the less defended bluffs.
He found a group of rangers and told them of his plan and then yelled out “Rangers Lead the Way”, which has become the official ranger moto. Within an hour, the rangers and soldiers from the 29th reached the top. The German defenses were oriented to the sea and Cota’s growing band of soldiers captured the Vierville draw (D-1) about 2 hours later by attacking them from their rear. It took the engineer soldiers 8 hours to clear the Vierville draw of mines and other obstacles.
The beach head was still an intense killing zone at about 0830. Several thousand soldiers were stranded and easy targets for the Germans. A frustrated destroyer skipper (Lt. Commander Ralph Ramey), defied his orders, steamed his destroyed as close as possible and began to blast the cliffs with his 5 inch guns. Soon, all the other destroyers followed. Within 30 minutes, they had destroyed 6 gun emplacements. The tide was turning. With less effective fire raining down on the trapped men, leaders began moving soldiers up the bluffs and into the draws. The crowded beaches were slowly clearing.
With men still vulnerable on the beach, and landing craft prohibited from landed more soldiers as there was no space, soldiers were trying to fight their way off the killing zone. In 2 hours of intense fighting, by 1100, the beach started to clear up as the men were making progress against the Germans. Some landing craft commanders again defied order
|
|||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 77
|
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/12/netherlands-to-supply-first-dutch-built-cv90-ifvs-to-ukraine-in-2026/
|
en
|
Netherlands to supply first Dutch-built CV90 IFVs to Ukraine in 2026
|
[
"https://www.defensenews.com/pf//resources/img/defensenews-logo-white.png?d=129",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/KsUQoXcd0lghhKpPmARvgiypIX8=/1024x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/IETM6E4KZ5GUPEXOJKVEEZYLNU.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/lf_7zC8LFp7gZTQpnZKwoDT2qmE=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/GCYPC3DYTVDEJDQN2OGKEIVMOA.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/bX1R2jJvsXMBXZxmov97xq4luHU=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/ZPDYODDDWJFHZL5CZ7MA7AFUO4.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/6xRamd-1_pd8q_sxkop5XUxtdv0=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/DDX6KC45F5C3TFW3MNZCY3NKAI.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/WcDJHJgyJyRC47LSG7yU5S58RbQ=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/P32GRDERAFAOVHCVST6EED34G4.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/qBPzjN8D2-USNSrmxIDnHKSCOXM=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/HJK3DBPA7VEAJNSWFD5LDDSPD4.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/LvTaiGTG6Dg1SH_Bn9oHOxsm4PM=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/d3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net/08-09-2024/t_8488c8b0c4794df9b2c62519f80b1c71_name_Stumpworx_Thumb.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/4xGTVX2Z5aYMzBcsKoAeNGkTpBY=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/d3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net/08-09-2024/t_e8c1f21242d54bb192a95a8cfacd36f8_name_SMD_RECAP_THUMB.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/dyqY_f7XP8hVRJhwhnnPyqlwzGo=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/d3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net/08-09-2024/t_327f903728764d178840fe2f0f99bc82_name_DNW_632_LEHRFELD_THUMB_3.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/pf//resources/img/defensenews-logo-white.png?d=129"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"dn-dnr",
"netherlands",
"dutch",
"cv90",
"holland",
"europe",
"ukraine",
"eurosatory",
"circulated-defense-news",
"defense-news"
] | null |
[
"Rudy Ruitenberg"
] |
2024-06-12T00:00:00
|
Ukrainian soldiers have reportedly praised the infantry combat vehicle for its armor, heat-signature reducing camouflage and firepower.
|
en
|
/pf/resources/img/favicons/def/apple-touch-icon.png?d=129
|
Defense News
|
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/12/netherlands-to-supply-first-dutch-built-cv90-ifvs-to-ukraine-in-2026/
|
PARIS — The Netherlands will deliver the first Dutch-built and financed BAE Systems CV90 infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine in 2026, the Dutch Ministry of Defence said.
The Dutch are investing €400 million (U.S. $430 million) in a Swedish fund to build the CV90s for Ukraine, the government said June 7. That amount is the Dutch share and will pay for “several tens” of vehicles, Netherlands Ministry of Defence spokesman Kaj Leers told Defense News in an emailed reply to questions.
The Dutch government also agreed with Sweden to set up CV90 production in the Netherlands, and expects to partly produce at least 180 of the vehicles, according to Leers. Negotiations are ongoing for local firm Van Halteren Technologies and a “whole chain” of Dutch suppliers to handle “an important part” of production, he said.
The Netherlands is joining an initiative by Denmark and Sweden to provide Ukraine’s armed forces with modern armor to fight off Russia’s invasion. The CV90 is “just what is needed at the front,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a statement in August on the occasion of a visit to Stockholm, and Ukrainian soldiers have reportedly praised the Swedish IFV for its armor, heat-signature reducing camouflage and firepower.
Sweden and Denmark signed a joint declaration in December to send additional CV90s to Ukraine, after an initial Swedish donation of 50 vehicles last year. Ukraine and Sweden in February discussed terms and conditions for purchasing more of the vehicles.
Van Halteren will play “an important role” in supplying dozens of new CV90s to Ukraine, Sweden and possibly Denmark, which are buying vehicles to the same modernized standard as the Netherlands, Dutch State Secretary for Defence Christophe van der Maat said in a video posted on X on Friday. The Defence Ministry together with the Economic Affairs Ministry and Van Halteren is looking how the Dutch CV90 production line can be scaled up further, according to Van der Maat.
“We want to really help the Dutch know-how contribute to the growing requirement for CV90 fighting vehicles in Europe,” Van der Maat said.
The Netherlands last week took delivery of the first of its CV90s that are part of a more than €660-million mid-life upgrade aimed at keeping the IFV operational through to 2039. The Dutch are upgrading 122 vehicles, with final delivery scheduled for 2027.
The midlife upgraded for the Royal Netherlands Army is being done by BAE Systems Hägglunds in cooperation with Van Halteren, and includes a new turret with improved networking and observational capabilities, such as an electronic-optical panoramic sight. The upgrade also adds the Spike anti-tank missile by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, and 90 vehicles will get the Iron Fist active protection system from Elbit Systems.
BAE Systems signed a contract with Sweden in May for new CV90s built to the Dutch upgrade standard to replace the vehicles donated to Ukraine. Slovakia and Czechia last year agreed to buy CV90s in deals totaling more than €3.5 billion. Leers declined to say whether the Netherlands expects to order additional new CV90s once local production has started.
The Dutch Ministry of Defence also declined to say whether the CV90s for Ukraine will be delivered with a cannon. The CV90s operated by the Dutch Army are equipped with a 35mm Bushmaster III auto-cannon, while Sweden operates a version of the CV90 equipped with a 40mm Bofors auto-cannon in a stabilized turret, which is the version first delivered to Ukraine.
Separately, the Netherlands said Tuesday it’s buying 120mm mortar systems from BAE Systems Hägglunds to mount on its CV90s, replacing the unmounted 81mm mortars currently in use with the Dutch army. The mortar systems will be installed on the vehicles after their mid-life upgrade, which should be completed in 2028. Sweden also uses the 120mm mortar on its CV90s, according to the Ministry of Defence.
The new mortars will have a range of 7 to 12 kilometers, compared with 6 kilometers for the current system, as well as a higher rate of fire, and can be operated from inside the vehicle, the ministry said. The goal is to increase accuracy by adding GPS-guided munition.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 20
|
https://www.ga.com/the-netherlands-to-upgrade-their-mq-9a-capabilities
|
en
|
The Netherlands To Upgrade Their MQ-9A Capabilities
|
[
"https://www.ga.com/images/general-atomics-logo.svg",
"https://www.ga.com/images/BlogFeaturedImages/the-netherlands-to-upgrade-their-mq9a-capabilities.jpg",
"https://www.ga-asi.com/images/BlogFeaturedImages/pr-social-twitter.gif",
"https://www.ga-asi.com/images/BlogFeaturedImages/pr-social-linkedin.gif",
"https://www.ga-asi.com/images/BlogFeaturedImages/pr-social-facebook.gif",
"https://www.ga-asi.com/images/BlogFeaturedImages/pr-social-instagram.gif",
"https://www.ga-asi.com/images/BlogFeaturedImages/pr-social-youtube.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) is working with General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) to make important upgrades to their growing fleet of MQ-9A Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA).
|
en
|
https://www.ga.com/images/favicon.ico
|
General Atomics
|
https://www.ga.com/the-netherlands-to-upgrade-their-mq-9a-capabilities
|
SAN DIEGO – 26 March 2024 – The Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) is working with General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) to make important upgrades to their growing fleet of MQ-9A Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA). The RNLAF announced in 2023 that they will double their number of MQ-9A Reapers from four to eight and now are making upgrades to their aircraft to include capabilities such as maritime radars, a communications relay, extended range fuel tanks, electronic support measures (ESM), and weapons. The upgrades will take place incrementally over the next three years.
“The RNLAF is using the MQ-9A for an increasing set of NATO missions,” said Lieutenant-Colonel Jan Ruedisueli, commander of the RNLAF’s 306 Squadron. “With these upgrades, we will support NATO’s ISR and maritime surveillance missions throughout Europe.”
GA-ASI will integrate the new payloads for the RNLAF, including a maritime radar currently operating in other areas of the world, ESM, weapons, and a communications relay that is purpose-built to connect all services of the Netherlands Ministry of Defence.
“We’re excited to continue upgrading and increasing the mission capabilities of the RNLAF’s fleet of Reapers,” said Jaime Walters, vice president of International Strategic Development at GA-ASI. “One of the key aspects of our aircraft is the modularity of our platforms allowing them to rapidly meet the full spectrum of customer requirements.”
The MQ-9A Block 5 has a 3,850-pound (1,746-kilogram) payload capacity that includes 3,000 pounds (1,361 kilograms) of external stores. It provides a long-endurance, surveillance capability with full-motion video, Synthetic Aperture Radar/Moving Target Indicator/Maritime Radar, and ESM. An extremely reliable aircraft, MQ-9A Block 5 is equipped with a fault-tolerant flight control system and a triple-redundant avionics system architecture. It is engineered to meet and exceed manned aircraft reliability standards.
About GA-ASI
General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI), an affiliate of General Atomics, is a leading designer and manufacturer of proven, reliable RPA systems, radars, and electro-optic and related mission systems, including the Predator® RPA series and the Lynx® Multi-mode Radar. With more than eight million flight hours, GA-ASI provides long-endurance, mission-capable aircraft with integrated sensor and data link systems required to deliver persistent situational awareness. The company also produces a variety of sensor control/image analysis software, offers pilot training and support services, and develops meta-material antennas.
For more information, visit www.ga-asi.com
Avenger, Lynx, Predator, SeaGuardian, and SkyGuardian are registered trademarks of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 83
|
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/11/10/1448437/-Air-Minded-Vliegbasis-Soesterberg
|
en
|
Air-Minded: Vliegbasis Soesterberg
|
[
"https://cdn.prod.dailykos.com/avatars/large/missing.png",
"https://cdn.prod.dailykos.com/assets/ui/hamburger_navigation/twitter-logo-white-5e0001f6fd0658aae69fcd847c43f51798b63253813b87fd7a239eec9a6816fb.svg",
"https://cdn.prod.dailykos.com/assets/ui/hamburger_navigation/facebook-logo-white-bfa79dfbd943a31da751b691551234273c9c643967922e49bb1c522f7a7e33ee.svg",
"https://cdn.prod.dailykos.com/assets/ui/hamburger_navigation/instagram-logo-white-15a388d1e54fd5bd1a317519ea10fb2ef76508a4e4633c084ef5f854942616a4.svg",
"https://cdn.prod.dailykos.com/avatars/331322/small/4FC9004F-CFB9-4730-91B1-8F983788D5C4.jpeg?1661460663",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/728/22505285047_906f71a664_m.jpg",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/637/22910974132_da04579dde_z.jpg",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/597/21518186030_1c79a40a67_z.jpg",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/611/22302694194_ddc1cc0ffb_z.jpg",
"https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5709/21083413264_4acd8c93e8_n.jpg",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/610/21518936869_97d65bd4bb_n.jpg",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/607/21518936819_5017fdd714_m.jpg",
"https://farm1.staticflickr.com/771/21715368351_e6f436c816_z.jpg",
"https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5515/9103555082_325fcc398e_z.jpg",
"https://cdn.prod.dailykos.com/assets/blm_symbol-f72d20b42b57c5f212e7600e2f4a8a43bad43509cd8a717d9a18526c192633c0.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2015-11-10T00:00:00
|
Originally posted at Paul’s Thing.
I don't know when Veterans Day turned into Veterans Week, but it has, so I don't feel too bad posting a little of my own veteran history one day ear
|
en
|
Daily Kos
|
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/11/10/1448437/-Air-Minded-Vliegbasis-Soesterberg
|
Originally posted at Paul’s Thing.
I don't know when Veterans Day turned into Veterans Week, but it has, so I don't feel too bad posting a little of my own veteran history one day early.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, I was stationed at Soesterberg Air Base in the Netherlands, a brand new F-15 Eagle pilot in the 32nd Tactical Fighter Squadron, the northernmost American fighter squadron in Europe during the Cold War. We were the only unit in United States Air Forces Europe to wear a patch with a royal crest, namely that of the House of Orange (the wolfhound on our patch had been designed by the Disney Studios during WWII). The 32nd TFS had been flying fighters and interceptors out of Soesterberg AB since 1955: F-100 Super Sabres, F-102 Delta Daggers, F-4 Phantom IIs, and finally F-15 Eagles—which is where I came in, as one of the initial cadre of Eagle pilots assigned to the unit after it converted from Phantoms.
Soesterberg Air Base was Dutch, properly called Vliegbasis Soesterberg. The Royal Netherlands Air Force operated from one side of the main runway; the USAF from the other. Our base-within-a-base was called Camp New Amsterdam, but most Americans stationed there called it Soesterberg. The 32nd continued to fly F-15s at Soesterberg until 1994, when the squadron closed and Camp New Amsterdam reverted to the Dutch. The RNLAF eventually moved out too, relocating its operations to another Dutch air base in 2008. Today Soesterberg is home to an air museum and a glider port.
The airfield at Soesterberg was established in 1911. The Dutch army took it over in 1913, and it remained under Dutch military control until WWII, when the Germans invaded and occupied the Netherlands. At that point, Vliegbasis Soesterberg became Fliegerhorst Soesterberg, a forward Luftwaffe base. During the war the Germans based a variety of bombers and fighters at the base: the bombers flew missions against England during the Battle of Britain, as well as anti-shipping missions over the English Channel; the fighter unit stationed there scrambled to intercept and shoot down American and British bombers on their way to and from targets in Germany. By the end of 1944 the Allies had bombed Soesterberg so extensively the Germans were no longer able to use it. The Canadians liberated the town and airfield in 1945, and by 1951 Vliegbasis Soesterberg had been rebuilt and was back in operation with the RNLAF.
If you've flown in Europe, you know military airfields there are generally small. In the Cold War, most were camouflaged as well, difficult to see from the air unless you knew what to look for. Soesterberg was no exception. When I started flying there, I was amazed by how well the base blended in with its surroundings—I rarely saw the runway until I was within few miles of it, and only then if I was lined up properly. On the Camp New Amsterdam side we operated on old Luftwaffe taxiways, trees pressing in on both sides, just wide enough to accommodate the F-15 (later during my tour, we widened the taxiways and built hardened bunkers, leaving as much tree cover in place as we could). My first and lasting memory of Soesterberg is of those green, leafy woods. My second memory is of the Luftwaffe-era structures that were still there, both on the base and in the town of Soesterberg. There was even an old Allied bomb crater, still visible 40 years later:
A few Luftwaffe aircraft shelters were still standing when I was there, hidden under the trees. We used them to store parts and ground equipment; they were far too small for jet fighters, even the F-100s that had been there in the mid-1950s. Then there were the taxiways, which I've mentioned. Here and there were concrete Nazi anti-aircraft artillery emplacements, buried fuel and ammunition bunkers, and underground tunnels once used by Luftwaffe pilots scrambling to their aircraft. In my time the underground structures were mostly full of water, and strictly off-limits. Here's one:
Just off base, what was once the Luftwaffe Offizierscasino—built with concentration camp slave labor—was now the RNLAF Officers' Club. Here's what it looked like when I was there; alongside are two interior shots taken during its glory days:
We Americans had our own officers' club, a converted farmhouse in the woods off one end of the main runway. I'm not one hundred percent sure the farmhouse pre-dated WWII, but I'm pretty sure it did.
I don't know what the RNLAF had inside the old offizierscasino (sadly, I never got to go inside), but the centerpiece of our officers' club was an antique bar with inlaid Dutch tiles. It apparently had been salvaged from some historic bar or hotel in Utrecht or another nearby town; the Heineken Brewery bought it from us for its museum in 1981 and gave us a new bar to replace it.
Here's an aerial shot from my Soesterberg days: two fully armed 32nd TFS Eagles flying over the preserved windmills at Kinderdijk on a rare sunny day. Captain Steve Spencer is flying tail # 082; Captain Paul Woodford is flying his wing in tail # 091:
The Luftwaffe-era photos in this post were sent by a friend and fellow veteran, a Royal Netherlands Army officer who was stationed at Soesterberg when I was there, Major Peter van Oest. The photo of the F-15s over the windmills was taken by McDonnell-Douglas factory photographer Bob Williams, flying in the back seat of an F-15B. Other information and photos come from various online sources:
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 75
|
https://edmerck.tripod.com/history/francebases.html
|
en
|
The USAF In France 1950
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
From 1950 to 1967 the USAF set up and maintained bases in France as part of NATO. This piece of Air Force history is little known, and many errors exist in what has been written. As one who participated in this build up, I hope to remedy both situations by drawing a brief outline of units involved, where they were stationed, their missions, and what conditions were like at the bases in France.
The Cold War that developed in Europe during 1948 and escalated into the attempted seizure of West Berlin, convinced the western nations to form a common defense organization. Discussions led to a multinational defense agreement that evolved into NATO. A central NATO defense strategy was the use of tactical air power to offset the Soviet Union's numerical superiority of ground forces, but USAF planners did not want any new tactical air units moved into the US "Zone of Occupation" in southern Germany because of their vulnerability. By 1950 USAFE wanted all tactical air units to be located west of the Rhein River to provide greater air defense warning time and France agreed to provide air base sites.
During 1950 the State Department, HQ USAF teams, and the French Defense Ministry negotiated to select the air bases and determine the amount of construction funding needed to get them operational at the earliest possible date. France gave tentative approval by February 1951 to establish ten main US air bases with all support facilities: Bordeaux-Merignac, Chambley-Bussieres, Chaumont-Somuntiers, Chateauroux-Deols, Dreux-Louvillier, Etain-Rouvres, Evreux-Fauville, Laon-Couvron, Phalsbourg-Bourscheid, and Toul-Rosieres. Two additional bases were selected for RCAF (Royal Canadian Air Force) fighters, Gros-Tenquin and Marville-Montmedy.
The Buildup 1950 - 1954
The sites selected for the ten main bases varied from open farmland to commercial airports. Bordeaux-Merignac and Chateauroux-Deols were well developed commercial airports with good runways, taxiways, and roads. Chaumont, Etain, Evreux, Laon and Toul had runways circa 1940-44, limited parking aprons and open space for troop housing. No sites had adequate buildings, hangars, or housing to accommodate a wing. Of serious concern were sources of potable water and electrical power. Major construction would be required at all selected bases to support jet fighters, bombers, and transports. Chaumont, Laon and Toul would be developed in two steps: first a temporary bare base tent camp built in minimum time to support flying missions and completed while the wing operated at its air base. It took twice as long to complete these bases as USAFE had estimated. Chambley, Dreux, Etain, Evreux, and Phalsbourg were planned as one step bases, eliminating the bare base expenses. Though construction began in 1952 at these five sites, they were not ready for wing operations until mid-1955, long after their expected completion. Two major NATO decisions adversely affected the development of base infrastructure: only French contractors could construct the facilities, and only French building materials and equipment could be used. In the early fifties there was neither sufficient heavy equipment nor quality building materials available in France for these large projects.
An airlift terminal was established in April 1951 at Orly Field, the international airport south of Paris. It was operated by the 1630th Air Base Squadron, a small unit supporting military and commercial air transports moving US officials and high ranking military personnel to NATO offices in Paris and to SHAPE at Fontainebleau. Orly Field was strictly limited to these MATS (Military Air Transport Service) flights; tactical aircraft were not allowed to fly into Paris.
In June 1951, the 73rd Air Depot Wing was the first large USAF unit to move into France. It was required for USAFE logistical support and MDAP (Mutual Defense Assistance Program) support to all NATO countries and intended to replace the Erding Air Depot in West Germany. This wing was based at the Chateauroux-Doels airport, in central France, and operated the depot until departure of all US forces from France in 1967. The 73rd began immediately as supply center for the new bases though considerable construction was required to provide necessary depot facilities. The 866th US Army Engineer Aviation Battalion, a SCARWAF (Special Category Army Personnel with Air Force) organization, assisted the 73rd to improve existing housing, roads, and storage site drainage. A tent camp for troop housing and a very large warehousing facility was located at La Martinerie, two miles south of the airport. USAFE also required a primary ammunition storage/maintenance depot so a large forested site 15 miles southwest of Niort, "Foret de Chize," was established as the Chize Ammunition Storage Sub-Depot. Another sub-depot using the Bordeaux Ford Bacalan plant near the WWII submarine pens was opened in June 1951 to store supplies moving through this major seaport and later became USAFE's clothing depot.
The three combat wings hurriedly ordered to France between October 1951 and May 1952 were federalized Air National Guard units activated for 21 months. This action got aircraft, equipment and personnel in place to be easily redesignated regular USAF wings after the end of the guard's tour of active duty. The 126th Bomb Wing (Light) arrived in December 1951, the 117th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing with RB-26Cs and RF-80As reached France in January 1952, and the 137th Fighter-Bomber Wing in May 1952.
I was attached to the first flying wing deployed to France, the 126th Bomb Wing (L) with its three squadrons; 108th, 168th and 180th, flying B-26B/Cs. The word was that we were going to an interim base at Bordeaux-Merignac which had World War II hangars and shops ready for our occupancy. We would be permanently based at Laon when the bare base construction was completed there. Our squadron air crews flew the B-26s to Bordeaux in October and November while personnel and equipment proceeded by troop and cargo ship.
We had a rude awakening upon our arrival in Bordeaux. Living and working conditions were abysmal by USAF standards. The expected hangars and shops had been bombed by the 8th USAAF when the base was occupied by the Luftwaffe in WWII so almost all aircraft maintenance had to be done outdoors. Evidence of the Luftwaffe's presence was found throughout the base; the perimeter was still mined, and aircraft munitions were frequently found in the mud. Our wing was the first to encounter all the problems of being based in France and developed many innovative solutions. Each maintenance section had to set up its own shop tent on the ground. Flooring of pierced steel planking was used to keep the shop equipment from sinking into the mud. Aircraft parking was a serious problem due to limited ramp space. B-26s that had to be parked on the ground would sink into the mud overnight and great effort was required to extract them. Fifteen hundred officers and airmen were housed in 200 tents with canvas over wood frames on wood floors. The tents were heated by two oil burning stoves. Prefabricated portable wooden buildings were erected for three mess halls, six large latrines, a hospital, communications center, and the base exchange.
Flight operations were often canceled due to bad winter weather, inadequate VHF radio communication sets for civil airport/airways operation, and limited aircraft maintenance facilities. An unusual flying stoppage was the weekly grazing of sheep throughout the aircraft parking area by a local farmer. Flight operations began immediately though, and in February we supported NATO's operation "GRAND SLAM" which involved British, French, and Italian forces. As part of MDAP we began the ground and flight training of French pilots and navigators who would fly B-26s in Indochina.
When we moved to Laon AB, located seven miles northwest of the old cathedral city of Laon, in May 1952, we found another tent city with prefabricated wood buildings for headquarters, two large mess halls, seven large latrines, a hospital and base exchange. An 8,000 ft runway had been built on high ground with good drainage for all weather operation. Upon arrival each flying squadron built an aircraft maintenance ramp using pierced steel planking. Then the French contractor built six canvas covered tent frames on wood floors for squadron operations, air crew personnel equipment, armament, radio/radar, and aircraft repair shops. By late July 1952 the aircraft maintenance shops at Laon were vastly superior to those used at Bordeaux AB or even Langley AFB.
The summer weather was excellent, permitting the wing to fly up to 1,200 hours per month. The squadrons began weapons training with air to ground gunnery and bombing missions at Wheelus AB, Tripoli, Libya. Air to ground rocket firings were conducted at ranges off the English coast. Amazingly, napalm training was done by dropping the napalm tanks on Laon AB parallel to the runway; a suitable range could not be found elsewhere. USAF Project 7019 directed that one crew per squadron, consisting of a pilot, navigator, and gunner, began departing every month for a 60-day combat tour in Korea. Training French B-26 crews continued at Laon. Exercises involving US and NATO ground forces, with the 126th supplying close air support, continued at various camps in Belgium, France, and Germany. In addition, radar calibration, MSQ-1 radar directed bombing, and night cross-country navigation training missions added to the busy flying schedule.
At midnight 31 December 1952, the 126 Bomb Wing (L) was redesignated 38th Bomb Wing, (L) with the same missions, aircraft, equipment, and personnel when the 21 month mobilization of the 126th expired. The 38th's squadrons were designated; 71st, 405th, and 822nd Bomb Sq (L). The wing continued flying gloss black Invaders for the next three years.
The Toul-Rosieres bare base, located 12 miles north of the city of Toul, presented greater problems. Upon arrival in January of 1952, the 117th Tac Reconnaissance  Wing commander deemed it uninhabitable and the flying squadrons were temporarily deployed to bases in Germany. The base was a sea of mud, and the new runway was breaking up and could not support safe flying. Some personnel remained at Toul, but the base only became truly operational during the summer of 1952 when the flying squadrons returned.
The 117th TRW was redesignated the 10th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing with the same aircraft, equipment, and personnel at midnight 9 July 1952. The squadrons were redesignated the 1st, 32nd and the 38th. The 10th TRW remained at Toul AB until May 1953, when it moved to Spangdahlem AB, West Germany. After its departure, the base was improved. In April 1954 the 465th Troop Carrier Wing became the new resident of Toul AB. Its three flying squadron were; the 780th TCSq, 781st TCSq and the 782nd TCSq. It flew C-119Cs until its departure in 1955 for Evreux.
The last of the bare bases, Chaumont, located two miles southwest of the city of Chaumont, was in the best condition of the three. The French contractor had laid a good quality new concrete runway over an old one. It supported the heavy F-84G fighters the 137th Fighter-Bomber Wing flew across the Atlantic to occupy the base in May 1952. The 125th, 127th, and 128th Fighter Squadrons were able to fly at their new field and began immediately supporting NATO exercises. The tent camp was completed and prefabbed wood buildings were erected. At midnight 9 July 1952, the 137th FBW was redesignated the 48th Fighter-Bomber Wing. The 492nd, 493rd, and 494th were the new fighter squadron designations. The 48th wing remained at Chaumont AB until relocated to RAF Lakenheath, UK, in January 1960.
As the main air bases became operational, the USAFE planners had to decide on the best dispersal of tactical aircraft against enemy counter air strikes using both conventional and nuclear weapons. Their goal was to have no more than one squadron at a single base in the event of war. The 1954 concept would place one squadron forward on alert in West Germany, one squadron at a DOB (Dispersed Operating Base) in France, and one squadron at its main air base. Beginning in 1954, DOBs were constructed at Chalons-Vatry, Luneville-Chenevieres, Vitry-Brienne, and Vouziers-Sechault: all sites in northeast France. The DOB concept was considered by all to be worth the costs and operational hardships. Usually one tactical squadron would fly to a DOB and operate for a week or two while undergoing an operational readiness inspection. The maintenance sections would pack up their shop semitrailers, drive to the DOB, set up the camp site and support a very active flying schedule.
NATO construction costs had greatly exceeded 1951 estimates; total US construction expenditures in France approached 1 billion dollars by 1954. DOD expenditures were growing too rapidly for the Eisenhower administration and cuts of tactical forces were being forecast. But, as 1954 ended, two more wings arrived in France and within a year all of the main bases were operational except Phalsbourg. Mission Capable 1955 - 1958
On 12 December 1954, the 21st and 388th Fighter-Bomber Wings, flying F-86Fs, deployed to Chambley and Etain. These were "one step" bases supposedly ready for operations. Chambley AB was constructed on clear farmland located 22 miles southwest of the ancient city of Metz, and Etain AB was a WWII airfield site 20 miles north of Chambley.
After three years of construction, Chambley's runway was not usable, so the three fighter squadrons of the 21st FB Wing had to deploy elsewhere for the first six months. The 72nd deployed to Chateauroux, the 416th and 531st operated at Toul. Etain's runway was not ready either, resulting in the 388th's squadrons flying in West Germany. All returned to Etain AB in September.
Evreux AB, 65 miles northwest of Paris, was finally ready to receive the 465th Troop Carrier Wing which transferred from Toul on 23 May 1955. Then, on 22 September 1955, the 60th Troop Carrier Wing with the 10th, 11th, and 12th TC squadrons, flying C-119Fs relocated from Rhein-Main AB, West Germany to set up operations at Dreux AB, 38 miles west of Paris. Both wings provided airlift for all of USAFE, worked with Army paratroopers, and were involved in humanitarian airlift missions.
By the end of 1955, after overcoming the survival mode, the tactical wings in France settled into their operational missions with good facilities. All bases had identical standard NATO structures to reduce design costs. Three or four large hangars were constructed at every base finally eliminating outdoor winter maintenance. "Project Caravan" provided trailers for on-base family housing. Trailer camp sites were constructed by SCARWAF troops. Commodity credit housing and guaranteed rental income housing units, consisting of single and duplex family homes, were built near every main air base. Chateauroux air depot had a 410 unit apartment complex "Cite de Touvent" and a 507 housing unit "Cite Brassioux" for military and DAF civilian employees.
Navigation aids were gradually upgraded from on-base low power non-directional beacons to higher powered off base NDBs to improve ADF approaches. Mobile GCA units or RAPCONs were installed at main air bases to improve night and bad weather approaches. Aircraft losses in France were high due to bad winter weather, but by 1957 TACAN (Tactical Air Navigation) ground stations were installed, greatly improving flying safety.
A radio relay network was constructed to interconnect all USAFE facilities in France. It was operated and maintained by the 7th and 8th Radio Relay Squadrons. This intra-theater system connected France, Germany, and United Kingdom air bases and supplemented the frequently intermittent commercial telephone systems. The network used commercial microwave radio sets providing voice/teletype service. Microwave relay sets were installed at 49 off-base sites.
During the mid 50s the USAF began flying personnel to and from Europe replacing troop ships. In Paris, the 7113th Personnel Processing Sq was expanded to handle the military personnel rotating to and from the US through Paris and the Orly air terminal. Three hotels were leased in Paris for overnight quarters primarily for dependents.
The Chateauroux Air Depot was very busy throughout this period procuring supplies and parts, contracting services, and maintaining all USAF equipment. One of their unusual tasks was the support of new aircraft procurement. Two fighters, peculiar to NATO and not flown by the USAF, were purchased with MDAP funds: 221 North American F-86Ks and 225 Dassault Mystere IV-As. The F-86Ks were produced by Fiat in Italy and Chateauroux managed the US government furnished equipment they required. F-86K Sabre interceptors were supplied to France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, and West Germany. The Mystere IV-A, produced by Dassault Aviation at Bordeaux, were only flown by French fighter squadrons as part of 4th ATAF (Allied Tactical Air Force). These aircraft programs helped develop NATO's aircraft manufacturing capacity.
In addition to its usual maintenance projects the Chateauroux depot established maintenance contracts with many European airlines and aircraft manufacturers. KLM, SABENA, Air France, Air Italia, SAS, CASA, Fiat, Fairy, SNCNF-Marseilles, and SNCASO-Toulouse provided IRAN (inspect and repair as necessary) services on USAFE & NATO aircraft. Contractor maintenance reduced the time and expense of returning aircraft to CONUS depots. Maintenance costs were lower in NATO countries than at US depots.
Another major economy was project "native son" which employed French workers as widely as possible on all bases to reduce AF personnel. USAFE carefully controlled and limited military manning after 1954.
There continued to be changes in base occupancy and aircraft conversions through 1956 and 1957. On 17 July 1956, the 50th Fighter Bomber Wing from Hahn AB, West Germany reopened Toul-Rosieres AB. In April 1957 the 317th Troop Carrier Wing transferred from Neubiberg AB, West Germany to Evreux to replace the 465th TCW which was then inactivated. The 388th FBW remained at Etain until it was abruptly redesignated the 49th Fighter Bomber Wing on 10 December 1957. Another airlift unit, the 309th TCG arrived from Sewart AFB, TN, to join the 60th TCW at Dreux on 1 June 1956. They flew their C-123Bs, providing logistical support to all USAFE bases until 10 August 1958, when they returned with their aircraft to Tennessee.
Finally in November 1957, Phalsbourg received its first flying unit, the 23rd Helicopter Sq, flying eighteen H-21Bs. These Workhorses provided typical helicopter airlift missions such as special air lift, administrative support, and emergency air evacuation. The 23rd was the only helicopter squadron in USAFE and had difficulties operating, because it was not allowed to fly at night in France and had insufficient manning to provide complete base/wing operations. The 23rd remained at Phalsbourg for a year until it was inactivated.
Two major forces: economic and political, combined in 1958 to suddenly reduce the USAF presence in France. The economic force was a greatly reduced USAF budget. The political force was Gen De Gaulle's pronouncement that all nuclear weapons and delivery aircraft had to be removed from French soil by July 1958. Since NATO strategy had evolved into "massive nuclear retaliation" this meant all tactical fighter wings had to depart France. USAFE implemented Project "Red Richard" the rapid relocation and inactivation of combat wings in France. These wings were either relocated to Germany or the United States and the bases reduced to standby status or returned to the French. The 21st TFW was inactivated at Chambley, 8 February 1958; the 60th TCW was inactivated at Dreux, 25 September 1958; and the 38th TBW was inactivated at Laon, 18 June 1958. The 49th TFW relocated from Etain to Spangdahlem, 25 August 1958. Chateauroux continued to be very busy since it was the only USAF depot in Europe. Expenses for approximately 9,000 military personnel were eliminated by "Red Richard."
All weather air defense of western Europe, long a concern of USAFE leaders, was upgraded by the addition of three more F-86D squadrons to the 86th Fighter Interceptor Wing. The 513th Fighter Interceptor Squadron occupied Phalsbourg from April 1958 to January 1961. Since the 513th was not nuclear capable it was exempt from De Gaulle's restriction, as was the 66th TRW which moved to Laon AB from Sembach, West Germany 10 July 1958.
All the efforts of USAFE commanders and troops in France could be considered wasted as 1959 ended, but only a few years later money and effort were again directed to manning and maintaining these bases.
Reactivation and Final Disengagement 1961 - 1967
In 1961 Berlin became a serious international problem, as Soviet Premier Khrushchev insisted on an East Germany peace settlement and elimination of the four Allied powers within the city. Berlin became a divided city. President Kennedy's response was to expand our conventional military power by mobilizing the Reserves. Forty Air Reserve Forces, flying squadrons and support units were activated for one year on 1 October 1961. During the next month, operation "Stair Step" dispatched 216 ANG fighters across the Atlantic to air bases in France.
The newly arrived activated ANG wings reopened Chaumont, Chambley, Dreux, Etain, Toul, and Phalsbourg. The 7108th Tactical Fighter Wing, supporting 141st TFSq operations, was based at Chaumont; the 7121st Tactical Fighter Wing and its 166th TFSq was assigned to Etain AB. The 7122nd Tactical Fighter Wing and the 163rd TFSq arrived at Chambley. Toul was reopened for the 7131st Tactical Fighter Wing and 110th TFSq. Dreux was occupied by the 7117th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing and its 106th TRSq flying RF-84Fs, but problems developed immediately. French air traffic controllers prevented jet flying from Dreux AB due to high density commercial air traffic in the Paris region. The 106th TRSq had to move to Chaumont to fly but USAFE insisted that the 7117th Wing continue to operate Dreux for airlift traffic. Phalsbourg became home to the 102nd Fighter Wing and its three fighter squadrons, the 101st, 131st, and 138th.
Concerns by the Kennedy administration with balance of payments "Gold Flow" limited this deployment. Consequently, the 102nd at Phalsbourg was the only complete wing moved to France. The other five had only partial wing headquarters, partial support squadrons and one flying squadron at their new air base; hence the 7000 designator indicating a partial wing.
Upon arrival in France the wings' missions consisted of theater flying training, command inspections, air-ground operation, gunnery training, photo missions, and alerts. Typical difficulties arose due to lack of aircraft/engine spare parts, special vehicles, shop equipment, and office equipment. Much equipment had been removed from the bases after 1958 to meet other USAFE needs, but the bases were in overall fair condition with minor repairs required to buildings and base utilities. Each Stair Step base required additional permanent construction to meet new 17th Air Force requirements which resulted in $3.5 million expenditure. Overall morale remained high during the eight months these units were in France and good US French relations developed in the small towns surrounding the air bases.
Our air bases in France were very convenient for this emergency deployment and eliminated vulnerable targets if these aircraft had been added to our air bases in West Germany. Also the four French DOBs were still available for our use if further aircraft dispersement became necessary.
Unfortunately, the Berlin Wall was completed through the city and a barbed wire fence plus mine fields extended the entire north-south length of a divided Germany. But the American, British, and French Zones still stood in Berlin and access to the city was maintained. It's possible that the sudden appearance of 170 tactical fighters with nuclear weapon delivery capability changed Krushchev's attitude toward his Berlin "settlement."
By April 1962 with the Berlin crisis subsiding, plans were being made for the departure of the ANG wings from France. Units were to return all personnel, equipment and aircraft back to CONUS for release from active duty by 1 September 1962. Six wings departed France in a timely manner; 130 aircraft made the return flight via the North Atlantic route during June. Plans were altered slightly by the USAF decision to create a new fighter wing by taking F-84Fs from three departing wings. The 366th Tactical Fighter Wing was activated on 8 May 1962 with two squadrons at Chaumont AB, one squadron at Chambley AB, and another at Etain AB. The 366th was the last USAFE tactical fighter wing based in France; it was able to continue operating until July 1963 since it had conventional weapons capability only.
Three partial wings were activated in France during 1965. On 1 July 1965, the 26th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing, flying factory new RF-4C "Phantoms," was activated at Toul AB with the 22nd and 32nd TRSq. The 25th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing was activated on 1 October 1965, flying RB-66B/C/E "Destroyers" at Chambley AB with two squadrons, the 19th and 42nd. The 19th TRSq had day and night photography tasking, while the 42nd TRSq flew tactical electronic warfare missions. The 513th Troop Carrier Wing was activated at Evreux 15 April 1965 and its C-130B squadrons were rotated TDY from CONUS.
After 15 years of bad and good times of USAFE basing in France, the end was decided by Gen Charles De Gaulle. On 7 March 1966, he announced that France would withdraw from NATO's military structure but not leave the political organization. He gave NATO forces one year (until 1 April 1967) to depart France. This was a giant undertaking for the US and resulted in "Project Freloc," Fast Relocation.
This eviction notice was a very serious setback for NATO defense strategy, but it came at a fortuitous time for the US. The expenses and manpower required to operate this force structure in France could be readily diverted into the expanding war in Southeast Asia. By 1966 only the Chateauroux depot, three tactical reconnaissance wings, and one partial troop carrier wing remained in France. Most of the main air bases were in standby status. No major construction projects had been approved since 1962. The 25th TRW was inactivated. Its RB-66s were returned to CONUS, and some aircrews sent directly to Vietnam. The 26th TRW relocated to Ramstein AB, West Germany. The 66th TRW moved to Upper Heyford, England, after eight years at Laon AB. The 513th Troop Carrier Wing moved to RAF Mildenhall, England, with minimum problems.
All NATO, US and RCAF facilities had to be abandoned and turned over to France. The cost of relocating NATO installations exceeded one billion dollars. HQ SHAPE at Fontainebleau had to be moved into completely new facilities at Mons and Brussels, Belgium. USAFE closed seven main operating air bases, one air depot, 70 smaller installations, and over 1,500 family housing units. 33,000 AF personnel and their dependents and 85,000 tons of equipment had to be relocated. Much of this equipment was later used in Europe or transferred to Southeast Asia. The greatest task was removal of property and supplies at the Chateauroux air depot. The Air Force Reserve, flying C-124s, provided extra airlift to remove all "high value" depot property to CONUS; especially aircraft engines, shop machinery, and test equipment. Vast quantities of supplies were moved from Chateauroux to England and West Germany.
The State Department, Department of Defense, and Air Force carefully managed the news about our departure from France, and the attendant problems of an integrated NATO air defense for western Europe and the decrease in tactical airpower. Negative comments by USAF personnel departing France were not permitted to be released. Relocation costs and lost infrastructure investments were never mentioned in press briefings. Fortunately for State and DOD, the media was focusing on Vietnam, so the removal of our forces from France went virtually unreported in the US. Finally on 23 October 1967, our flags were furled and after 17 years all US forces departed France.
Today most of the old USAF air bases in France are being used and are not accessible to tourists. The French Air Force is currently flying from Evreux, Toul, and the Sechault DOB. The French Army uses Chaumont, Etain, Laon, Phalsbourg, Chenevieres DOB and RCAF Grostenqiun. Chateauroux-Deols air depot complex is used as a regional airport. Portions of the old aircraft factory are used as a commercial aircraft overhaul facility. The adjacent large La Martinerie depot storage and administrative area is operated by the French Air Force. Dreux AB is not active but not abandoned and is secured; all buildings plus four large hangars are still standing. Brienne la Chateau DOB is a commercial business park; the airfield is used for sport aviation, an aviation museum and has a campground. Chalons-Vatry DOB renamed Vatry-Sommesous is being expanded into the largest air cargo terminal in Europe. Chambley AB and RCAF Marville are being developed into commercial business parks; many old buildings and hangars exist, and runways and aprons at these sites are usable.
Large hot air balloon contests have been held at Chambley over the past five years. Bordeaux-Merignac continues as a busy international airport for the Bordeaux region; a large new air cargo terminal is located in the old USAF area. No trace of the US air base remains at the airport. The Bordeaux-Bacalan port depot buildings are now commercial business sites and the old submarine pens may remain forever. The submarine pen structure was used as a maritime museum and is now being remodeled into a theater.
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 95
|
https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/netherlands-air-force.28155/
|
en
|
Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/assets/logo/artban_big.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/assets/logo/artban_big.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/assets/logo/artban_big.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145029-2b75ded0ca3a17d8cc35e782296c8bcd.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145030-5d7b352efd2dcb8a007373004e76919b.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145031-9fbd00b5f7a80bd831dbb6201d62e04b.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145032-8486f00357c79fd5be940ab0f0c6f37b.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145033-ad15de9c3ad8227e99bf23326df9bcc1.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145034-740685b84f8dbcb4daae8993cdd6c984.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145046-26597f47eaeef4fadd8c4be95b1414ec.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/1/1137.jpg?1214292683",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/0/746.jpg?1289862728",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/39/39869.jpg?1297025060",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145116-3af98fb1d0e372b56a9ed1ecd5990718.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145117-7f75e37a0f7b957e5256cfc11a583242.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145118-01b61d7b61a0223ccf8dbd8d9592d740.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145122-6ff6437678c7c57bf6ec18325a49f851.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/0/746.jpg?1289862728",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145206-3e27195b59dfa556cba445f019902308.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145205-34513e5175036204b54e523cf70f753c.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145204-5fea1c78ffd47d11672f5e8f8aeaa6da.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145203-e04ddfacf62d1d28e17bfac19985ea65.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145202-5865af0615d76682393fc74a40333a76.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145207-5479423859779178cee8b2e3014937d5.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145208-426bc55156a3be16325392bb11e9d2cd.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145209-3f4b5cb3e2bb554a4dd0f5a0de3cdd46.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145210-55c0b30556d9d5191f12202cef887733.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145211-0b6baeb1bcacb371df35b725aa16db69.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/32/32416.jpg?1273153031",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145216-2a9d112b3dfe92caef5d5b709c67ba91.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145215-257d3c669efee0a9f8033b72479a76bd.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145214-87a58e30cb9c624074fe1c4185b3f9dc.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/38/38781.jpg?1511508476",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/38/38781.jpg?1511508476",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145439-63fd8a0c90b1ef70734d8e9945c7800f.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145440-9e435d6895c8794d2b2d5233c5069eec.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145441-f866a1f4fc704d7b4c8a380439819abd.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145442-357a6094a81ba0c49fd22ca01f61cae9.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145443-2ccc065be3b1e437a83b004fefab939b.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145448-453d0ee3781f296b9e6668dbafe08c02.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145447-ccad312e25441dea07b2fc35ed0fa15d.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145446-cac637367bbea14684c98e4433038b30.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145445-17ae6bf4e3a68ecf4233fefadc8f404c.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145444-429ecd50054410db5f44366f1aa9d7cd.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145453-34c1252b0787fa10ba28363c8f9ee0a1.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145452-5d54e70dd16363093b936dc443541cf8.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145451-ce94ab013550fa924d624bc300e4769a.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145450-3cd3ad6bbda33165afb60cec34769945.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145449-b489bb5a9820b169060ae06bc7f5dcd2.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145454-51bf3beb15044b1a38c3f03380af3458.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145455-fe330511f5c12ad61569ab96d433f49f.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145456-a6359fe5c34af19f69182d5227d84b9c.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/38/38781.jpg?1511508476",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145509-9776a6cd978633703733bc3f9b23557b.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145510-d4e24ebbb106f51dc2f183dfb60f7f87.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145511-66bc6628dedcd7678f6bb7b58e136048.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/attachments/145/145512-60631e4168091b3cf78090dd79474214.jpg",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/m/27/27462.jpg?1711660398",
"https://www.ebayadservices.com/marketingtracking/v1/impression?mkevt=2&mkcid=1&mkrid=711-53200-19255-0&campid=5338973216&siteid=0&toolid=20003&customid=notmdl&mpt=60931880",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/s/4/4410.jpg?1654672889",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/s/76/76056.jpg?1670900436",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/s/76/76056.jpg?1670900436",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/s/31/31523.jpg?1453269497",
"https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/data/avatars/s/27/27462.jpg?1711660398"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Royal Deeside",
"UK www.flickr.com"
] |
2011-02-16T05:59:25-05:00
|
After the end of World War I the Dutch government cut the defence budget and the Army Aviation Group was almost dissolved. As political tensions in Europe...
|
en
|
Aircraft of World War II - WW2Aircraft.net Forums
|
https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/netherlands-air-force.28155/
|
After the end of World War I the Dutch government cut the defence budget and the Army Aviation Group was almost dissolved. As political tensions in Europe increased during the late 1930s the government tried to rebuild the armed forces again in 1938 but there were many problems, not least the shortage of pilot instructors, navigators and pilots to fly the new multiple engine aircraft. Lack of standardisation and resulting maintenance issues added to the complexity of the rebuilding task.
As war loomed, in July 1939 the Army Aviation Group was renamed the Army Aviation Brigade (Luchtvaartbrigade). In August 1939, the Netherlands government mobilised its armed forces, but due to limited budgets the Army Aviation Brigade operated only 176 combat aircraft of several types; Fokker T.V type bombers (16), Fokker D.XXI single-engine fighters (36), Fokker G.I twin-engine fighters (35), Fokker D.XVII single engine fighters (7), Douglas DB-8A-3N light bombers (17), Fokker C.X light bombers (20), Fokker C.V reconnaissance aircraft (33) and Koolhoven FK-51 artillery observer aircraft (20). In May 1940, Germany invaded the Netherlands. Within five days the Dutch Army Aviation Brigade was taken out by the German Luftwaffe. All of the Brigade's bombers, along with 30 D.XXI and 17 G.I fighters were shot down; two D.XXI and eight G.I were destroyed on the ground. Two G.I were captured by German forces, one of which was later flown to England by a Fokker pilot. The Douglas bombehrs were used as fighters because no suitable bombs were available, yet these aircraft were not suited for this role and eight were shot down and three destroyed on the ground in the first hours of the conflict.
In spite of their numerical inferiority, the Dutch armed forces did enjoy success against the Luftwaffe, having 350 Luftwaffe aircraft destroyed. While many were lost to anti-aircraft fire and crashes at improvised landing fields in the Netherlands, the Aviation Brigade did enjoy successes. The cost was high - almost 95% of the Dutch pilots lost. In recognition of their actions Queen Wilhelmina granted the highest Dutch military decoration, the Militaire Willemsorde (MWO), to the Army Aviation Brigade collectively. Some aircrews escaped to England and on June 1, 1940, 320 Squadron and 321 Squadron were established there under RAF operational command. Due to a shortage of personnel, 321 Squadron was absorbed by 320 Sqn in January 1941. Although their personnel were predominantly from the Navy Air Service, Army Aviation aircrew also served with 320 Sqn until the end of the war. In 1941, the Royal Netherlands Military Flying School was re-established, in the United States at Jackson Field (also known as Hawkins Field), Jackson, Mississippi, operating lend-lease aircraft and training all military aircrew for the Netherlands.
The separate Militaire Luchtvaart van het Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger (ML-KNIL; Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Military Air Service) continued in the Netherlands East Indies (NEI), until its occupation by Japan in 1942. Some personnel escaped to Australia and Ceylon. 321 Squadron was re-formed in Ceylon, in March 1942, from Dutch aviators. In 1942, 18 (NEI) Squadron, a joint Dutch-Australian unit was established, in Canberra, equipped with B-25 Mitchell bombers. It saw action in the New Guinea campaign and over the Dutch East Indies. In 1943, 120 (NEI) Squadron was established. Equipped with Kittyhawk fighters, it flew many missions under Australian command, including the recapturing of Dutch New Guinea. In June 1943, a Dutch fighter squadron was established in England. 322 (Dutch) Squadron, equipped with the Supermarine Spitfire, saw action as part of the RAF. 322 Sqn aircraft featured the British RAF roundels as well as the Dutch orange triangle. 322 Sqn was successfully deployed against incoming V-1 flying bombs. From mid-1944, during the invasion of Normandy, it executed ground attack missions over France and Belgium. In July 1944, the Directorate of Netherlands Airpower was established in London.
The Militaire Luchtvaart van het Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger ("Military Air Service of the Royal Netherlands East Indian Army", ML-KNIL) had ordered 144 Brewster B-339C and 339D models, the former with rebuilt Wright G-105 engines supplied by the Dutch and the latter with new 1,200 hp (895 kW) Wright R-1820-40 engines Brewster purchased from Wright. At the outbreak of war, only 71 had arrived in the Dutch East Indies, and not all were in service. A small number served briefly at Singapore before being withdrawn for the defense of Java.
As the Brewster B-339 aircraft used by the ML-KNIL were lighter than the modified B-339E Brewster Mark Is used by British, Australian, and New Zealand air forces, they were able at times to successfully engage the Japanese Army Ki-43 "Oscar", although both the "Oscar" and the Japanese Navy's A6M Zero still out-climbed and out-turned the B-339 at combat altitudes (the Zero was faster as well). Apart from their role as fighters, the Brewsters were also used as dive bombers against Japanese troopships. Though reinforced by British Commonwealth Brewster Mk I (B-339E) aircraft retreating from Malaya, the Dutch squadrons faced superior numbers in the air, and were too few in number to stem the advance of Japanese ground forces.
In a major engagement above Semplak on 19 February 1942, eight Dutch Brewster fighters intercepted a formation of about 35 Japanese bombers with an escort of about 20 Zeros. The Brewster pilots destroyed 11 Japanese aircraft and lost four Brewsters; two Dutch pilots died. The Brewsters flew their last sortie on 7 March. Altogether, 17 ML-KNIL pilots were killed, and 30 aircraft shot down; 15 were destroyed on the ground, and several were lost to misadventure. Dutch pilots claimed 55 enemy aircraft destroyed. Two Dutch pilots, Jacob van Helsdingen and August Deibel, scored highest with the Buffalo with three victories each. Following the surrender of the Netherlands East Indies on 8 March 1942, 17 ML-KNIL Buffalos were transferred to the USAAF and RAAF in Australia.
Attachments
Brewster F2A Buffalo 001.jpg
Brewster F2A Buffalo 002.jpg
Brewster F2A Buffalo 003.jpg
The CW-21 Demon was a lightweight fighter based on the CW-19R general-purpose monoplane. It was intended primarily for export, with 32 being ordered by China in 1939, and 24 improved versions being ordered by the Netherlands East Indies in 1940. Being inadequately armed and with no worthwhile protection for the pilot, the Demons were fair game for the Japanese fighters they opposed. Three of the improved Demons (the CW-21B) were sent to the American Volunteer Group in China (the "Flying Tigers"), but all three were lost on the ferry flight from Rangoon to Kunming, when the entire group crashed into a mountain during bad weather.
In 1940, The Netherlands ordered 24 examples of a modified version designated the CW-21B (together with a number of two-seat Model 23s), for the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Military Aviation (Militaire Luchtvaart van het Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger; ML-KNIL). The modifications consisted of inward retracting landing gear, a semi-retractable tail wheel, two each 0.3 and 0.5 inch (7.62 and 12.7 mm) machine guns, and a slightly large fuel tank. These changes gained an eight mph (13 km/h) speed increase at sea level. Deliveries started in June 1940, but only 17 had been received by Vliegtuigroep IV, Afdeling 2 (No. 2 Squadron, Air Group IV; 2-VLG IV), when war with Japan began on December 8 1941. With its rudimentary pilot protection, lack of self-sealing fuel tanks and light construction, the CW-21B was not unlike the opposing Japanese planes. It had better firepower than the Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar", but worse than the cannon-armed Mitsubishi Zero. Its climb rate was far better than either. Squadron VLG IV claimed four aerial victories during the Netherlands East Indies campaign but the ML-KNIL was overwhelmed by the sheer number of Japanese adversaries.
Attachments
Curtiss CW-21 Demon 002.jpg
Curtiss CW-21 Demon 001.jpg
01276243.jpg
The Dornier Do 24 is a 1930s German three-engine flying boat designed by the Dornier Flugzeugwerke for maritime patrol and search-and-rescue. According to Dornier records, some 12,000 people were rescued by Do 24s during its flying career. A total of 279 were built between several factories from 1937-1945. The Dornier Do 24 was designed to meet a Dutch navy requirement for a replacement of the Dornier Wals being used in the Dutch East Indies. It was an all-metal monoplane with a broad-beamed hull and stabilising sponsons. The aircraft was powered by three wing-mounted radial engines. The first two aircraft built were fitted with 447 kW (600 hp) Junkers Jumo 205C diesel engines. The next two had 652 kW (875 hp) Wright R-1820-F52 Cyclones, this was to meet a Dutch requirement to use the same engines as the Martin 139. The third aircraft (with Cyclone engines) was the first to fly on 3 July 1937. Six Dutch aircraft (designated Do 24K-1) were built in Germany, followed by a further aircraft built under licence by Aviolanda in the Netherlands (designated Do 24K-2).
Only 25 aircraft had been built on the Aviolanda assembly line before the German occupation. The Luftwaffe were interested in the completed and partially completed aircraft. The Dutch production line continued to produce aircraft under German control. 11 airframes were completed with Dutch-bought Wright Cyclone engines, but later models used the BMW Bramo 323R-2. A further 159 Do 24s were built in Holland during the occupation, most under the designation Do 24T-1. Another production line for the Do 24 was established in Sartrouville, France, during the German occupation. This line was operated by SNCA and was able to produce another 48 Do 24s. After the liberation, this facility produced a further 40 Do 24s, which served in the French Navy until 1952.
37 Dutch- and German-built Do 24s had been sent to the East Indies by the time of the German occupation of the Netherlands in June 1940. Until the outbreak of war, these aircraft would have flown the tri-color Roundel. Later, to avoid confusion with British or French roundels, Dutch aircraft flew a black-bordered orange triangle insignia. After the Japanese invasion, six surviving Do 24s were transferred to the Royal Australian Air Force in February 1942. They served in RAAF through most of 1944 as transports in New Guinea, making the Do 24 one of the few aircraft serving operationally on both sides during World War II. During the war, a German Do 24 made a forced landing in neutral Sweden, was impounded and paid for, and remained in Swedish service until 1952.
Attachments
Dornier Do-24 001.jpg
Dornier Do-24 002.jpg
Dornier Do-24 003.jpg
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 61
|
https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/rnlaf-declares-ioc-f-35a-fleet/
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force declares IOC for its F
|
[
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1175064750058523&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2017/09/AFT.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/12/AF1-RNLAF.jpg",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/offsite.png'",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/company-profile-unit.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/newsletter-new.svg",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2024/08/German-military-train-contract-1024x682.jpg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2024/07/meteorology-main-image-1-1024x611.jpg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/icons/catfish-icon.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2017/09/AirforceTechnology_footer.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/linkedin_icon_w.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/twitter_icon_w.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/facebook_icon_w.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/verdict-logo-w.png",
"https://analytics.twitter.com/i/adsct?txn_id=ocdmi&p_id=Twitter&tw_sale_amount=0&tw_order_quantity=0",
"https://t.co/i/adsct?txn_id=ocdmi&p_id=Twitter&tw_sale_amount=0&tw_order_quantity=0"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Himaja Ganta"
] |
2021-12-28T11:07:00+00:00
|
The Netherlands Ministry of Defence has officially declared IOC for the Royal Netherlands Air Force’s (RNLAF) F-35A fleet.
|
en
|
Airforce Technology
|
https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/rnlaf-declares-ioc-f-35a-fleet/
|
The Netherlands Ministry of Defence has declared initial operational capability (IOC) for the Royal Netherlands Air Force’s (RNLAF) F-35A fleet.
The latest announcement makes the Netherlands the eighth nation and RNLAF the 12th military service to acheive IOC for their F-35 fleet of aircraft.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Program vice-president and general manager Bridget Lauderdale said: “The declaration of IOC ushers in a new era of air power that gives the RNLAF transformational capabilities.
“I am proud of the Lockheed Martin team’s commitment to delivering the most effective, survivable and connected fighter to our partners in the Netherlands.”
The F-35s can operate with ‘impunity’ in harsh airspace using sensors and low observable technology, providing the RNLAF with air superiority and high combat capabilities.
Each F-35 contains parts manufactured by Dutch firms, with over 25 suppliers throughout the Dutch industry contributing to the F-35 programme.
So far, 24 F-35As have been delivered to the RNLAF, while the air force crews have achieved over 9,085 flight hours.
A total of 55 pilots and 262 maintainers are supporting the F-35A fleet in the Netherlands.
Until now, F-35 has been operating from 29 bases across the world. A total of nine nations are operating F-35s worldwide.
Currently, over 730 F-35s are operational worldwide.
The F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter (JSF) is a stealthy, supersonic multirole fighter aircraft developed by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company.
It is developed for the US Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, as well as programme partners from Nato and US allies.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 4
|
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/fr/customary-ihl/v2/rule4
|
en
|
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/favicon.ico
|
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/favicon.ico
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/favicon.ico
| null | ||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 18
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands East Indies Army
|
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/icons/wikipedia.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-wordmark-en.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-tagline-en.svg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/99/Question_book-new.svg/50px-Question_book-new.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Translation_to_english_arrow.svg/50px-Translation_to_english_arrow.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army_Coat_of_Arms_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Lambang_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Wapenschil_Logo_KNIL.jpg/220px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army_Coat_of_Arms_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Lambang_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Wapenschil_Logo_KNIL.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/Affiche_voor_werving_voor_het_KNIL._Advertentie_van_de_Koloniale_Reserve_uit_1938._Poster_for_recruitment_for_the_KNIL._1938_Colonial_Reserve_advertisement._Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger.jpg/220px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/De_Stadswacht_waakt_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army_1941.jpg/220px-De_Stadswacht_waakt_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army_1941.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Koninklijk_Nederlandsch_Indisch_Leger_-_Versterkt_onze_gelederen%21.jpg/220px-Koninklijk_Nederlandsch_Indisch_Leger_-_Versterkt_onze_gelederen%21.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Isaac_Israels_-_Transport_of_colonial_soldiers_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg/200px-Isaac_Israels_-_Transport_of_colonial_soldiers_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Dutch_cavalry_at_Sanur_1906.jpg/200px-Dutch_cavalry_at_Sanur_1906.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/Korps_Speciale_Troepen._Parachutisten_worden_klaargemaakt_voor_een_actie._Paratroopers_are_being_prepared_for_an_action_1948_KNIL_Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger.jpg/200px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Elf_Javaanse_KNIL%2CK%2C_SFA022800558.jpg/200px-Elf_Javaanse_KNIL%2CK%2C_SFA022800558.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/COLLECTIE_TROPENMUSEUM_Een_groep_Indische_militairen_rust_uit_bij_het_oversteken_van_een_rivier_TMnr_10001951.jpg/200px-COLLECTIE_TROPENMUSEUM_Een_groep_Indische_militairen_rust_uit_bij_het_oversteken_van_een_rivier_TMnr_10001951.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Vickers_Light_Amphibious_Tank.jpg/200px-Vickers_Light_Amphibious_Tank.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/23px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Generaal_General.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Generaal_General.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Luitenant_generaal_Lieutenant_general.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Generaal_Majoor_General_major.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Kolonel_Colonel.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Kolonel_Colonel.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Luitenant_kolonel_Lieutenant_colonel.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Majoor_Major.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Majoor_Major.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Kapitein_Captain.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Kapitein_Captain.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Luitenant_first_class.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Luitenant_first_class.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Luitenant.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Luitenant.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/23px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Onderluitenant_Sub_Lieutenant.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Adjudant_Warrant_officer.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Sergeant_majoor_Sergeant_major.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5d/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Sergeant.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Sergeant.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/94/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Sergeant_der_Tweede_Klass_Sergeant_Second_Class.jpg/50px-thumbnail.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Korporaal_Corporal.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Korporaal_Corporal.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Soldaat_Soldier.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Soldaat_Soldier.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Soldaat0_Soldier0.jpg/50px-Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army%2C_Koninklijk_Nederlandsch-Indisch_Leger_Tentara_Kerajaan_Hindia_Belanda_Rank_Insignia_KNIL_1942-1950_Soldaat0_Soldier0.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg/30px-Commons-logo.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8a/OOjs_UI_icon_edit-ltr-progressive.svg/10px-OOjs_UI_icon_edit-ltr-progressive.svg.png",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Contributors to Wikimedia projects"
] |
2004-11-22T23:13:39+00:00
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikipedia.png
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Netherlands_East_Indies_Army
|
Dutch colonial military
Royal Netherlands East Indies ArmyKoninklijk Nederlands Indisch LegerActive14 September 1814–26 July 1950CountriesDutch East IndiesAllegianceNetherlandsTypeArmyHeadquartersBandung, Dutch East IndiesNickname(s)KNILEngagementsFirst expedition to Palembang 1819
Java War 1825–1830
Padri War 1821–1837
Expeditions to Bali 1846–1849
Expedition to the western section of Borneo 1850–1854
Palembang Highlands Expeditions 1851–1859
Banjarmasin War 1859-1867
Second Bone War 1859–1860
Dutch intervention in Lombok and Karangasem 1894
Kerinci Expedition 1903
Aceh War 1873–1904
World War II
Malayan campaign 1941–1942
Dutch East Indies campaign 1941–1942
New Guinea campaign 1942–1945
Borneo campaign 1945
Indonesian National Revolution 1945–1949CommandersCommanderSee listNotable
commandersHein ter Poorten
Simon SpoorAircraft flownArmy Air Force
Military unit
The Royal Netherlands East Indies Army (Dutch: Koninklijk Nederlands Indisch Leger; KNIL, Dutch pronunciation: [knɪl]) (Indonesian: Tentara Kerajaan Hindia Belanda) was the military force maintained by the Kingdom of the Netherlands in its colony of the Dutch East Indies, in areas that are now part of Indonesia. The KNIL's air arm was the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Air Force. Elements of the Royal Netherlands Navy and Government Navy were also stationed in the Netherlands East Indies.
History
[edit]
1814–1942
[edit]
The KNIL was formed by royal decree on 14 September 1814.[1] It was not part of the Royal Netherlands Army, but a separate military arm specifically formed for service in the Netherlands East Indies. Its establishment coincided with the Dutch drive to expand colonial rule from the 17th century area of control to the far larger territories constituting the Dutch East Indies seventy years later.[2][failed verification]
The KNIL was involved in many campaigns against indigenous groups in the area including the Padri War (1821–1845), the Java War (1825–1830), crushing the final resistance of Bali inhabitants to colonial rule in 1849, and the prolonged Aceh War (1873–1904).[3] In 1894, Lombok and Karangasem were annexed in response to reports of the local Balinese aristocracy oppressing the native Sasak people. Bali was finally taken under full control with the Dutch intervention in Bali (1906) and the final Dutch intervention in Bali (1908).
In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the KNIL resumed the conquest of the Indonesian archipelago. After 1904 the Netherlands East Indies were considered pacified, with no large-scale armed opposition to Dutch rule until World War II, and the KNIL served a mainly defensive role protecting the Dutch East Indies from the possibility of foreign invasion.
Once the archipelago was considered pacified the KNIL was mainly involved with military policing tasks. To ensure a sizeable European military segment in the KNIL and reduce costly recruitment in Europe, the colonial government introduced obligatory military service for all resident male conscripts in the European legal class in 1917. In 1922 a supplemental legal enactment introduced the creation of the Home Guard (Dutch: Landstorm) for European conscripts older than 32.
World War II
[edit]
Dutch forces in the Netherlands East Indies were severely weakened by the defeat and occupation of the Netherlands itself, by Nazi Germany, in 1940. The KNIL was cut off from external Dutch assistance, except by Royal Netherlands Navy units. The KNIL, hastily and inadequately, attempted to transform into a modern military force able to protect the Dutch East Indies from foreign invasion. By December 1941, Dutch forces in Indonesia numbered around 85,000 personnel: regular troops consisted of about 1,000 officers and 34,000 enlisted soldiers, of whom 28,000 were indigenous. The remainder were made up of locally organised militia, territorial guard units and civilian auxiliaries. The KNIL air force, Militaire Luchtvaart KNIL (Royal Netherlands East Indies Air Force; ML-KNIL)[7] numbered 389 planes of all types, but was largely outclassed by superior Japanese planes. The Royal Netherlands Navy Air Service, or MLD, also had significant forces in the NEI.[8]
During the Dutch East Indies campaign of 1941–42, by forces of the Empire of Japan, most of the KNIL and other Allied forces were quickly defeated.[9] Most European soldiers, which in practice included all able bodied Indo-European males, were interned by the Japanese as POWs. 25% of the POWs did not survive their internment.
A handful of soldiers, mostly indigenous personnel, mounted guerrilla campaigns against the Japanese. These were usually unknown to, and unassisted by, the Allies until the end of the war.
During early 1942, some KNIL personnel escaped to Australia. Some indigenous personnel were interned in Australia under suspicion of sympathies with the Japanese. The remainder began a long process of re-grouping. In late 1942, a failed attempt to land in East Timor, to reinforce Australian commandos waging a guerrilla campaign ended with the loss of 60 Dutch personnel.
Four "Netherlands East Indies" squadrons (the RAAF-NEI squadrons) were formed from ML-KNIL personnel, under the auspices of the Royal Australian Air Force, with Australian ground staff.
KNIL infantry forces (much like their counterparts in the UK), were augmented by recruitment among Dutch expatriates around the world and by colonial troops from as far away as the Dutch West Indies. During 1944–45, some small units saw action in the New Guinea campaign and Borneo campaign.
Just south of Casino, New South Wales, a camp was established in 1942 for a KNIL Technical Battalion. Upon the declaration of the Indonesian Republic, the Dutch soldiers in that battalion interned and imprisoned 500 of their Indonesian native comrades within the camp. Harsh treatment and penalties were issued out by the Dutch on any independence seeking soldiers. This led to the deaths of two KNIL native soldiers; one was a possible suicide and the other was a protest leader. This brought about condemnation from Australian locals, who forced the Australian authorities to repatriate all the imprisoned soldiers, despite being reluctant to heed earlier requests for assistance.[10]
1945–1950
[edit]
Following World War II, the KNIL was used in two large military campaigns in 1947 and 1948 to re-establish Dutch control of Indonesia. The KNIL and its Ambonese auxiliaries have been accused of committing war crimes during this "police action". Dutch efforts to re-establish their colony failed and Netherlands recognition of Indonesian sovereignty came on 27 December 1949.[11] On 26 January 1950, elements of the KNIL were involved in an abortive coup in Bandung planned by Raymond Westerling and Sultan Hamid II. The coup failed and only accelerated the dissolution of the federal Republic of the United States of Indonesia.
The KNIL was disbanded by 26 July 1950 with its indigenous personnel being given the option of demobilising or joining the newly formed Indonesian military.[13] However, efforts to integrate former KNIL units were impeded by mutual distrust between the predominantly Ambonese KNIL troops and the Javanese-dominated Republican military, leading to clashes at Makassar in April and the attempted secession of an independent Republic of South Maluku (RMS) in July. These revolts were suppressed by November 1950 and approximately 12,500 Ambonese KNIL personnel and their families opted for temporary resettlement in the Netherlands.[a] Following this, the KNIL ceased to exist but its traditions are maintained by the Regiment Van Heutsz of the modern Royal Netherlands Army. At the time of disbandment the KNIL numbered 65,000, of whom 26,000 were incorporated into the new Indonesian Army and should be received with the same rank. Some of them later in the 70s reached the rank of Major General in Indonesian Army. It is estimated that around 39,000 of the remaining KNIL troops who majority of whom came from Ambon, took the option of retiring or joining the Royal Dutch Armed Forces and serving in Papua or Suriname. Some of them were involved in the Dutch contingent in Korean War (1950–1953).[14]
Recruiting
[edit]
During its formation, it was stated that the KNIL would include both European and indigenous soldiers. In the beginning the KNIL was equally divided, which meant that half the army consisted of European soldiers, while the other half was made up of indigenous soldiers.[15] However, starting from the late 1830s the ratio between European soldiers and indigenous soldiers went from 1:1 to 1:3.[16] The reason for this was that there were not enough European volunteers to keep up with the recruitment of indigenous soldiers. Besides European volunteers and indigenous recruits the KNIL also recruited foreign mercenaries of several nationalities during the 19th century.[17] During the protracted Aceh War the numbers of European troops were kept to 12,000 but continued Achenese resistance necessitated the deployment of up to 23,000 indigenous soldiers (mainly from Java, Ambon, and Manado). Even slaves of the Ashanti (Ivory Coast and Ghana) were recruited in limited numbers for service in the East Indies (see Belanda Hitam).[19] The ratio of foreign and indigenous troops to those of Dutch origin was reported to be 60% to 40%. After the Aceh War, the enlistment of non-Dutch European troops ceased and the KNIL came to consist of Dutch regulars recruited in the Netherlands itself, Indonesians, Indos (Eurasians), and Dutch colonists living in the East Indies and undertaking their military service.
In 1884 personnel strength was numbered at 13,492 European, 14,982 Indonesian, 96 African (though some sources put the number of Africans much higher [20]) and at least 1,666 Eurasian recruits. The officer corps was wholly European and was probably close to 1,300. There were also about 1,300 horses.[21] Recruitment was carried out in the Netherlands and Indonesia, with over 1,000 Dutch subjects and 500 foreigners enlisting annually. The foreign troops consisted of Flemish, German, Swiss, and French volunteers. Walloons, Arabs, and nationals of both the United Kingdom and United States were forbidden from serving. Other foreigners who could not prove fluency in either Dutch or German were also not accepted for service.[21]
It was against the law to send Dutch conscripts from the Netherlands to the East Indies but Dutch volunteers continued to enlist for colonial service in the KNIL. In 1890 a Colonial Reserve Corps (Koloniale Reserve) was established in the Netherlands itself to recruit and train these volunteers and to re-integrate them into Dutch society upon the conclusion of their overseas service. On the eve of the Japanese invasion in December 1941, Dutch regular troops in the East Indies consisted of about 1,000 officers and 34,000 men, of whom 28,000 were indigenous. The largest proportion of these "native troops" had always consisted of Javanese and Sundanese soldiers.[b][c] During the Japanese occupation, most of the Dutch and Ambonese personnel were interned in POW camps.
During the Indonesian National Revolution, the KNIL's officers were still largely Dutch and Eurasians although most of its troops were recruited from predominantly Indonesian Christian ethnicities, particularly Batak, Moluccas, Timor and Manado. Although there were smaller numbers of Javanese, Sundanese, Sumatran and other Muslim troops in Dutch service, these received comparatively lower rates of pay than their Christian counterparts, leading to resentment and distrust. The Dutch sought to take advantage of these ethnic tensions by claiming that the Ambonese would lose their special privileges and pensions under a Javanese-dominated government. As noted above, these factors contributed to clashes between demobilised KNIL units and the Republic of Indonesia's military throughout 1950.
Isaac Israëls, Het transport der kolonialen (Transport of the Colonial Soldiers), showing recruits for the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army marching through Rotterdam to their transport to the Dutch East Indies[24]
Cavalry of the Royal Dutch East Indies Army in 1906 during the Dutch intervention in Bali (1906)
Paratroopers are being prepared for an action (1948)
Decorated indigenous KNIL soldiers, 1927
Indigenous KNIL troops, 1938
The Vickers light amphibious tank was used by Dutch forces in the East Indies.
Ranks
[edit]
Officers
Rank group General / flag officers Senior officers Junior officers Officer cadet Royal Netherlands East Indies Army
(1942–1950) Generaal[25] Luitenant-generaal Generaal-majoor[26] Kolonel[26][27] Luitenant-kolonel Majoor Kapitein[28] 1e Luitenant[29][30] 2e Luitenant[31]
Others
Rank group Senior NCOs Junior NCOs Enlisted Royal Netherlands East Indies Army
(1942–1950) Onderluitenant Adjudant Sergeant majoor Sergeant[32] Sergeant der 2e Klass[27] Korporaal 1e Soldaat Soldaat
Commanders
[edit]
1815-1819 General-major Carl Heinrich Wilhelm Anthing
1819-1822 General-major Hendrik Merkus de Kock
1822-1828 General-major Josephus Jacobus van Geen
1829-1830 General-major Hendrik Merkus de Kock
1830-1835 Luitenant-generaal Hubert de Stuers
1835-1847 General-major Frans David Cochius
1847-1849 General-major Carel van der Wijck
1849-1851 Luitenant-generaal Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach
1851-1854 General-major Gerhardus Bakker
1854-1858 Luitenant-generaal François de Stuers
1858-1862 Luitenant-generaal Jan van Swieten
1862-1865 Luitenant-generaal Charles Pierre Schimpf
1865-1869 Luitenant-generaal Augustus Johannes Andresen
1869-1873 Luitenant-generaal Willem Egbert Kroesen
1873-1875 Luitenant-generaal Nicolaus Whitton
1875-1879 Luitenant-generaal Gillis Pieter de Neve
1879-1883 Luitenant-generaal Huibert Gerard Boumeester
1883-1887 Luitenant-generaal Karel Lodewijk Pfeiffer
1887-1889 Luitenant-generaal Anthonie Haga
1889-1893 Luitenant-generaal Theodoor van Zijll de Jong
1893-1895 Luitenant-generaal Adriaan Gey van Pittius
1895-1897 Luitenant-generaal Jacobus Augustinus Vetter
1897-1900 Luitenant-generaal Lammert Swart
See also
[edit]
Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Women's Corps (VK-KNIL) — women's branch of the KNIL, 1944–1950
British Indian Army — having a similar function in British India
Notes
[edit]
References
[edit]
Citations
Bibliography
Bosma, Ulbe (2011). "Emigration: Colonial circuits between Europe and Asia in the 19th and early 20th century". European History Online. Mainz: Institute of European History .
Hoofdkwartier Militaire Luchtvaart – Overzicht 1947 (5 pc), Flash Aviation, 2005.
Kahin, George McTurnan (1952). Nationalism and Revolution in Indonesia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Vickers, Adrian (2005). A History of Modern Indonesia. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521542623.
Willems, Wim, ed. (1994). Sporen Van Een Indisch Verleden 1600-1942 (in Dutch). Leiden: COMT. ISBN 90-71042-44-8.
Further reading
[edit]
Marc Lohnstein and Adam Hook, Royal Netherlands East Indies Army 1936–42, Men-at-arms series 521, Osprey Publishing, Oxford 2018. ISBN 9781472833754
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 42
|
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/timeline
|
en
|
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
|
[
"https://www.niehs.nih.gov/modules/custom/usa_top_banner_block/images/favicon-57.png",
"https://www.niehs.nih.gov/modules/custom/usa_top_banner_block/images/dot-gov.svg",
"https://www.niehs.nih.gov/modules/custom/usa_top_banner_block/images/icon-https.svg",
"https://www.niehs.nih.gov/themes/custom/niehs_cms/web-resources/images/niehs-logo.svg",
"https://www.niehs.nih.gov/themes/custom/niehs_cms/web-resources/images/NIH_NIEHS_Print_logo.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
A research ethics timeline from 1620 to present.
|
en
|
/themes/custom/niehs_cms/favicon.ico
|
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
|
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/timeline
|
1500s
Mughal emperor Akbar the Great performs an experiment to determine whether children who grow up in a mute environment will learn language. He ordered twelve infants to be raised by mute nurses who communicated with each other via sign language. He later came back to discover that the twelve children did not learn an audible language but instead communicated in sign. Similar experiments have been done by other monarchs, many with the purpose of discovering the “original” language.
1620
Philosopher and scientist Francis Bacon (1561-1626) publishes The Novum Organon, , in which he argues that scientific knowledge should be based on observation and experimentation and not on tradition and authority and that it should benefit humanity.
1632
Physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilea (1564-1642) publishes his Dialogue on Two World Systems, in which he defends a heliocentric theory of the solar system, a view that contradicted the Catholic Church’s position that the Earth does not move but that the Sun moves around it. In 1633, Galileo appeared before an inquisitor from the Catholic Church. He was ordered to recant his views and was sentenced to house arrest for the remainder of his life. The Church banned his book. In 1992, 359 years after Galileo’s arrest, Pope John Paul II formally apologized for its treatment of Galileo.
1662
The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge, the world’s first scientific organization, is established for the purpose of realizing Bacon’s vision of science. The Royal Society publishes the world’s first scientific journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, in 1665.
1752
TThe Royal Society of London institutes peer review procedures for articles submitted to Philosophical Transactions.
1796
English physician Edward Jenner (1749-1823), the “father” of immunology, tests a vaccine for smallpox on an 8-year-old boy, James Phipps. Jenner and others had observed that dairymaids did not get smallpox. Jenner theorized that this was because they were exposed to cowpox. Jenner tested this hypothesis by inoculating Phipps with cowpox and then exposing him to smallpox. Phipps did not get smallpox. During Jenner’s time, 10-20% of the global population died from smallpox each year.
1830
English mathematician and inventor Charles Babbage (1791-1871) publishes Reflections on the Decline of Science in England, And Some of Its Causes, in which he argues that many of his colleagues were engaging in dishonest research practices, including fabricating, cooking, trimming, and fudging data. Babbage invented a programmable, mechanical computing machine.
1856
Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and Lord Alfred Wallace publish The Origin of Species, which proposes a theory of evolution of living things by natural selection. The book generates a great deal of controversy because it proposes that human beings were not created by God (as most religions claimed) but descended from apes. Darwin collected most of the data for the theory while serving as the ship’s naturalist on the voyage of the HMS Beagle (1831-1836). He waited over twenty years to publish his ideas because he knew they would meet with strong opposition and he wanted to ensure that he could back up his claims with evidence and arguments. George Lyell urged Darwin to publish his theory after reading a paper by Alfred Wallace that proposed a theory similar to Darwin’s, so that Darwin could establish priority. Instead, Darwin shared credit with Wallace.
1874
Roberts Bartholow (1831-1904) was treating a mentally disabled patient, 30-year-old Mary Rafferty, who had a two-inch hole in her skull caused by a cancerous ulcer. He inserted electrodes into the hole to study the effects of electrical stimulation on her brain. Rafferty experienced pain, distress, convulsions, and seizures, and fell into a coma a died in a few days.
1876-1957
The Massachusetts Supreme Court rules in McDonald v. Massachusetts General Hospital that a charitable hospital is not liable for the actions of its employees. This was an important case for human research ethics because courts that followed its reasoning shielded hospitals from legal liability from medical experiments performed by employees. Later, in Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital (1914), the New York Court of Appeals ruled that Mary Schloendorff could sue her doctors, but not the hospital, for unconsented surgery. This legal principle, known as the Schloendorff rule, stood until 1957, when the New York Court of Appeals overturned it in Bing v. Thunig.
1885
French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) tested a rabies vaccine on a 9-year-old boy, Joseph Meister, who had been attacked by a rabid dog two days before. The vaccine worked, and by 1886 Pasteur was treating hundreds of people. The vaccine had been tested on dogs but not humans. Pasteur could have been prosecuted for vaccinating people because he was not a licensed physician.
1897
Giuseppe Sanarelli (1864-1940) injects bacteria into five patients without their consent to test his hypothesis that the bacteria cause yellow fever. The patients all developed yellow fever symptoms and three died. However, the hypothesis later was proven false by Walter Reed. Many physicians sharply criticized Sanarelli’s experiments as being immoral.
1900
U.S. Army physician Walter Reed (1851-1902) conducts medical experiments in Cuba in the early 1900s which show that Aedes aegypti mosquitos carry yellow fever. Yellow fever had been a major public health problem in the Caribbean and Central America that killed thousands of people each year and threatened commerce and U.S. military operations. Reed asked participants who had never had yellow fever to allow themselves to be bitten by mosquitos that had fed on patients with yellow fever, or to be injected with blood from a yellow fever patient. The participants signed informed consent forms (believed to be the first know use of this documentation) stating that they understood the risks of the experiment, including the possibility of death. The forms were translated into Spanish. Participants received $100 in gold and additional $100 and free medical care if they contracted yellow fever. Family members of participants who died also received $100. Two of Reed’s collaborators, James Carroll and Jesse Lazear, volunteered for the experiment. They both developed yellow fever and Lazear died. Reed had been planning to volunteer for the experiment, but Carroll talked him out of it due to his age (the disease was more deadly for patients over 40 years old, such as Reed). A total of 33 volunteers participated in the experiment, including 18 Americans (2 civilians and 16 soldiers) and 15 Spanish immigrants. Six people died from yellow fever. The surviving military personnel received medals and government pensions, and the Army’s Medical Center in Washington, DC was named after Reed.
1909
Robert Millikan (1868-1953) performs oil drop experiments to determine the charge of an electron. Millikan received a Nobel Prize for this research in 1923. Historians and journalists who studied Millikan’s notebooks discovered that he did not report 33 out of 149 oil drop observations that he had marked as “fair” or “poor.” Millikan also did not name his student, Harvey Fletcher, as an author on the paper that reported the results of these experiments, even though Fletcher made important contributions to the design of these experiments, such as suggesting that Millikan use oil droplets instead of water droplets.
1912
Museum curator Charles Dawson discovers a skull in at Piltdown gravel bed near Surrey, U.K. It was thought to be the fossilized remains of a species in between humans and apes (i.e., “a missing link”). A controversy surrounded the skull for decades and many scientists believed it to be fake. Chemical analyses performed in 1953 confirmed these suspicions by showing that the skull is a combination of a human skull and orangutan jaw, which had been treated with chemicals to make them appear old. The identity of the forger is still unknown, though most historians suspect Dawson.
1925
The University of Wisconsin establishes the Wisconsin Alumni Foundation (WARF), an independent organization that manages intellectual property (e.g. patents) and investments owned by the university and supports scientific innovation and discovery on campus. At that time, few universities owned or managed patents. WARF helps Harry Steenbock develop his invention for fortifying fats with vitamin D.
1932-1972
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, begins in 1932. The study investigated the effects of untreated syphilis in 400 African American men from the Tuskegee, Alabama area. The researchers did not tell the subjects that they were in an experiment. Most subjects who attended the Tuskegee clinic thought they were getting treatment for "bad blood." Researchers withheld treatment for the disease from participants even when penicillin, an effective form of treatment, became widely available in the 1950s. The study ended in 1972, after a news story from the Associated Press alerted the public and Congress to the ethical problems with the research. The U.S. government settled a lawsuit brought by the participants and their families. In 1997, President William Clinton issued an official apology on behalf of the U.S. government to surviving participants and their families.
1932-1945
Japanese scientists working at Unit 731 performed morally abominable experiments on thousands of Chinese prisoners or war, including biological and chemical weapons experiments, vaccination experiments, and wound-healing and surgical studies, including vivisections. The U.S. government agreed to not prosecute the scientists for war crimes in exchange for data from the biological and chemical weapons research. Unit 731 of the Imperial Japanese Army also conducted research on Korean prisoners/civilians (such as Dong Ju Yoon (arguably the most famous modern era Korean poet) and Chung-Chun Lee (a Korean national hero and freedom fighter)), as well as Mongolians, Manchurians (separate from Chinese), and Russians.
1939-45
German scientists conducted morally abominable research on concentration camp prisoners, including experiments that exposed subjects to freezing temperatures, low air pressures, ionizing radiation and electricity, and infectious diseases; as well as wound-healing and surgical studies. The Allies prosecuted the German scientists for war crimes in the Nuremberg Trials. The Nuremberg Code provided the legal basis for prosecuting the scientists.
1940
Two German refugee scientists, Frisch and R.E. Peierls, warn the U.S. about Germany's nuclear weapons program. Physicist Albert Einstein (1879-1955) sends a letter to President Roosevelt warning him about the threat posed by Germany. The letter, which was written by Leó Szilárd in consultation with Edward Teller and Eugene Wigner, was signed by Einstein. The letter suggested that the U.S. should develop a nuclear weapons program.
1942-1945
The U.S. conducts the $2 billion ($34 billion in 2023 dollars) Manhattan Project to develop an atomic bomb. General Leslie Groves directs the Project and physicist Robert Oppenheimer (1904-1967) oversees the scientific work. Other notable scientists who worked on the project included Hans Beth (1906-2005), Enrico Fermi (1901-1954), Richard Feynman (1918-1988), and Edward Teller (1908-2003). At the time, the negative health effects of radiation were poorly not well-understood and the scientists working on the project were exposed to extremely large doses of radiation through the handling of plutonium and uranium. The first atomic bomb was detonated in the Jornada del Muerto Desert in New Mexico on July 16, 1945.
1944-1980s
The U.S. Department of Energy sponsors secret research on the effects of radiation on human beings. Subjects were not told that they were participating in the experiments. Experiments were conducted on cancer patients, pregnant women, and military personnel. These experiments included in total several hundred releases of radiation on human subjects. They were often done to test weaponry or safety equipment. These experiments were investigated decades after they happened by the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, which was created in 1994 by President William Clinton after he declassified documents pertaining to this research. This committee also discovered that at least several hundred Uranium miners died of lung cancer, partly as a result of the government failing to properly ventilate the mines.
1945
The U.S. drops atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan on August 6 and 9, killing an estimated 200,000 civilians. After the bombs were dropped, Oppenheimer and other scientists led the “atoms for peace” movement.
1945
Engineer and Head of the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development Vannevar Bush (1890-1974) writes the report Science: The Endless Frontier for President Franklin Roosevelt. The report argues for a major increase in government spending on science and defends the ideal of a self-governing scientific community free from significant public oversight. It advocates for investment in science and technology as a means of promoting national security and economic development.
1946
The U.S. Congress passes a law transferring atomic energy development from military to civilian control. The law leads to the formation of the Atomic Energy Commission, which promotes peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
1947
The Nuremberg Code, the first international code of ethics for research on human subjects, is adopted. The Code requires that research cannot take place without the subject’s consent; that research must be scientifically well-designed and socially valuable; and that research must minimize harm and suffering and should not involve a significant risk of death or disabling injury.
1947
Norbert Wiener, the founder of cybernetics, published an article in the Atlantic Monthly titled "A Scientist Rebels" in which he refuses to conduct research for the military.
1948
Alfred Kinsey (1894-1956) publishes Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Five years later, he publishes Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. These books were very controversial, because they examined topics which were regarded as taboo at the time, such as masturbation, orgasm, intercourse, promiscuity, and sexual fantasies. Kinsey could not obtain public funding for the research, so he funded it privately through the Kinsey Institute.
1949
The Soviet Union tests an atomic bomb, marking the beginning of the Cold War.
1950s-1960s
Believing that the Soviet Union had discovered a form of mind control, the CIA starts a covert program called MKUltra with the purpose of developing mind control techniques that could be used for interrogation or brainwashing. MKultra researchers subjected unwitting participants to psychological torture involving the administration of electric shocks and the psychoactive drug LSD. The program also involved hiring Nazi and Japanese doctors who had performed unethical experiments on living human subjects. The MKUltra program came to the public’s attention during Congressional Hearings held from 1975 to 1977.
1953
James Watson (1928-) and Francis Crick (1916-2004) propose a model for the structure of DNA, for which they eventually would share the Nobel Prize with Maurice Wilkins (1916-2004) in 1962. An X-ray diffraction photo of DNA (known as Photo 51) generated by Rosalind Franklin (1920-1958) was crucial for verifying Watson and Crick’s model. Wilkins showed Watson and Crick Photo 51 without Franklin’s permission. Watson/Crick and Wilkins/Franklin published their papers in the same issue of the journal Nature in 1953. Neither Wilkins nor Franklin were named as authors on the Watson/Crick paper (and vice versa). Franklin was not awarded the Nobel Prize because she died in 1958 from ovarian cancer at age 37, and the prize is not awarded posthumously.
1954
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission revokes Oppenheimer’s security clearance based on its determination that, due to his associations with members of the Communist Party, he could not be trusted to be loyal to the U.S. and was a security risk.
1956-1980
Saul Krugman, Joan Giles and other researchers conduct hepatitis experiments on mentally disabled children at The Willowbrook State School. They intentionally infected subjects with a mild form of hepatitis for the purpose of developing a vaccine to a stronger form of the disease, which was endemic at Willowbrook. Children were infected both by injecting them with the hepatitis and making them drink chocolate milk mixed with the feces of people infected with the disease. The experiments were approved by the New York Department of Health. The Willowbrook State School itself was a center of controversy for abuse and neglect of children. In a speech to Congress in 1965, Robert F. Kennedy called the school a “snake pit.”
1957
The Soviets launch Sputnik, the first satellite to orbit the Earth, which triggers the U.S. government to increase its investments in science and technology to avoid falling behind in the space race.
1957-1962
In 1957, thalidomide is marketed in West Germany as medication to treat morning sickness during pregnancy. About 10,000 infants, mostly in West Germany, are born with severe birth defects as a result of exposure to this drug. 2,000 children die from thalidomide exposure. In 1960, Frances Kathleen Oldham Kelsey (1914-2015), a drug reviewer for the FDA, refused to approve the drug. Soon, countries around the world ban the drug. Kelsey is awarded the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service in 1962.
1961
President John F. Kennedy commits the U.S. to the goal of putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade.
1961
Rachel Carson (1907-1964) publishes Silent Spring, which alerts people to the harmful environmental and public health effects pesticides, especially DDT. Her book launches the environmentalist movement.
1961-1962
Stanley Milgram (1933-1984) conducts his "electric shock" experiments, which proved that people are willing to do things that they consider to be morally wrong when following the orders of an authority. The experiments, which had several variations, included a learner, a teacher, and a researcher. The learner was connected to electrodes. If the learner gave an incorrect response to a question, the researcher would instruct the teacher to push a button on a machine to give the learner an electric shock. Teachers were willing to do this even when the dial on the machine was turned up to “dangerous” levels and the learner were crying out in pain and asking for the experiments to stop. In reality, no shocks were given. The purpose of the experiments was to test subjects’ willingness to obey an authority figure. Since then, other researchers who have repeated these experiments have obtained similar results.
1963
Due to fear of the long-lasting impacts of nuclear fallout, dozens of countries signed the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which bans nuclear weapons tests, except those conducted underground.
1963
The Public Health Service publishes its Guide to the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, which describes standards, practices, and procedures for conducting experiments with animals and protecting their welfare. The Guide has been revised eight times, most recently in 2011.
1964
The World Medical Association publishes Declaration at Helsinki, Ethical Principles for Research Involving Human Subjects. The Helsinki Declaration has been revised numerous times, most recently in 2013.
1964
The U.S. Surgeon General's office issues its first of several reports on health problems related to smoking.
1965
The Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AALAC) is established as an organization that accredits institutions which perform experiments on laboratory animals. AAALAC evaluates organizations based on their compliance with standards, practices, and procedures described in the Public Health Service’s Guide to the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.
1966
Henry Beecher (1904-1976) publishes an article in the New England Journal of Medicine describing 22 unethical studies reported in the medical literature. Beecher selected these studies from 186 he had found in medical journals and said they represented a pattern of unethical behavior. Though Beecher did not include the names of researchers and institutions in his article, it is likely that Example 16 was the Willowbrook Experiment and Examples 1-3 were examples of methodologies that had been used in the Tuskegee Study.
1966
The U.S. Congress adopts the Animal Welfare Act, which protect animals used in research, excluding rodents and birds. The Act was adopted partly due to the fear of dogs being stolen to be used in research. During the 1960s, various states adopt or revise animal cruelty laws that protect agricultural, domestic, wild, and laboratory animals.
1968
The United States, Soviet Union, and United Kingdom sign the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons and agree to pursue nuclear disarmament policies. Today, 190 countries have signed the treaty. Notably, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea are not parties to the treaty.
1969
The U.S. lands the first man on the moon, Neil Armstrong.
1972
The U.S., Soviet Union, and dozens of other countries sign the Biological Weapons and Toxins Convention, which prohibits the development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling and use of biological and toxin weapons but allows research on defensive countermeasures to biological weapons and toxins. However, the Soviet Union continues to conduct secret research on offensive bioweapons during the 1970s and 1980s.
1973
After conducting hearings on unethical research involving human subjects, including the Tuskegee study, Congress passes the National Research Act in 1973, which President Nixon signs in 1974. The Act authorizes federal agencies (e.g., the NIH and FDA) to develop human research regulations. The regulations require institutions to form Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to review and oversee research with human subjects.
1973-1975
Leaders of the emerging field of recombinant DNA research meet in Asilomar, CA to discuss biosafety issues and develop biosafety protocols. In 1974, Paul Berg and other top scientists call for a voluntary moratorium on recombinant DNA experiments until these risks are better understood and appropriate safety protocols are in place. In 1975, Berg and others published a paper in describing some biosafety principles and recommendations for recombinant DNA experiments.
1974
The NIH forms the recombinant DNA advisory committee (RAC) to provide guidance for NIH-funded recombinant DNA experiments. In 1976, the RAC publishes guidelines for recombinant DNA research, which include the requirement that funded institutions establish institutional biosafety committees (IBCs) to oversee recombinant DNA experiments. Although not required by NIH policy, most IBCs also oversee other types of dangerous biological research, such as research involving the collection and storage of deadly pathogens.
1974
William Summerlin admits to fabricating data by using a marker to make black spots on white mice at Sloan Kettering Cancer Institute. He was developing a technique for transplanting skin grafts.
1974
Monsanto Corporation and Harvard University reach a deal for the first major corporate investment in a university.
1975
Peter Singer publishes Animal Liberation, which provides a philosophical defense of the animal rights movement. Singer argues that all sentient beings have inherent moral value and that to think otherwise is a form of bias which he calls speciesism, i.e., the view that human beings are inherently superior to other forms of life. Singer argues that many socially accepted ways of using animals, such as for food, sport, or experimentation, are unethical.
1975
Harvard entomologist E.O. Wilson (1929-2021) publishes Sociobiology, which reignites the centuries-old "nature vs. nurture" debate. His book proposes biological and evolutionary explanations of human behavior and culture.
1978
The Animal Liberation Front, a radical animal rights group, is formed. This group has engaged in tactics involving raiding labs, destroying lab equipment, releasing animals into the wild, and threatening scientists. The ALF and related groups have caused millions of dollars in property damage.
1978
Louise Brown, the world’s first baby conceived by in vitro fertilization, is born in the U.K., alive and healthy.
1979
The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects in Biomedical and Behavioral Research publishes The Belmont Report: Principles of Ethical Research on Human Subjects. The Report articulates three ethical principles for research with human subjects, respects for persons, beneficence, and justice, and provides a conceptual foundation for a major revision of the U.S. federal research regulations in 1981.
1980
Congress passes the Bayh-Dole Act, which allows researchers to patent inventions developed with government funds; the Act is amended by the Technology Transfer Act in 1986.
1980
In Diamond v. Chakrabarty, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that a genetically modified bacterium can be patented because it is the product of human ingenuity. This sets a precedent for patents on other life forms and helps to establish solid intellectual property protection for the new biotechnology industry.
1981
The Whitehead Institute is established at MIT, which represents a major private investment in a university. Other universities follow this example and begin forming complex partnerships with industry.
1981
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (a precursor to the Department of Health and Human Services, DHHS) conducts major revisions of the federal human research regulations for human subjects research.
1981
John Darsee, a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard, is accused of fabricating data. 17 of his papers were retracted.
1982
William Broad and Nicholas Wade publish Betrayers of Truth. The book claims that there is more misconduct in science than researchers want to admit and suggests that famous scientists, including Isaac Newton, Gregor Mendel, and Robert Millikan were not completely honest with their data. Their book helps to launch an era of "fraud busting" in science.
1984
Members of a religious cult led by Bhagwan Rajneesh sprayed salmonella bacteria on salad bars in ten restaurants in The Dalles, Oregon in an effort to make people too sick to vote in Wasco County elections so that the cult’s candidates would win. 751 people developed salmonella poisoning, but fortunately no one died. This is the first known bioterrorist attack on U.S. soil.
1984-1993
After collaborating with Robert Gallo on isolating HIV from biological samples provided by AIDS patients, Luc Montagnier accuses Gallo of misappropriating an HIV strain and accuses him of research misconduct, for which Gallo is found innocent. Gallo and Montagnier also have a dispute about who should be credited with discovering HIV and who can patent a test for the virus. The U.S. and French governments reach an agreement to settle the controversy.
1985
The Animal Welfare Act is amended to create the Animal Welfare Information Center, the purpose of which is to improve the public’s access to animal welfare information and to develop more humane methods of animal research. The amendment also requires that government funded animal research be reviewed by Animal Care and Use Committees.
1986
Aerospace engineer Roger Boisjoly warns NASA about possible O-ring failure during the Space Shuttel Challenger launch, due to cold weather. The O-rings, which are made of rubber, are designed to function properly at temperatures as low as 32° F (0° C), but the predicted air temperature at launch time was 26° F (−3° C). Boisjoly meets with NASA officials to discuss the problem, but they decide to go ahead with the launch, and the Challenger explodes, killing all seven crew members. A special committee investigating the accident determines that the O-rings did not seal properly due to the cold weather, which allowed rocket fuels to leak and explode. Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feyman plays a key role in convincing the committee that the explosion was due to O-ring failure.
1987
A NIMH panel concludes that Steven Breuning fabricated and falsified data in 24 paper. Breuning is convicted of defrauding the federal government in 1988.
1987
Martin Luther King is accused of plagiarizing his Ph.D. dissertation.
1987-1996
Margot O'Toole, a post-doctoral student at the Whitehead Institute, has some questions about data in a paper authored by six of her colleagues and published in the journal Cell in 1986. She asks to examine Thereza-Imanishi-Kari's lab notebooks, which seem to be inconsistent with published results. She accuses Imanishi-Kari of fabricating and falsifying data. The ensuing investigation leads to inquiries by MIT and Tufts as well as the NIH and a Congressional committee chaired by Rep. John Dingell. Nobel Prize winner David Baltimore is one of the co-authors on the disputed paper. Although he was not accused of misconduct, Baltimore resigns as President of Rockefeller University. He described the investigation, which was covered by the New York Times, as a "witch hunt." An appeals board at the DHHS eventually exonerated Imanishi-Kari, who admitted only to poor record keeping.
1988
Harvard and Dow Chemical patent a genetically engineered mouse used to study cancer.
1989
The PHS forms two agencies, the Office of Scientific Integrity and the Office of Scientific Integrity Review to investigate scientific misconduct and provide information and support for universities. It also amends its definition of misconduct. The two agencies are reorganized in 1992 as the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).
1989
The NIH requires that all graduate students on training grants receive education in responsible conduct of research. In the ensuing years, these requirements are expanded to include post-doctoral trainees and intramural researchers. NSF adopted RCR training requirements in 2010.
1989
Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann hold a press conference at the University of Utah to announce that they have discovered a way to produce nuclear fusion at room temperatures. After dozens of labs across the world fail to reproduce their results, they are accused of fraud, sloppiness, and self-deception.
1989
The National Academy of Science (NAS) publishes On Being A Scientist (revised in 1994 and 2009), which is a free, short book on research ethics for scientists in training.
1990
The U.S. launches the Human Genome Project, a $20 billion effort to map and sequence the human genome.
1990
W. French Anderson begins the first human gene therapy clinical trial on patients with ADA deficiency, a genetic disease that affects the immune system.
1990
In Moore v. Regents of the University of California, the California Supreme Court rules that researchers have intellectual property rights in a cell line derived from Moore's tissue, but that Moore did not have any property rights in his own tissue. The Court also rules that the researchers violated Moore's right to informed consent by not disclosing their commercial interests in his tissue sample to him. Most courts have followed this ruling by holding that patients relinquish their property rights to tissues when they donate them to research or when they are leftover (“abandoned”) during surgery of medical procedures.
1990
Congress investigates conflicts of interest (COIs) involving Pharmatec and the University of Florida and other COIs in biomedical research.
1990s-present
Europeans oppose the introduction of genetically manipulated foods and crops. Consumers in the U.S. are more receptive to GM plants and animals. After banning GM crops in 1998, the European Union allows the cultivation of GM crops but requires GM foods to be labeled as such. In 2022, the U.S. mandates the labelling of GM foods.
1991
U.S. federal agencies revise their human research regulations. All U.S. government agencies now accept one basic regulatory framework, known as "the Common Rule" (45 CFR 46).
1992
NAS publishes Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process. TThe book estimates the incidence of misconduct, discusses some of the causes of misconduct, proposes a definition of research misconduct, and recommends some strategies for preventing misconduct and promoting research integrity.
1992
The Public Health Service (PHS), which funds NIH research, consolidates the Office of Scientific Integrity and the Office of Scientific Integrity Review into the Office of Research Integrity (ORI). ORI develops policies, procedures, policies, and regulations for preventing, reporting, and investing research misconduct; reviews and monitors misconduct investigations conducted by PHS-funded institutions and makes recommendations concerning misconduct findings and administrative; provides technical assistance to institutions that are responding to misconduct allegations; and supports research, conferences, and education on the responsible conduct of research.
1993
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals the U.S. Supreme Court rules that federal judges serve as the gatekeepers for admitting scientific testimony in court and that they can use a variety of criteria, including testability, reliability, peer review, and general acceptance for determining whether testimony is scientific. The intent of the ruling was to allow cutting-edge science that might not be generally accepted to be admitted as evidence in the courtroom. Prior to Daubert, federal judges followed the general acceptance standard articulated in Frye vs. United States (1923). State courts follow either the Daubert or Frye standard, depending on the jurisdiction.
1993
Fertility researchers successfully clone human embryos.
1994
Harvard psychologist Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray publish The Bell Curve, a controversial book that reignites the centuries old debate about biology, race, and intelligence.
1994
Roger Poisson admits to fabricating and falsifying patient data in NIH-funded breast cancer clinical trials in order allow his patients to qualify for enrollment and have access to experimental treatments.
1994
The NIH applies for patents on thousands of gene fragments in order to undercut private efforts to patent gene fragments. The Patent Office rejects the NIH's applications because they did not clearly define a practical use for the fragments.
1994-1995
A Commission chair by Kenneth Ryan, convened by NIH, holds meetings on defining, investigating, and preventing scientific misconduct.
1994
The Clinton Administration declassifies information about secret human radiation experiments conducted from the 1940s-1980s and issues an apology.
1994
Two scientists who worked at Philip Morris, Victor DeNobel and Paul Mele, testify before Congress about secret research on the addictive properties of nicotine. If the research had been made public, the FDA or Congress might have taken additional steps to regulate tobacco as a drug. Many states and individuals brought litigation against tobacco companies, which led to a $206 billion settlement between tobacco companies and 46 states. The scientific community also publishes more data on the dangers of second-hand smoke.
1995
Boots Pharmaceuticals pressures Betty Dong to withdraw a paper from publication in JAMA showing that its drug, Synthroid, is not more effective than generic equivalents at treating hypothyroidism.
1995-2005
Dozens of studies are published in biomedical journals which provide data on the relationship between the source of research funding and financial interests and the outcomes of research studies in the biomedical sciences, and the close relationship between academic researchers and the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.
1995
The NIH and NSF revise their conflict of interest policies.
1995
Scientists and defense analysts become concerned about the use of chemical or biological weapons by a terrorist group after Aum Shinrikyo, a Japanese doomsday cult, releases sarin gas in a Tokyo subway, killing 12 people and sending 5,500 to hospitals. The group also attempted (unsuccessfully) to spray anthrax spores over Tokyo. In 1998, terrorism experts warn about the use of biological or chemical weapons by Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.
1995
Over 200 religious leaders, led by biotechnology critic Jeremy Rifkin, protest the patenting of plants, animals, and human body parts in Washington, D.C.
1996
Dolly, the world's first cloned sheep, is born; her birth is announced in 1997. Several European nations ban human cloning. Congress considers a bill to ban all human cloning but decides not to after scientists argue that the bill would undermine biomedical research.
1996
Physics professor Alan Sokal submits a paper titled “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity” to Social Text, a cultural studies journal. Sokal filled the paper with errors of fact and reasoning and outright nonsense that any well-qualified physicist would be able to spot in order test the rigor of the journal’s peer review process. The paper proposed that quantum gravity does not exist independently of human beings and is a social and linguistic construct. After the paper was accepted for publication, Sokal revealed the hoax.
1997
The ICMJE, representing over 400 biomedical journals, revises its authorship guidelines. The ICMJE recommends that to be an author on a scientific paper one must make a substantial contribution to research design, data collection, data analysis, or data interpretation and write the paper or critically revise and review it.
1997
In an article published in New England Journal of Medicine,Peter Lurie and Sidney Wolfe accuse the NIH, WHO, UN and CDC of designing and conducting unethical clinical on the prevention of mother-child transmission of HIV in developing countries, because the trials include placebo control groups even though the experimental treatment had been tested in western nations and proven effective. Representatives NIH Director Harold Varmus and CDC Director David Satcher argue that placebo control groups were needed to ensure scientific rigor because the dose of the experimental treatment being tested in the trials was much lower than the dose that had been proven effective. The dispute spurs a closer examination of international research ethics codes and guidelines.
1998
Scientists perfect methods for growing human embryonic stem cells. Some countries ban the research; others promote it.
1998
Craig Venter forms Celera Genomics and begins a private effort to sequence the human genome, using dozens of automated sequencing machines.
1998-1999
Apotex forces Nancy Olivieri, a clinical researcher at the University of Toronto, to withdraw a paper that exposes safety concerns about its drug deferiprone, which is used to treat thalassemia. The company tries to discredit Olivieri and have her fired.
1999
Eighteen-year-old Jessie Gelsinger dies in a human gene therapy experiment at the University of Pennsylvania. The event triggers heightened scrutiny of conflicts of interest in human subjects research, including institutional conflicts of interest. Penn settles a lawsuit brought by the Gelsinger family for an undisclosed amount of money.
1999-2009
Human research lawsuits increase dramatically. Alan Milstein, from the law firm Sherman, Silverstein, Kohl, Rose & Podolsky, P.A., instigates 13 lawsuits against researchers, universities, pharmaceutical companies, and Institutional Review Board members.
1999
The U.S. NIH and OHRP require all people conducting or overseeing human subjects research to have training in research ethics.
2000
The U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy finalizes a federal definition of misconduct as "fabrication, falsification or plagiarism" but not "honest error or differences of opinion.” Misconduct must be committed knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly.
2000
ORI proposes mandatory training in responsible conduct of research (RCR) for all researchers on PHS grants, including junior senior investigators, students, and technicians. Several scientific associations and universities oppose the policy as an unnecessary and un-funded mandate. The Bush Administration suspends the ORI proposal in 2001 on the grounds that the agency failed to follow proper procedures for proposing new government regulations. Many research institutions voluntarily expand their RCR training programs.
2001
Celera and the Human Genome Project both finish 99% complete drafts of the human genome and publish their results in Science and Nature.
2001
Congress debates legislation on human cloning but does not adopt any laws.
2001
Several journals, including Nature and JAMA, experiment with requiring authors to describe their responsibilities (e.g., designed experiments, collected data, analyzed data, wrote a first draft of the paper, etc.) when publishing research. Today, many journals follow this policy.
2001
The Bush Administration announces that the NIH will only fund human embryonic stem cell research on approximately 64 cell lines created from leftover human embryos.
2001
In the fall of 2001, Bruce Ivins, a biodefense researcher at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Fort Detrick, allegedly sent letters laced with anthrax spores to Senators Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy and several members of the media. The attacks, which killed five people, sickened 17, and exposed dozens of postal workers to anthrax spores, created tremendous anxiety in a nation already reeling from the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s lengthy and costly investigation eventually named Ivins as the suspect in 2008, but Ivins committed suicide before he could be apprehended and brought to trial.
2002
Bell Labs determines that Jan Hendrick Schön, a rising star working in condensed matter physics and nanotechnology who published dozens of articles in a short period of time in prestigious journals, had fabricated and falsified data. 28 papers authored by Schön were retracted.
2002
The President's Council on Bioethics recommends that the U.S. ban reproductive cloning and enact a moratorium on research cloning.
2002
Historian Stephen Ambrose is accused of plagiarism.
2002
The NAS publishes Integrity in Scientific Research, which recommends that universities develop programs for education in responsible conduct of research (RCR) as well as policies and procedures to deal with research ethics.
2002
North Korea declares that it has a secret nuclear weapons program and warns that it has other "more powerful" weapons.
2002-2004
Scientists publish several papers in prominent journals with direct implications for bioterrorism. A paper published in the Journal of Virology described a method for genetically engineering a form of mousepox virus that is much deadlier than the naturally occurring strain. A paper published in Science showed how to make the poliovirus by obtaining supplies from a mail-order company. A paper published in PNAS develop a mathematical model for showing how many people would be killed by infecting the U.S. milk supply with botulinum toxin. In 2003, the American Society for Microbiology (ASM), the National Academy of Sciences, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies held a meeting to discuss the censorship biological research that poses security risks. Journals agree to self-censor some research.
2003
The U.S. invades Iraq with the stated purpose of eliminating its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs. The U.S. found evidence of weapons programs but no actual weapons.
2004
The EPA suspends the CHEERS study due to criticism from advocacy groups and members of Congress, who claimed that the study was intentionally exposing children to pesticides and targeting minority groups. The EPA revised its human subjects rules in response to a Congressional mandate to strengthen protections for children and pregnant or nursing women.
2004
Merck withdraws its drug Vioxx from the market, due to safety and liability issues. As many as 50,000 people had a heart attack or stroke while take the drug, and thousands sued the company. As early as 2001, Merck scientists suspected that Vioxx could increase the cardiovascular risks, but researchers funded by Merck did not publish some of the data that would support these suspicions, even though they reported it to the FDA. In 2001, the FDA warned Merck that it had misrepresented Vioxx’s safety profile to the public and in 2002 it issued a black box warning for the drug. A systematic review of antidepressant medications known as selective serotonin uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) found that some of these drugs increase the risks of suicide in adolescents and children. The review included data from the U.K.’s Committee on Safety in Medicines, which had not been previously published. Patients, parents, researchers, and policymakers accused companies intentionally hiding this data from the public, and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer sued Glaxo for fraud. As a result of these problems related to data suppression, government agencies (including the FDA) and journals now require clinical trials to be registered on a publicly available website. Registration includes important information about the studies, including research design, interventions, and methods; research sites and personnel; contact information; and research results (but not raw data).
2005
In response to criticism from Congress, the NIH revises its conflict of interest rules for employees. The rules place restrictions on ownership of stock in substantially affected organizations (such as pharmaceutical or biotech companies) by employees and prohibit employees with consulting with industry for pay.
2005
Seoul University research Woo Suk Hwang admits to fabricating data in two papers published in the journal Science. In the papers, Hwang claimed that he had used nuclear transfer techniques to develop patient-specific human embryonic stem cells.
2005
University of Vermont researcher Eric Poehlman admits to fabricating or falsifying data in 15 federal grants and 17 publications. Poehlman served a year and day in federal prison and agreed to pay the U.S. government $180,000 in fines.
2005
In response to recommendations from a National Research Council report titled “Biotechnology in the Age of Terrorism,” the Department of Health and Human Services establishes the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) to provide advice and guidance to federal agencies, scientists, and journals concerning oversight and public of research in biotechnology or biomedicine which can be readily applied to cause significant harm to public health, agriculture, the economy, or national security (i.e. “dual use” research).
2009
Someone hacked into the email server at the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and posted on the internet thousands of emails exchanged between climate change researchers at the CRU and researchers around the world. The emails showed that the researchers refused to share data and computer codes with climate change skeptics, who called the incident "climategate." The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which relies heavily on data and models from CRU researchers, vowed to promote greater openness in climate research.
2009
The Obama Administration announces it will significantly expand NIH funding of human embryonic stem cell research which had been restricted under the Bush Administration.
2010
The National Science Foundation (NSF) announces RCR training requirements for funded investigators, students, and trainees. The NIH expands and strengthens its RCR training requirements.
2010
While doing research on the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, Susan Reverby, Professor of Women’s Studies at Wellesley College, uncovered documents concerning unethical research experiments on human subjects conducted by the U.S. government in Guatemala from 1946 to 1948. The research involved intentionally infecting over 1300 subjects with syphilis to test the effectiveness of penicillin in preventing this disease. Only 700 subjects were given penicillin and 83 died as a result of the study. The subjects were not informed that they were participating in an experiment.
2010
Lancet retracts a paper, published in 1998 by Andrew Wakefield and colleagues, linking the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine to autism. Lancet retracted the paper after an investigation by journalist Brian Deer found that Wakefield had not disclosed a significant financial interest and had not obtained ethics board approval for the study. Wakefield’s research had been supported by a law firm that was suing vaccine manufacturers, and lawyer for the firm had helped Wakefield recruit patients. Wakefield did not disclose his relationship to the law firm in the 1998 paper. In 2010, the U.K.’s General Medical Council revoked Wakefield’s license to practice medicine. In 2011, Deer published an article in the British Medical Journal accusing Wakefield of fabricating and falsifying data in the 1998 paper. Deer based his findings on discrepancies between data reported in the paper and the data from patient records.
2010
Jeffrey Beale publishes a list of what he calls “predatory journals.” Predatory journals are profit-driven journals that charge high fees for open access publication, promise rapid publication, and have poor (or nonexistent) standards for peer review. Beale later withdraws his list due to legal pressure from journals.
2010
Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus launch Retraction Watch, a blog that post retractions of scientific papers and articles related to research integrity.
2010
The World Conference on Research Integrity releases the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity, a code of ethics for scientists in various disciplines.
2011
The NIH and NSF revise their conflict of interest rules for funded research.
2011
Journalist Rebecca Skloot publishes a widely-acclaimed book about Henrietta Lacks, an African American woman who provided the tissue for a widely-used cell line known as HeLa (an abbreviation of her name). In 1951, Lacks underwent treatment for cervical cancer at Johns Hopkins Hospital and died later that year. Researchers discovered that they were able to culture the cells from Lacks’ tumor and keep them alive, which was the first time that scientists had been able to grow a human cell line. HeLa cells have been used in thousands of laboratories around the world in biomedical experiments. Skloot was interested in finding out where the HeLa cell line came from, and she discovered that it came from Henrietta Lacks. Skloot interviewed Lacks’ family and learned that researchers had grown her tumor cells without her consent and without providing the family any compensation, which was a common practice at that time. Skloot decided to donate profits from her book to a private foundation she started whose purpose is to raise awareness about the role the human biological materials play in research and issues related to consent and ownership. In 2013, the NIH reached an agreement with Lacks’ family concerning access to genomic data from NIH-owned HeLa cell lines. The agreement gives the family control over access to the data and acknowledgment in scientific papers. In 2021, the Lacks family sued Thermo Fisher Scientific, a company that commercialized the the cell line. The lawsuit claims that the company unjustly profited from Lacks' tissue without her consent.
2011-2013
Several authors publish papers documenting a dramatic increase in the number of retracted papers since 2001 and that the majority of the retractions are due to research misconduct.
2012
Two papers embroiled in controversy were published in Science and Nature after months of debate about their implications for bioterrorism. The papers reported the results of NIH-sponsored research conducted by a team working in the Netherlands, led by Ron Fouchier, and a team working at the University of Wisconsin, led by Yoshihiro Kawaoka. The researchers were able to genetically modify an H5N1 avian flu virus so that it can be transmitted by air between mammals. Currently, avian flu can only be contracted through direct contact with birds. The virus is highly lethal, with a case fatality rate of over 50%. Over 300 people have died from the virus since 1997. The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) initially recommend that the papers be published in redacted form, with key details removed and only made available to responsible scientists, so the terrorists or others could not use the information to make deadly bioweapons. However, the NSABB changed its mind and recommended full publication of both papers after learning more about the value of the research for public health (e.g., monitoring of bird populations, vaccine development), biosafety measures for containing the virus, how difficult it would be for terrorists to replicate the work, and legal problems with redacted publication.
2013
The NIH launches the reproducibility initiative in response to published reports of problems with the reproducibility of biomedical and social/behavioral research. The initiative includes guidelines and educational materials for promoting rigor, transparency, openness, and reproducibility in research and reducing bias and error. Scientific journals also develop policies designed to promote reproducibility.
2013
In Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that isolated and purified DNA cannot be patented. Only DNA that has been modified by human beings can be patented. The ruling invalidates Myriad’s patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and creates uncertainty concerning the legal validity of other types of patents on isolated and purified chemicals, such as chemicals derived from medicinal plants.
2014
Haruko Obokata, a biochemist at the RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology in Kobe, Japan, and coauthors published two high-profile papers in Nature describing a method for converting adult spleen cells in mice into pluripotent stem cells by means of chemical stimulation and physical stress. Several weeks after the papers were published, researchers at the RIKEN Center were unable to reproduce the results and they accused Obokata, who was the lead author on the papers, of misconduct. The journal retracted both papers in July after an investigation by the RIKEN center found that Obokata had fabricated and falsified data. Later that year, Obokata’s advisor, Yoshiki Sasai, committed suicide by hanging himself.
2014
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) announces a pause on new funding of gain of function (GOF) genetic manipulation experiments involving SARS, MERS, and other potential pandemic pathogens (PPPs) and asks the NSABB to review the issues and make policy recommendations. GOF research is research that attempts to genetically manipulate a pathogen to enable it to acquire a new function, such as increased transmissibility or virulence. The NSABB recommended that the DHHS should lift the funding pause after implementing an oversight framework that minimizes and manages the risks of GOF research with PPPs, which DHHS did in 2017.
2015
A research team led by Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina publishes a paper in Nature Medicine reporting the results of an experiment in which they used a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone to create a chimeric virus that expresses the spike protein of SHC014. The virus was able to use angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors to infect and replicate in human airway cells and caused pathogenesis in mouse cells. The authors hypothesized that coronavirus pools found in horseshoe bats maintain spike proteins that give them the capability of infecting humans and stated that there is “a potential risk of SARS-CoV re-emergence from viruses currently circulating in bat populations.” Baric’s research was funded by the NIH. Shi Zengli, the second to last author on the paper, provided the genomic sequence for the spike protein. Shi conducted similar experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Baric’s lab was Biosafety Level 3, but Shi’s was only Biosafety Level 2. The paper became embroiled in controversy in 2021 when U.S. Senator Rand Paul alleged that it violated DHHS’s funding pause on GOF research.
2016
The NIH places a temporary moratorium on funding for experiments involving human-animal chimeras while it revises existing policies that govern this research. The NIH lifted the moratorium the following year.
2017
17 federal agencies publish the Final Rule for revisions to the Common Rule, which becomes effective in 2019. The revisions clarify and expand categories are research that are exempted from the Common Rule, enhance informed consent requirements, relax the need for continuing review once a study has stop recruiting participants, and requires a single IRB be responsible for reviewing multisite research.
2017-2019
Drawing inspiration from the Sokal hoax of 1996, in 2017-2018, philosopher Peter Boghossian, mathematician James Lindsay, and social commentator Helen Pluckrose submit bogus papers to race, gender, queer, fat, and sexuality studies journals to test their peer review standards. Several of the papers were published. The authors revealed their hoax in 2019. Boghossian and Pluckrose authored a paper titled “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct,” which was published in Cogent Social Sciences. In the paper, they argued that the human penis is not an anatomical organ but a social construct whose purpose is to perpetuate toxic masculinity.
2018
In October, He Jiankui, a scientist of the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China, announces the birth of the world’s first gene edited babies, both girls. He claims that he used CRISPR-Cas 9 technology to modify the CCR5 gene to give the girls immunity to HIV. The announcement generates outrage around the world and many scientists and policymakers call for a ban on creating gene edited babies.
2020
During the COVID-19 pandemic, which killed millions of people around the world, scientists worked feverishly to conduct research that could help combat this public health crisis. To make data and results available as quickly as possible, many journals expedited their peer review process for COVID-19 submissions and scientists published articles on pre-print servers before undergoing peer review. Unfortunately, the rush to publish led to the dissemination of invalid, irreproducible, and falsified results in some cases. Dozens of COVID-19 papers had to be retracted or withdrawn. Two prominent biomedical journals, the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet, retracted papers after the editors learned that the healthcare analytics company Surgisphere, which provided the data used in the studies, was not making the raw data available to independent scientists who found inconsistencies in the data and wanted to do an audit. The journals also learned that Surgisphere did not make all the data available to the scientists who authored the papers.
2022
In early 2020, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, US scientists claimed that the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes the disease probably moved from horseshoe bats into the human population via an undetermined intermediate host species. Others believed that SARS-CoV-2 was a genetically engineered pathogen that had escaped from a laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China. The World Health Organization attempted to investigate the origins of the virus by interviewing scientists at WIV and inspecting facilities, but they were unable to obtain all the information they needed. During 2020, there was a scientific consensus that SARS-CoV-2 probably had a natural origin. Opinions began to change in 2021, however, when highly respected science writer Nicholas Wade published several articles critically examining the two competing hypotheses: natural origin vs. laboratory escape. Wade argued that there was substantial evidence supporting the laboratory escape hypothesis, because an intermediate host species had not been found despite intense searching and a key part the protein that the virus uses to infect cells, known as the furin cleavage site, does not occur in related coronaviruses. After Wade’s articles were published, many scientists started publishing papers examining evidence concerning the origins of SARS-CoV-2. However, the origins of SARS-CoV-2 remain a mystery.
2023
Neuroscientist Marc Tessier-Lavigne resigns his position as President of Stanford University after a special committee appointed by the Board of Trustees found that he failed to retract or correct 12 papers with serious flaws in a timely fashion. Tessier-Lavigne was a principal author on five of the papers, four of which included fabricated or falsified data or images. The Committee did not find that Tessier-Lavigne engaged in research misconduct. Commentators on the PubPeer website, which provides post-peer review of scientific papers, had alleged in November 2022 that digital images in the papers had been duplicated or otherwise manipulated.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 17
|
https://theaviationist.com/2020/04/17/royal-netherlands-air-force-298-squadron-celebrates-75th-anniversary-with-its-special-painted-ch-47-chinook/
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force 298 Squadron Celebrates 75th Anniversary With Its Special Painted CH-47 Chinook
|
[
"https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/viewthroughconversion/935912128/?value=0&guid=ON&script=0",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=427305193390107&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=809476641126074&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/header-the-aviationist-2021.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/CH-47-RNLAF-75-Special-678x381.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/CH-47-RNLAF-706x471.jpg",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f5260c1a4f5417527329915544c2932f?s=125&d=mm&r=g",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Airbus-achieves-world’s-first-fully-automatic-refuelling-contacts-80x60.jpeg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/KazakMiG-31Crash_10-80x60.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Banner-FIA2024_ADV-The-Aviationist_300x250.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/EA-37B-delivered-80x60.jpeg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Ukrainian-Mi-8-helicopter-80x60.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Ukraine_F-16s_vs_Cruise_Missiles_1-80x60.jpeg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Patch_TA.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/yt-home-e1625060502511.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"David Cenciotti",
"www.facebook.com",
"david.cenciotti"
] |
2020-04-17T00:00:00
|
D-666 (aka "The Beast") in special color scheme makes a tour of popular low flying area's in The Netherlands to celebrate 75th anniversary of the
|
en
|
The Aviationist
|
https://theaviationist.com/2020/04/17/royal-netherlands-air-force-298-squadron-celebrates-75th-anniversary-with-its-special-painted-ch-47-chinook/
|
D-666 (aka “The Beast”) in special color scheme makes a tour of popular low flying area’s in The Netherlands to celebrate 75th anniversary of the “Grizzly” squadron.
The 298 Squadron of the Koninklijke Luchtmacht (KLu, Royal Netherlands Air Force) was established on Apr. 16, 1945. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the social distancing restrictions established in the Netherlands, the big 75th Anniversary party planned to be held at Gilze-Rijen Air Base, home of the squadron, was cancelled. Instead, the special painted CH-47D Chinook D-666 flew a long navigation trip in the Netherlands with two 10 minutes stops in the Low flying areas where photographer and friend Marco Ferrageau had the opportunity to take the shots you can find in this post. In fact, the Dutch Government did not enforce a total lockdown and people can go outside provided they adhere to the 1.5 meter distance rule.
The aircraft sports the special livery made by graphic designer Jeroen van Veenendaal and applied to the Chinook by the painters of the 980 squadron of Main Support Base Woensdrecht. A dragonfly (the unit’s symbol) is featured on the left hand side of the rear fuselage while the Grizzly, the unit’s radio callsign, is on the right hand one. The paint was applied to the Chinook by the painters of 980 Squadron.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 6
|
https://english.defensie.nl/organisation/air-force/bases-and-units
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force bases and units
|
[
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/content/gallery/defence/channel-afbeeldingen/logos/logo-klucht-eng.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Military airfields and Royal Netherlands Air Force units are dispersed throughout the Netherlands. The Air Force also has units stationed with other Dutch Defence elements and abroad.
|
en
|
/binaries/content/assets/defence/iconen/favicon.ico
|
https://english.defensie.nl/organisation/air-force/bases-and-units
|
Aircraft and helicopters
The F-16s of the Royal Netherlands Air Force are stationed at the Leeuwarden and Volkel air bases, while Eindhoven is the home of the Air Force’s transport aircraft. Gilze-Rijen Air Base is the main hub of the Defence Helicopter Command, which also has elements based at De Kooy Naval Air Station and Deelen Military Aviation Facility.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 59
|
https://www.canada.ca/en/air-force/corporate/wings/14-wing/history.html
|
en
|
Royal Canadian Air Force
|
https://www.canada.ca/etc/designs/canada/wet-boew/assets/favicon.ico
|
https://www.canada.ca/etc/designs/canada/wet-boew/assets/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.canada.ca/etc/designs/canada/wet-boew/assets/sig-blk-en.svg",
"https://www.canada.ca/etc/designs/canada/wet-boew/assets/wmms-blk.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"History",
"Royal Canadian Air Force",
"Air Force",
"14 Wing",
"Greenwood",
"RCAF"
] | null |
[
"National Defence",
"Royal Canadian Air Force"
] | null |
The history of 14 Wing Greenwood.
|
en
|
/etc/designs/canada/wet-boew/assets/favicon.ico
|
https://www.canada.ca/en/air-force/corporate/wings/14-wing/history.html
|
14 Wing Greenwood History
Greenwood's birth can be attributed to the declaration of war by the United Kingdom on Germany on 3 September 1939. Canada followed suit on 10 September 1939.
One of the earliest and best known war plans to expand all Commonwealth Air Forces was the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan (BCATP). It was also to change the future of the tiny hamlet of Greenwood, in the center of Nova Scotia's Annapolis Valley.
The formal agreement, signed on 17 December 1939, created the largest air training system ever conceived, and provided a relatively safe training ground in Canada for mainly British, Australian, New Zealand and Canadian airmen. The BCATP's goal was the graduation of 20,000 airmen annually from 74 training units across Canada.
Greenwood was selected for its fog-free climate.
Members of No. 36 (RAF) Operational Training Unit (OTU) started moving from Scotland to Greenwood by 24 February 1942, arriving on 9 March 1942.
By 25 March 1942, six Hudson MK III Aircraft were picked up from their sister OTU at Debert. Five more arrived on 27 March, and nine the following day. In early April, five Anson Aircraft were added to the growing fleet. Aircraft continued to arrive during April and May, and the Station was soon up to Aircraft strength.
The Hudsons and Ansons had been supplied by the United Kingdom Air Ministry. In late July, six Lysander Aircraft, to be used for drogue towing, were added to the fleet. By the end of August 1942, Aircraft strength totaled 36.
Station strength. Including 194 trainees, was 1,474.
By the end of November, course loading had doubled and 80 Aircraft including: 64 Hudsons, 11 Ansons and 5 Lysanders, were on strength.
RAF Station Greenwood was not just a training unit. The station quickly found itself involved in actual combat operations.
The year 1942 was probably the peak year for successful German U-Boat activity in the Western Atlantic area.
By the end of July 1942, Allied ships had been sunk in Canadian and Newfoundland waters. The OTU's students were being trained in anti-submarine work and its instructors were veterans of the art.
The OTU, as a wartime training establishment, was under pressure to produce aircrews as fast and as efficiently as possible. Accidents were bound to happen, and did. During the war, literally dozens of Aircraft were destroyed at Greenwood in accidents, but not all resulted in loss of life. We can find 31 graves of airmen from England, Australia, and New Zealand at the Holly Trinity graveyard in Middleton and in St. Lawrence (R.C.) Cemetery just outside Kingston, Nova Scotia.
By the end of 1942, changes for Greenwood were already in the wind.
The priorities in Europe were shifting. The Allies were going on the offensive. No. 36 OTU's new role was to train aircrew for the Mosquito. The first Mosquito (nicknamed "Mossie") arrived at Greenwood on 26 March 1943. On 3 July 1943, Greenwood officially became a Mosquito OTU and the first Mosquito course started training two days later. The last Hudson left Greenwood on 3 October 1943.
Support Aircraft for the Mosquito OTU were the Airspeed Oxford and the Bristol Bolingbrook, used for bombing and drogue towing. By the end of September 1943, there were 33 Mossies (10 dual), eight Oxford MK V's. and two Bolingbrokes. Mosquito strength would reach between 50 and 60 Aircraft, the majority being the bomber version. Later, a few Harvards and a Ventura or two (similar to the Hudson) were added to the station Aircraft fleet.
Orders were issued from higher authority and on 1 July 1944, RAF Station Greenwood transitioned to an RCAF Station.
Training continued uninterrupted during disbandment of No. 36 OTU (RAF) and formation of No. 8 OTU (RCAF).
The daily diaries of No. 36 OTU and No. 8 OTU between June 1942 and April 1945 together record a total of 57 Greenwood airmen killed in 25 Aircraft crashes (see Honour Roll). No. 8 OTU's portion of this was 21 lives and 11 birds.
The story of Greenwood would not be complete without mentioning another section that was also part of the political reality of Canada in those years. The Army Search Light Battery. It arrived at No. 36 OTU on 4 December 1942. Their task was to provide realistic training to aircrews - the terrifying experience of being "coned" by enemy anti-Aircraft battery searchlights.
On 31 March 1945, the BCATP ceased to exist. Then came V-E Day, 8 May 1945, when Germany surrendered. The war in Europe was over.
The changes at Greenwood were drastic. As early as April, Mosquitos were being flown to storage facilities. By the end of July, most were gone and Greenwood was no longer a training station. No. 8 OTU finally disbanded on 1 August 1945.
Three "Very Long Range" (VLR) bomber groups, each consisting of 22 Squadrons, (one RAF, one RCAF, and the third a composite British Commonwealth formation), were created and code-named "Tiger Force".
By Spring 1945, "Tiger Force" was scaled down to two groups, considerably smaller than originally proposed.
By 8 May 1945, almost immediately, the RCAF units earmarked for "Tiger Force" were converted to Canadian built Lancaster Bombers (MK X's) and returned to Canada for training and reorganization. No. 6614 Wing Greenwood was created. The plan called for the Wings to commence training for the Pacific in August, with the first Wing to arrive in the Pacific Theater by December.
The arrival of the new bomber Wing overlapped the phasing out of No. 8 (RCAF) OTU. The disbandment order for the OTU was to be effective 31 July 1945. By 1 August 1945, No. 664 (Heavy Bomber) Wing and its two squadrons (No. 405 and 408 Squadrons) were officially formed. Training was to commence 24 August 1945.
405 Squadron was Canada's first bomber squadron to form overseas, in April 1941. In April 1943, it became the RCAF's first and only Pathfinder Unit.
With the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the subsequent capitulation of Japan on 14 August 1945, No. 6614 Wing (and Tiger Force) became superfluous. On 5 September 1945, No. 6614 Wing officially disbanded as part of Tiger Force.
On 31 March 1946, the OTU ceased to exist. The station went into care and maintenance, effective 1 May 1946. One building after the other was closed.
By the end of June 1946, the station strength went to 72 people. For most of the "Care & Maintenance" period, strength would run around three dozen. Between July 1946 to February 1947, Greenwood slept. The skeleton staff carried out only minimal preventive maintenance and fire protection services.
The first indication of changes at Greenwood came with the publication of AFHQ Organization Order 854 dated 17 February 1947, which reorganized and activated Greenwood effective 1 April 1947. "Care & Maintenance" period had lasted officially for 11 months.
By the fall of 1947, Greenwood had finally moved out of the doldrums of the post-war period, although not to a degree predicted in February 1947. RCAF 10 Group, Halifax, announced in mid-October 1947 that No. 103 Rescue Unit (RU) would complete its move from Dartmouth (now Shearwater) to Greenwood by month end. No. 103 RU was conceived in January 1947, primarily to aid distress Aircraft. One of the reasons for its formation was the newly established Trans-Atlantic commercial air service.
The target date for the move was set for 29 October. The move included between 100 and 150 men and officers, two Canso amphibian Aircraft, one Norseman and one Sikorsky S-51 Dragonfly helicopter.
The year 1948 marked the beginning of Greenwood's affiliation with the Navy. In September, 103 RU deployed a Lancaster and a Canso to Goose Bay, Labrador, to work with RCN Units on a northern exercise. This work followed, in October by participation in naval maneuvers with both RCN and USN units. Such tasking was to continue until the formation of two maritime squadrons a few years later.
The clause in NATO Agreement pertaining to security of the North Atlantic was to have a great effect on RCAF Station Greenwood.
Canada had become increasingly uneasy over communist actions in Europe during 1948. One of the most feared Russian military build-ups was the growing submarine fleet.
Greenwood was selected as the site for the required maritime reconnaissance training unit and first operational squadron. To help gather the required Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) expertise, 11 RCAF officers went to England to study coastal command training methods.
By 12 December 1949, the first course of 2 (M) OTU started and 405 Squadron was reactivated. Modified Avro Lancaster MK X wartime bombers were designated as their MR Aircraft.
2 (M) OTU continued to produce aircrew to fill the ranks of 405 Squadron until 30 April 1951. On this date, 2 (M) OTU's newest graduates formed the nucleus of 404 Squadron. The Unit had been a wartime coastal patrol squadron in England during the latter part of the war.
With 103 Rescue Unit, two operational squadrons and the OTU, RCAF Greenwood had a crowding problem, which taxed all station facilities. A decision was made to move 2 (M) OTU to RCAF Summerside, PEI, effective 14 November 1953. The unit departed Greenwood after graduating 18 courses of 70 crews totaling 450 airmen between 12 December 1949 and 6 November 1953.
The P2V Neptune was conceived during the war as the first Aircraft designated specifically for Anti-Submarine Warfare. The version Canada purchased was the P2V5. The first of the 25 Aircraft arrived to Greenwood on 30 March 1955.
The Neptune was not the only new Aircraft received in Greenwood in 1955. On 17 January, a Piasecki helicopter (the "flying banana") was received by 103 Rescue Unit.
The once proud Lancaster though finished at Greenwood by November 1955, continued to fly for the RCAF for many more years.
As early as 1952 the RCAF issued requirements for a new long-range patrol Aircraft to replace the wartime Lancaster.
The Argus, although primarily designed to be a long-range patrol submarine hunter/killer, had a secondary cargo and passenger capability.
By 1958, less than three years from contract start, the first big sub-hunter was airborne. The name "Argus", came from the Greek mythology. Argus, "the vigilant watchman", was the 100 eyed giant; a most fitting name for an Aircraft which at that time had more sensors on board than any other single Aircraft.
It was not until 1 May 1958, that Greenwood received its Argus for operations.
In all, 33 were produced, the last being 20742 (no. 20742 was delivered in 1961). The first 13, 20710 - 20722, were Mark I's; the reminder being Mark II's. The most obvious difference between the two was the much larger chin radome on the MK I series for the APS 20 radar system. The MK II used the British ASV 21 search radar.
This newer, larger, more complex airframe would require not only more space, but also more personnel to maintain and operate it. More hangars were built, the last started in 1958.
In early March 1958, No. 2 (Maritime) Operational Training Detachment (2 (M) OTU Detachment) was formed at Greenwood. Their initial task was to become proficient with the new Aircraft and prepare the lesson plans for their future students. N0.9 FTTU was responsible for the Argus aircrew and groundcrew technical training.
In late July 1958, 405 Squadron became the first operational unit to receive the Argus. By this time, Greenwood had five of the big birds.
It was not until 15 April 1959 that 404 Squadron received its first CP-107 Argus, 20730. On 1 May 1961, 415 Squadron was reactivated at Summerside to become the third operational unit to fly the Argus. Starting in May 1958, the Greenwood Neptunes were transferred to 407 Squadron, Comox, B.C. replacing the last Maritime Lancasters. They were to serve another ten years at Comox before being replaced by the Argus.
Maritime Patrol and Evaluation Unit (MP&EU), originally "Test, Development and Evaluation Flight" under 404 Squadron, was granted its present designation on 11 June 1959.
During the 23 years of Argus flying, there were two accidents that resulted in loss of life and Aircraft. The first occurred in 1965. 404 Squadron was deployed to Puerto Rico on an Exercise. On the night of 23 March, Argus 20727 plunged into the ocean 60 miles north of the Island.
All perished including two government research scientists.
404 Squadron crew were:
S/L J. A. Anderson, DSO, DFC, CD
Sgt P. Chapman, CD
F/O H.S. Cocks
F/O B.W.G. Cromlish
F/L J.E.K.A. (Kaye) Huet
F/O R.C. Johnson
Sgt M. Jones, CD
F/O F.A. Knights
F/O G.A. Maguire
F/O J.M. Peele
F/L J.E. Perron, CD
F/O J.A. Richardson
F/L C.M. Sorge
F/L J.W. Tetrault, CD
F/O R.G. Williams
The second accident occurred at Summerside, PEI on 31 March 1977 when 415 Squadron Argus 20737 crashed on landing. Three died and six others were medically grounded for up to a year. Killed were: Maj Ross Hawkes, Sgt Ralph Arsenault, and MCpl Al Senez.
In 1968, in an attempt to alleviate the crowding at Greenwood, 103 RU terminated its 21 years existence at Greenwood and was transferred to Summerside.
In 1975, 449 Squadron was disbanded. The Canadian Forces started an overall reorganization and this left Greenwood with two squadrons, one operational (405 Squadron) and one training (404 Squadron).
Starting in 1974, the Canadian Forces started a series of cutbacks with drastic reductions to Air Force flying rates, and many other Canadian Forces Units dropped from active service.
The impact on Greenwood was that six Argus from 18 were stored, reducing base strength to 12 from 18. Some 242 personnel were immediately cut, real estates dropped. About 140 PMQ's were suddenly empty. Base personnel provided 142 officers and men to support the 1976 Olympics in Montreal from February to October.
In July 1976, an Air Reserve Augmentation Flight (ARAF) was established. This unit was to play an especially important role in the phase-in of the Aurora Aircraft . A considerable number of Argus technicians who were retiring at the time, were maintained as active members of the Reserves and supplemented Argus servicing and maintenance while regular CF members trained on the CP-140 Aurora.
In September 1978, MP&EU transferred in from Summerside, PEI.
The year 1979 was the last "real Argus year" for Greenwood.
CFB Summerside's 415 Squadron continued to fly the Argus through the end of spring 1981, when the unit transferred to Greenwood and converted to the Aurora.
The first Aurora (a variant of the Lockheed P-3 Orion) rolled off the assembly line on 25 January 1979 and flew its first flight on 22 March.
The first Auroras replaced the 33 Argus', with 14 to be stationed at Greenwood and the other four in Comox, B.C.
415 Squadron was to be transferred from Summerside, PEI to Greenwood, centralizing all east coast Long Range Patrol Aircraft and greatly reducing the cost of Aurora support facilities.
Manning at Greenwood jumped 10% in 1980 to cope with the many new challenges brought about by the Aurora program. With the addition of 415 Squadron the following year, there was an ever greater increase in personnel.
The Base was to accept the CP-140 on time. On 27 May 1980, the first Aurora, CP-140, arrived at CFB Greenwood. Ceremonies were held on 29 May initiating a new era of ASW for Canada and Greenwood. ASW Aircraft from Britain, the Netherlands, Norway, France and the USA were on hand for this historic event, and the Governor-General and his wife were the guests of honour. The last Aurora, CP-140 118, arrived at Greenwood 10 July 1981.
On 27 July 1980, the first Operational Aurora Mission was carried out. The first NORPAT was flown during the week of 1 September 1980.
On 19 November, the Base newspaper was renamed "The Aurora", replacing its old mast head "The Argus". During the 1950's, the Station paper had been known as "Wings Over Greenwood". During the four war years, there had been as many Station periodicals, beginning with the RAF "Overseas".
The ceremonial arrival of the "Swordfish" Squadron, held on 24 July, was highlighted by the last official flight for the Argus. Argus 736 departed for PEI for scrapping at CFB Summerside.
The Fincastle Competition started in 1961 as an annual Commonwealth bombing competition between RAF, RAAF, RNZAF, and Canadian ASW Squadrons. In 1970 it was modified to its present ASW form, where crews now fly a day and night sortie against a submarine and are judged on their ability to detect and attack their target.
Normally, Canada selects her Fincastle crew from the winner of the national O'Brien ASW competition.
On 5 October 1981, 405 Squadron won Fincastle in Australia.
From August to November 1983, CFB Greenwood provided support to Air Canada. During this time, the runways at Halifax International Airport were being repaired, causing seven of Air Canada's flights to be diverted to Greenwood. Base personnel assisted Air Canada staff in coordinating refueling and ground-handling requirements and processed over 1,600 passengers.
By 1988, the Aurora provided more and more non-military tasking including: fisheries surveillance, RCMP drug enforcement, and something new...Department of Immigration tasking to search out "Mother Ships" involved in illegal immigration operations.
The closure of CFB Summerside was announced in May 1989. By September, it was official that 413 Search and Rescue Squadron would be transferred to Greenwood in 1991. Thus, after 23 years, Greenwood would again become a multi-Aircraft air base with 413 Squadron bringing their Labrador helicopters and Hercules Aircraft.
On 10 June 1991, 413 Squadron officially arrived at Greenwood.
During the summer of 1995, 434 Combat Support Squadron, with 14 T-33 Silver Star and eight Challenger jets moved to 14 Wing Greenwood from 12 Wing Shearwater. The squadron supports Naval, Land and Air elements performing such roles as: electric warfare training, forward air control training, coastal surveillance, and air evacuations.
*Excerpts from "The History of CFB Greenwood 1942-1992".
For more information, please contact the 14 Wing Heritage Officer.
On April 28, 2002, the 434 (Combat Support) Squadron Colours were deposited in the All Saints Cathedral, Halifax with the Squadron closing its doors on July 15, 2002.
434 Bomber Squadron was formed at Tholthorpe, England, on 13 June 1943 as a unit of No. 6 Bomber Group.
It began operations on 12 August of that year and continued to operate from Tholthorpe until 11 December 1944, moving the following day to Croft. The Squadron operated there for the remainder of its stay in England. Equipped first with Halifax vs, the Bluenosers converted to Halifax III's in May 1944. The Squadron was adopted by the Rotary Club of Halifax and took the nickname "Bluenose" in reference to the common nickname for Nova Scotians. The schooner "Bluenose" is well known for it's fine record.
434 Bomber Squadron switched again this time to Canadian built Lancaster x's in December 1944. During the war years they flew some 2600 combat sorties, dropped 10,575 tons of bombs and mines, and lost 68 crew. Besides acquiring approximately 150 individual decorations, honors and awards, the Bluenosers received the following battle honors;
English Channel
North Sea 1943-1944
Baltic 1943-1944
Fortress Europe 1943-1944
France and Germany 1944-1945
Biscay Ports 1944
Ruhr 1943-1945
Berlin 1943-1944
German Ports 1944-1945
Normandy 1944
The Rhine
Following the cessation of hostilities in Europe the Squadron spent a short period flying liberated POW's from the continent to the United Kingdom before returning to Canada as part of the "Tiger Force", the Very Long Range (Bomber) Force formed for operations in the Pacific. The end of the Pacific War found the Squadron still in the early stages of formation and was disbanded at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, on 5 September 1945.
434 (Fighter) Squadron Squadron was formed as a Day Fighter unit equipped with the Canadian built North American F-86 Sabre at Uplands (Ottawa), Ontario on 1 July 1952. The Squadron joined No. 3 (Fighter) Wing at Zweibrucken, Germany in March 1953.
434 (Strike Attack) Squadron (1963-67). The role of 434 Squadron changed to that of all weather strike and reconnaissance and the Canadair built Lockheed CF-104 Starfighter was chosen as the Sabre replacement. 434 Squadron discontinued operations as a Sabre unit in January 1963 and the first CF 104 pilots arrived at 3 Wing the same month. The Squadron disbanded once again three years later in 1967.
Once again 434 Squadron was reactivated, but this time the "Bluenosers" were to serve in Canada. The Squadron stood-up in February of 1968 with its new Canadair built CF-5 Freedom Fighters.
434's role was that of Tactical Fighter and Operational Training, initially providing lead-in training for the CF-104 community. This multi-purpose role included Close Air Support, Interdiction, Photo Reconnaissance, Air Superiority and training for all of the above. In April, 1975 the Squadron was renamed 434(Tac F) Squadron and the role changed to Rapid Reaction Squadron standing ready to deploy to Europe in event of hostilities.
In 1982 the unit moved to Bagotville, Quebec and then to Chatham, New Brunswick in 1985. In 1988 the unit was once more stood down and the Squadron colours, were subsequently placed in All Saints Cathedral, Halifax, NS.
434 (Composite) Squadron was reactivated at CFB Shearwater on 5 July 1992. It was formed by combining half of 414 Squadron, which split and sent Aircraft to both coasts, with VU-32 which was deactivated.
434 (Combat Support) Squadron was moved to 14 Wing Greenwood in August of 1995 and in 2002 the Squadron was again stood down.
On July 15, 2002, 434 (Combat Support) Squadron was again stood down and the squadron colours were deposited in the All Saints Cathedral, Halifax.
434 has flown the following Aircraft:
Handley Page Halifax
Avro Lancaster
Canadair (North American) F-86 Sabre
Canadair (Lockheed) CF-104 Starfighter
Canadair (Northrop) CF-5 Freedom Fighter
Canadair (Lockheed) CE/CT-33 Silver Star
Canadair CC/CP/CE-144 Challenger
|
|||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 52
|
https://www.key.aero/article/nato-airpower-first-20-years
|
en
|
the first 20 years
|
https://supersocial.fullfatthings.com/i/1/https://www.key.aero/article/nato-airpower-first-20-years
|
https://supersocial.fullfatthings.com/i/1/https://www.key.aero/article/nato-airpower-first-20-years
|
[
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/themes/keyaero/logo.svg",
"https://www.key.aero/sites/keyaero/themes/keyaero/images/avion-revue-logo-white.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7080444/interactive-153342628011.png",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/woodwing/2022-07/116190.jpeg?h=b1205be0&itok=8q7qPcjB",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/woodwing/2022-07/118740.jpeg?h=5f7f28d4&itok=e6il5GOz",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/imported/2019-06-24/img_78-1_17.jpg?itok=_Ic4AhAe",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/woodwing/2024-03/254356.jpeg?h=a40fd520&itok=owkeLmI1",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/flypast_0.png?itok=oqoXRuzG",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2024-05/small_image.jpg?h=ac6cbfe2&itok=l9tjzPgo",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2024-04/transall_flight_adventure_2.jpg?h=804717d6&itok=JPjuJVzU",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2024-07/001_ai-aug-24_copy.jpg?h=ca3d6bfa&itok=ex4v8dWX",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/2021-10/KA%20bb%20reviews%20Oct_21.jpg",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/airliner-world.png?itok=yr0EUvfv",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/combat.png?itok=JI0mnk6m",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/aeroplane.png?itok=pgfznVlj",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/flypast_0.png?itok=oqoXRuzG",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/airforces-monthly.png?itok=fYAKPk3l",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/aviation-news.png?itok=dgBjCWrZ",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/pc-pilot.png?itok=JgKm2Vpk",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/AI-LOGO-2020_0.png?itok=EF2B-Pf1",
"https://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-9Yp58hh8HXUzM.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2022-07-05T12:00:00+00:00
|
Andrew Thomas reviews air power during the first 20 years of NATO’s existence
|
en
|
/sites/keyaero/themes/keyaero/favicon.ico
|
Key Aero
|
https://www.key.aero/article/nato-airpower-first-20-years
|
During a speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, on March 5, 1946, Winston Churchill said: “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent.”
Churchill foresaw the hegemony of Soviet communism and the coming of the Cold War that continued for most of the second half of the 20th century. The threat of Soviet expansion was recognised almost immediately World War Two ended, resulting in several European countries eventually creating the Western Union in September 1948. Stalin’s intentions were highlighted by the coup d’état in Czechoslovakia in February 1948, followed by the blockade of Berlin that began the following June.
Talks of a wider alliance that would include countries beyond Europe saw the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949. Thus, the Western Union of Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg were joined by Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal and, most significantly, the United States in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). The agreement was based on Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and is remarkably short, comprising just 14 articles with wording designed to be flexible. It has never…
|
||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 6
|
https://www.stratagem.no/partners-in-northern-europe-the-norwegian-and-dutch-air-force/
|
en
|
Partners in Northern Europe: the Norwegian and Dutch Air Force
|
[
"https://www.stratagem.no/assets/images/eckboslegat.png",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/2020/11/New-Project--2-.png",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/2024/03/tkexnoleR7271.jpg 380w, /content/images/size/w800/2024/03/tkexnoleR7271.jpg 800w, /content/images/size/w1600/2024/03/tkexnoleR7271.jpg 1600w",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/2024/03/biee.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/2024/03/Bilde1.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/2024/03/20230602_HGG_landing_utenfor_leir-3.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/2024/03/20230312tk_A3349.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w176/2024/03/biee.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w176/2024/03/Bilde1.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w800/2024/08/New-Project--1-.png",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w800/2024/08/20230327tk_A4971-1.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w800/2024/08/20160831MG_FLO-Kontor0020.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w800/2024/08/20190212tk_I2675.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w800/2024/08/20230531_SV-1013.jpg",
"https://www.stratagem.no/assets/images/eckboslegat.png",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w380/2021/09/20200316MP_-F-QP712-0543.jpg 380w, /content/images/size/w800/2021/09/20200316MP_-F-QP712-0543.jpg 800w, /content/images/size/w1600/2021/09/20200316MP_-F-QP712-0543.jpg 1600w",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w380/2021/09/20200520331skv_0220.jpg 380w, /content/images/size/w800/2021/09/20200520331skv_0220.jpg 800w, /content/images/size/w1600/2021/09/20200520331skv_0220.jpg 1600w",
"https://www.stratagem.no/content/images/size/w380/2021/09/2021.07.01_TB_9781.jpg 380w, /content/images/size/w800/2021/09/2021.07.01_TB_9781.jpg 800w, /content/images/size/w1600/2021/09/2021.07.01_TB_9781.jpg 1600w"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"LtCol Kamp-Bakx"
] |
2024-04-04T12:40:47+00:00
|
The strategic location of the Netherlands provides the Dutch society with a rationale to cooperate in a military and security sense with countries in the north and northwest of Europe, and with Norway specifically. There are several geographic reasons for this, which we want to address in this article. Our
|
no
|
Stratagem
|
https://www.stratagem.no/partners-in-northern-europe-the-norwegian-and-dutch-air-force/
|
The strategic location of the Netherlands provides the Dutch society with a rationale to cooperate in a military and security sense with countries in the north and northwest of Europe, and with Norway specifically. There are several geographic reasons for this, which we want to address in this article. Our aim with this article is to provide in this way a better comprehension on the collaboration between the Royal Netherlands and Norwegian Air Force. We will do this with a focus on some geographical features that we think connect Norway and The Netherlands as natural partners in a military and security context. From there, we will address how this has worked out in a collaboration between the two states in the past, as well as how this geographic connection works out in the context of the current geopolitical developments in Europe.
The article was first published in Luftled 3-2023
Geographic inspiration for natural partnership
According to the theory of strategic culture, national strategies and approaches to warfare are, to a significant extent, culturally determined.[1] One important aspect from which a national culture emerges is a state’s geography. Military strategy in fact appears to depend on geography to a far greater extent than what is currently practiced or taught.[2] Unique geographic characteristics of a state thus shape its national military decision-making. It may even function as a driver for military cooperation between states, as it provides them with similarities in their strategic interests. States cooperating with each other on this basis (or on the basis of any other cultural aspect) can be considered natural partners.
The Netherlands is strategically located at the heart of Northern Europe. It is bordering the North Sea and lies, from an air power perspective, not too far away from the northern flank of Europe. It considers itself as strongly connected to the Arctic region, from a historical point of view (e.g. with Willem Barentsz, who started in 1549 the first of three expeditions in search of the Northern passage), but also because the effects of global warming in this region have direct consequences for The Netherlands.[3] Although the Dutch and the Norwegian people connect as natural partners for many different cultural reasons, focus in this paper is on this geographical dimension as a binding feature.
With its waterways and other well-organized infrastructure, the Netherlands forms a valuable point for the entry and exit of military forces, logistics and internet traffic. Because of this, it has the collective responsibility to protect these assets, which includes defending against any attempt to breach the integrity of the Netherlands via the North Sea. What adds to this is a growing dependence on maritime infrastructure for communication cables and wind energy. It is of no surprise therefore, that the Dutch Maritime Strategy 2015 – 2025 indicates the freedom of movement of so-called 'Sea Lines of Communication' (SLOCs) as a primary interest, which may be supported by air assets in the form of helicopters and F-35 fighter aircraft.[4] Although the Dutch forces have the reputation to be a highly trained, respected and modern force that adheres to high standards and operates high-tech equipment, it nevertheless remains, in a numerical sense, a small nation when its military is considered.[5], [6] To assure the protection of the North Sea region, it therefore needs to forge allies. Defending the North Sea region is not just in the interest of the Netherlands though. Part of the North Sea, for instance, has been designated as a Dutch Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in 1999.[7] While the Royal Netherlands Navy's primary task is to protect economic security by contributing to deterrence, prevention or combating threats (use of force), this EEZ borders those of Great Britain and Germany, but is also close to those of Norway and Denmark. A safe North Sea is therefore in the economic interest of all these states.
A second geographic reason for the Norwegian and Dutch air forces to partner as natural partners concerns the proximity, and threat, of Russia to Europe’s northern flank. From a naval and air perspective, this northern flank can be seen as the entrance to Europe's backyard. For example, show of force of Russian long-range aviation power often takes place by means of flights around Norway to the North Sea and back. These kinds of posturing activities, in which lies an eminent threat, definitely connects the northern European states, including those that can be reached in this way via Europe’s backyard. Within NATO, the states have each set up a(n) (aerial) quick reaction alert (QRA) as a means to defend the airspace. The northern European ones, including Norway and The Netherlands, perform this task these days collectively. What this means is that they closely operate and coordinate with each other on the QRA air surveillance task, and that they even hand over threats to each other when necessary.
A third geographic feature that connects Norway and the Netherlands, in a military and security sense, is their distance to the Arctic region. Norway borders the region and is a member, as such, of the Arctic Council. The Netherlands does not border the Arctic region directly, but considers itself near-arctic and has an interest in the region. This has been recognized and because of this, The Netherlands has an Observer status in the Arctic Council since 1998.[8] Moreover, these interests are described in the latest version of The Netherlands’ Polar Strategy 2021-2025 that sets out the Dutch government’s intent to contribute to the protection, in the Polar region, of human interests, the environment, and international security and stability.[9]
The Dutch and the Norwegians, in short, connect to each other, in large part because they have geographically instigated strategic interests in common. The remainder of this article will address how the Air Forces of the two states tend to find each other as natural partners because of this, in the past, as well as in the context of the current geopolitical situation in Europe.
The Norwegian and Dutch Air Force: a historical overview of their partnership
The Dutch 320 Squadron was the first foreign unit in the Royal Air Force. It was deployed from June 1, 1940. The missions that 320 Squadron conducted within the RAF were anti-submarine patrols, convoy surveillance, and attacking enemy ships in the coastal waters of Norway and the Netherlands. So, even before the establishment of an independent Royal Netherlands Air Force in 1953, Dutch pilots were flying missions in northern Europe. Conversely, Norwegian pilots within the RAF carried out missions over the Netherlands during the Battle of Walcheren and the liberation of the south of the Netherlands in 1944.[10]
A more constructive cooperation between states in the region was given a boost by the establishment of NATO in 1949. Mentioned in this must be the participation of the Dutch 314 'Redskins' squadron in the NATO Allied Command Europe (ACE) Mobile Force (AMF), which was an elite force according to Norman Dodd.[11] It was stationed, as part of the AMF, at Rygge Air Base in Norway from 1959. They first flew with F-84F Thunderstreaks, since 1972 with NF-5s. The aim of the AMF was to protect the northern flanks of NATO territory by deterring a possible attack and carrying out missions such as air defense, close air support, air interdiction, reconnaissance and possibly support of the battle at sea.[12]
The participation in the AMF was in fact the main reason for the intense military cooperation between the Royal Norwegian and Netherlands Air Forces during that time. Many exercises north of the Arctic Circle were flown from 'deployment base' Bodø from 1961 onwards. Moreover, the Dutch took part on winter survival exercises and big exercises like Strong Express, in which 64,000 soldiers, 700 aircraft and 300 ships took part.[13] During the Cold War, multinational cooperation was substantiated within NATO. The friendly and collegial cooperation between the Dutch and the Norwegian pilots went without problems, as became apparent during so-called area familiarization flights and patrol missions along the North Cape.[14] This resulted in more coordination efforts. Collaboration, for instance, was sought in education and training. It led to agreements between the two countries, laid down in Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs). These MOUs contributed to ensuring that the core task of NATO's Article 5, namely territorial defense, can be carried out by maintaining the so-called Nordic balance in the context of great power competition.[15] In 1988, the permanent presence of the Dutch Air Force in Norway came to an end. The replacement of the NF-5 by the F-16, but especially the end of the Cold War, put an end to the need for a permanent presence of the Royal Netherlands Air Force in Norway. The final exercise that was run in this context was the NATO Exercise Arrowhead Express in 1988. But that did not mean that the ties between the two countries disappeared.
After the Cold War, NATO defense efforts became less 'static' and the need for flexible and expeditionary forces for out-of-area-operations became a priority. Strategic and military-strategic reasons for fixed collaborations with other countries in a military or security sense diminished, especially after the Berlin wall came down in 1989. Some of the collaborations that had started during the Cold War nevertheless continued. Initiatives like the European Participating Air Forces (EPAF; Belgium, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands), for instance, had resulted in a strong collaboration between the Norwegian and the Dutch Air Force in 1974. This collaboration followed from their mutual participation in the F-16 Multinational Fighter Program from 1975, a program in which the participating countries agreed to work together on the procurement and production of the F-16 aircraft (comparable with the development of the F-35 today).[16] As a result, EPAF joined the Fighter Weapons Instructor Training (FWIT) and “Red Flag” exercise from 1984 (the Royal Norwegian Air Force joint a few years later because of budget problems).[17] Especially FWIT provided a continuous exchange of training philosophies, tactics, and weapon system improvements within the F-16A/B community. It could even be said that especially the FWIT kept the multinational cooperation alive. Other exercises, like Maple Flag in Canada and Frisian Flag in The Netherlands, also helped to continue to foster cooperation and interoperability of the participating air forces.
The real test for EPAF took place from 2002 when the EPAF Expeditionary Air Wing started to take part in operations over Afghanistan from Manas airbase, Kyrgyzstan. This was a unique, tri-national alliance (Royal Danish Air Force, Royal Netherlands Air Force and the Royal Norwegian Air Force) and part of the 376th Air Expeditionary Wing of the United States Air Force (USAF). This tri-national alliance contributed to the American-led Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). It enabled small European countries to make an important contribution as a multinational squadron within a larger air campaign, which makes this “experiment” highly relevant for the current geopolitical context in which European countries may have to deploy with much less or no US presence. Van der Vegt, a historian of the Netherlands Institute for Military History (NIMH), reports that although the EPAF alliance on Manas was an experiment, it demonstrated ‘a prime “operational” example of effective small or middle power strategy to mitigate (combat) limitations in an asymmetrical multinational relationship vis-à-vis the United States’.[18] The collaborative efforts from the 70’s and 80’s had paid off. After a year of this first wartime deployment, EPAF had flown over 2000 sorties (The Netherlands 804, Denmark 743, Norway 488).[19] The experiment provided some important political, strategic, operational, and tactical lessons. The countries complemented each other on targeting capabilities especially. At the same time, activities regarding combat support, such as maintenance and communication systems, were regarded more effective when operating as an individual air force.[20] Van der Vegt furthermore pointed at several differences in culture, language, customs, working methods, different rotations of personnel, and other examples that had to be overcome. Van der Vegt’s overall conclusion though, is that this first empirical experiment was a success for EPAF to become [with such an alliance of small nations] a “top notch” unit.[21]
Natural military partnership: how does that work in the current geopolitical landscape?
It is not entirely correct, of course, to compare different historical periods. Nevertheless, after a period of expeditionary deployment, it is likely that the emphasis of Western forces is once again on the defense of NATO and EU territory, which regains the attention and need for cooperation between countries around the North Sea. The recent conflict in Ukraine and other rising threats against NATO territory makes us realize that we will shift from so called ‘wars of choice’ to a situation wherein European countries need to deal with a mindset according to ‘wars of necessity’.[22]
Not only the European Union describes this changing security environment in Europe in its Strategic Compass, NATO too reacted on this threat on NATO’s territory with its 2022 Strategic Concept. Called out for NATO in this Strategic Concept are the need for collective defence based on deterrence and defence; crisis prevention and management; and cooperative security.[23] Both the Netherlands and Norway are too small to carry out the tasks that they have independently. This will and must be done within a NATO context, or at least in a bilateral or multinational context with other countries. The air capabilities of the Scandinavian countries together sum up to 250 combat aircraft, including 143 F-35s within a few years.[24] That seems a lot but the countries must pay attention not only to threats from the northern region, but also from the Baltic region.
During the recent NATO Summit in 2023 in Vilnius, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg explained, in response to the war in Ukraine and the implications that this has for the European continent, NATO's revised position and posture when it comes to the defense of NATO territory. The central concept of the alliance, deterrence and defense[25], has not changed. However, the way in which NATO and its members are going to fulfil this task has. NATO’s revised posture strategy takes a regional approach, which means that NATO troops are allocated to a specific region. For this strategy, Europe is divided into three regions: 1) a northern region, which includes the Atlantic and European Arctic; 2) a central region, which includes the Baltic region and central Europe; 3) a southern region, which includes the Mediterranean and the Black Sea.[26] To fulfil the deter and defend task in these regions effectively, more NATO troops than ever will be allocated, which includes a fair share of air power resources. The allocated troops are to develop their regional operational concept together within the overall NATO political and military strategic objectives.
The regional approach within the revised NATO strategy requires a renewed commitment to intense cooperation between the Norwegian and the Royal Netherland Air Forces. One of the operational challenges for NATO is the Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) problem in the High North and the Baltics. This A2/AD challenge is particularly pronounced, as Russia has fortified its military presence in the North, both in the Arctic and in the Baltics, by deploying advanced anti-ship missiles, long-range aviation assets, and integrated air defense systems. This mixture of assets creates a formidable barrier for NATO forces attempting to operate in the region. However, based on their earlier experiences as natural partners, The Royal Netherlands and Norwegian Air Forces should be able to create, like with the EPAF alliance, sufficient interoperability regarding the suppression of enemy air defences, airborne electronic warfare, anti-submarine warfare, and air superiority, to counter the A2/AD challenges.[27] With mutual regional planning, training, and logistics, they should be able to counter this threat together with the other northern European countries, and to guarantee in this way, NATO's freedom of movement in the region.
Norway, like the Netherlands, will seek more cooperation with the Atlantic-oriented countries that fall under Joint Forces Command Norfolk.[28] It will also form alliances sec with the other Northern European countries. Long before the recent changes in the military-political situation in Europe, in 2009 already, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden formed the Nordic Defence Cooperation (NORDEFCO), an alliance on security and defense.[29] Minna Ålander of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs now advocates a strengthening of this kind of cooperation with more strategic cohesion, better operational integration, and a command structure that is specifically focused on the northern region of NATO.[30] In line with this call for a strengthened cooperation, the air forces of Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland signed a letter of intent in March 2023 to develop a Nordic air operations concept based on four focus areas: integrated command and control, operations planning and execution; flexible and resilient joint deployment of the air forces; shared situational awareness and airspace surveillance; and joint training and exercises. With the upcoming membership of NATO of Finland and Sweden especially, it would be legitimate to consider, in this context, to install a regional combined air operations center for the northern region specifically.
The Royal Netherland Air Force has to respond to this. Regional alliances in the northern part of Europe can be of value for the Netherlands too. In 2009 already, the Clingendael Institute called for The Netherlands to join in with the initiatives of the Nordic countries.[31] Both geographic and historical military reasons form the rationale for the allocation of Dutch airpower and troops in the northern region of NATO territory. Would it be possible in this sense, to benefit from old bonds? The answer is yes. The navy and air force especially would have the important task there to help protect the entrance to Europe’s backyard. This is all the more important when the technical advance of the past decennia is taken into consideration regarding ballistic and other missile threats. These threats have gained weight significantly as missiles today go further, faster, and are much more difficult to detect and track than the older ones. There is no such thing anymore, in this regard, as a main bearing to calculate with. All the European countries nowadays have in fact to take a 360-degree approach for their missile defense, which includes for the Netherlands, the European back door from the north. Collaboration with the Scandinavian countries in this, among which Norway, is of vital importance for the Netherlands. The historical experiences of the past, in which the long-during and intensive EPAF collaborative efforts actually paid off in a smooth alliance in Afghanistan later on, tells us that collaborative training efforts, agreements for host nation support between countries, and more joint education can safeguard the conceptual component of combat power at the operational level of warfare; operational art if you like. In concrete terms, the Netherlands will have to seek cooperation to effectively contribute to the air campaigning capacity in the northern region. Several initiatives can be identified.
The Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF), for instance, of which Norway and the Netherlands are members and which is led by the UK, forms a growing security network in conjunction with the Northern Group. The collaboration between these two groups includes the regular meeting of their attended defense ministers. Norway and The Netherlands also bond with each other in a maritime sense. Both countries participate with their maritime airpower and with their airpower in support of maritime operations in the Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 for tasks in the Atlantic Ocean and the northern flank. They also are the initiators and contributors to the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), and contributors as well to the Initial Follow-On Forces Group (IFFG). Moreover, Norway has joined the multirole tanker project (MRTT), a NATO aircraft pool of tanker and transport aircraft with its planning capacity, including Norwegian personnel, at the European Air Transport Command in Eindhoven. Another example is that Norway, like the Netherlands, has been a partner in the F-35 project right from the start of the development of this 5th generation aircraft. Within this F35 project, Norway and the Netherlands are leading the development of weapons instruction in the Weapons Instructor Course (FWIT) for the European F-35 community. As of 2024 this course does not only instruct pilots, but also Dutch and Norwegian intelligence staff, fighter controllers, and air defence personnel. One of the latest collaborative high-tech initiatives in which both Norway and The Netherlands have been involved is the bi-lateral cooperation in the space domain. A Norwegian satellite was launched with Dutch laser communication equipment. This SmallCAT (Small Communication Active Terminal) project is an initiative to test the compact laser communication technology that may be used within NATO.[32] All these initiatives may result to the fact that Norway and the Netherlands will take the lead within the 5th generation countries in Europe and contribute to a strong force within NATO.
Apart from these institutional collaborations there is also this renaissance of large international exercises, which underpins the deterrence posture in the northern European region. One of these exercises is the Arctic Challenge Exercise (ACE), in which the Netherlands participated this year with twelve F-35s and eight F-16s. It was a large exercise in a 'unique airspace' according to the commander of 312 Squadron: Lt-Col Patrick 'Naish' Vreeburg.[33] Another example is the Dutch participation to the exercise Joint Viking in Norway, in which thousands of soldiers participated in an international wintertime exercise. During this exercise, an attack on Norway was countered by deploying helicopters, fighter jets, naval ships, submarines and many ground troops.[34] Of similar value is the international exercise Frisian Flag from Airbase Leeuwarden.
All these initiatives between the Royal Norwegian and the Royal Netherlands Air Force will no doubt contribute to the defending of the Northern region, both within and without the context of NATO. It will bond and strengthen the regional alliances once again, up until the level that they are top notch performing alliances, just like AFM and EPAF did in the past.
Conclusions and way ahead
The Royal Netherlands and Norwegian Air Force share a past in which they have shown numerous times to be more than just military allies. They participated in many of the same collaborative programs and in many of the same exercises. We have suggested in this article that a main driver for this lies in the geographic location of both countries, because of which they share and will share similar military-strategic interests. Additional reasons for this natural partnership lie in cultural similarities, and in the many occasions that the Dutch and the Norwegian forces operate with the same high-end technology. They even decided at times to set up training programs together, such as the FWIT, and the WIC today.
For good reasons, the Scandinavian states strongly connect together these days in a military and national security sense. The Royal Netherlands Air Force aims to join these efforts, and will participate in at least some of these programs. We believe it is of high importance to strengthen the alliance with Norway and the Scandinavian partners. Our history of being close partners for so many decades in different respects has resulted in the two Air Forces being attuned to each other, with shared standards, shared technology, shared knowledge, and a shared mindset. The two Air Forces would not be as closely attuned as they are these days if they had not so often operated the same high-end technology and collaborated, in the past, in many operational, logistic, and educational programs regarding that technology.
The Dutch-Norwegian connection is, we believe, key to providing air power as allies that can make a difference in the region, especially when it is taken in mind that both countries operate with the F-35 5th generation fighter aircraft. As a result, the Royal Netherlands Air Force is investigating the possibilities to set-up a (semi-)permanent Forward Operating Base for our F-35s in Norway. This must lead, once again, to a high integration of the two Air Forces, and to a credible forward posture of airpower. We are sure it will lead to a cohesive alliance that is well-trained and interoperable, and able to effectively counter the threat in the Arctic and North-Sea region in the case the geopolitical situation shifts past the deterrence phase.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 50
|
https://www.japcc.org/articles/transforming-the-rnlaf-into-a-5th-generation-air-force-just-doing-it/
|
en
|
Transforming the RNLAF into a 5th Generation Air Force: Just Doing It!
|
[
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J37_theme-400x132.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_DD_Banner_2000x660-400x132.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_2023_Conf_Banner_2000x660-400x132.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/JAPCC_J33_FC_400x566-288x408.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-288x453.jpg 288w, https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-127x200.jpg 127w, https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-180x283.jpg 180w, https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen.jpg 360w",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Luyt_Lt_Gen-288x453.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J37_Art-01-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J37_Art-01-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J36_Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J36_Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_J35_Banner_2000x660_J35-Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/FT_J35_Banner_2000x660_J35-Art-06-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Red_Air_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/Red_Air_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-05_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-05_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-02_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J34_Art-02_Banner_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/13_J33_Art-13_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/13_J33_Art-13_2000x660-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-08-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-08-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-07-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/J32_Art-07-672x192.jpg",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/corner-60x60-light-grey.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png",
"https://www.japcc.org/wp-content/uploads/japcc-logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2022-02-03T12:21:04+01:00
|
Introduction The world is changing rapidly. The geopolitical landscape is transforming as a result of the strategic competition among existing, emerging, and revisionist powers. Simultaneously, these powers are developing emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and hypersonic missiles at an incredibly rapid pace. Our societies are more connected through our smartphones, smart homes,
|
en
|
Joint Air Power Competence Centre - NATO's Advocate to Air and Space Power
|
https://www.japcc.org/articles/transforming-the-rnlaf-into-a-5th-generation-air-force-just-doing-it/
|
Introduction
The world is changing rapidly. The geopolitical landscape is transforming as a result of the strategic competition among existing, emerging, and revisionist powers. Simultaneously, these powers are developing emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and hypersonic missiles at an incredibly rapid pace. Our societies are more connected through our smartphones, smart homes, and the internet of things. The growing world population is struggling to comprehend and overcome the challenges of climate change and global pandemics, resulting in an economy under pressure from both events. These trends and developments impact our armed forces in their efforts to stay relevant in safeguarding peace and security and making the necessary changes to organizations, capabilities, and operational concepts.
In this volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous context, the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) is transforming into a 5th Generation Air Force. Since we launched our ‘5th Generation Air Force’ vision in 2017, the RNLAF has incorporated a number of new weapon systems: our new Chinook F/CAAS-helicopters, the multinational A330 MRTT, the MQ-9 Reaper, and the F-35 Lightning II. Perhaps less visible, but certainly not less important, we have been transforming our organization, including how we train and exercise, to prepare for Joint All-Domain Operations (JADO). Finally, we have put information, data science, and software at the core of our efforts to improve our processes to fly, fight, and win more effectively and more safely. This article will highlight some of our ‘lighthouse projects’1 to illustrate the challenges we had to overcome and the solutions we were able to find. It will first look at the new possibilities that 5th generation capabilities offer, particularly sensors and connectivity. Next, it will explain innovative ways of implementing the required changes. Finally, the article will provide an insight into some of the innovative and transformative units that are leading the way toward operationalizing our ‘5th Generation Air Force’ vision: the Data Science Cell, the Space Security Centre, the Cyber Warfare Team and the F-35 Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E) Unit. The article will conclude by drawing conclusions and providing some key takeaways.
New Capabilities Supporting the Joint All-Domain Fight
The 5th generation capabilities are mainly about employing ‘next-level’ weapons systems to speed up our effects-cycle so we ‘outpace’ and ‘outsmart’ an opponent. It is also about keeping the technological edge over potential adversaries. Leading-edge technologies are applied to combine sensors with kinetic and non-kinetic effectors resulting in improved connectivity and survivability. The F-35 is clearly the centrepiece of our 5th generation air combat capability, but other new weapon systems like the MQ-9 and our new AH-64E are also part of the bedrock that underpins a next-level Air Force. The F-35 combines low observability with a sensor suite that is unmatched by any 4th generation fighter aircraft. On top of that, stand-off capabilities enable us to exploit altitude, speed, and range to our advantage. Furthermore, the F-35 brings new maintenance and logistics concepts to maximize mission availability. Clearly, 5th generation capabilities bring to bear the ability to operate near and through Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) regions that some of the revisionist powers tend to deploy. As advanced as the aircraft and its systems may be, to prevail in tomorrow’s combat missions, the main aim is to overwhelm potential adversaries with challenges and to get inside their Observe-Orient-Decide-Act (OODA) loop. Information dominance enables decision dominance, which is required to deter, defend, and dominate in modern combat. This means that data and information handling are becoming more critical in support of airpower. It is my firm belief that in the upcoming decade software will become as important, if not more important, than hardware. 5th generation capabilities are synonymous with information, are data-driven by design, and are potentially capable of functioning as nodes in a combat cloud. However, that will only happen if we unlock and find ways to share data and information more seamlessly than we are able to do now. As a coalition, we still have some steps to go to make this happen.
Innovate by Doing!
Receiving 5th generation capabilities stresses the importance of what we call an ‘operational information backbone’. This federated combat network with layered security connects participants in multiple domains and enables joint all-domain command and control. During the first few years of our transformation, we found that building and experimenting with small parts of this network is more important than first designing (and debating) an overall solution. Modus operandi from the digital industry assisted us in digitizing the battlespace and improving our adaptability to rapidly changing threat conditions. The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Robotic Process Automation (RPA) freed up scarce resources (i.e. personnel), particularly in processes that comprise dirty, dull, or dangerous tasks. The newly available resources are necessary to continue to perform operational tasks that require meaningful human control. Therefore, future combat units will have to be resourced with cyber experts, data scientists, and AI-specialists that continuously support the unit in improving its combat effectiveness. These changes cannot happen overnight, but they can begin in small start-up formats at the edges of our organization and in close cooperation with civil partners. These projects are designed to either fail fast or be scaled-up, if successful. It was merely the combination of the inherently pioneering spirit of our Airmen and the cooperation with digital partners that enabled us to stand-up and scale-up the following 5th generation lighthouse units. However, we need to be realistic about the tempo we can achieve in scaling our innovative efforts. Most of our Air Forces are facing limited budgets which, combined with the limited personnel resources we can dedicate to the innovation of all our other tasks, drives the tempo of our common innovation agendas.
The RNLAF’s Lighthouse Units
The Data Science Cell (DSC)
The DSC delivers data-driven, decision-making support products to accelerate and strengthen our transition to the 5th Generation RNLAF. The DSC started in 2017 and groups together a small number of military and civil data science experts. Firstly, the DSC tested and experimented with big data analysis to prove its added value for the RNLAF. This first phase concluded in less than a year and the RNLAF decided to take DSC to the next level and connect it to the operational and maintenance processes. Today the DSC is working on applications in the fields of predictive flight maintenance planning, long-term readiness planning, human resources analytics, and analysis of imagery from the sensors of 5th generation systems.
The Defence Space Security Center (DSSC)
In response to developments in the geopolitical arena and the lower threshold of access to space capabilities, the RNLAF has started to develop knowledge in the military use of space with the aid of the DSSC. After building capacity for monitoring space weather and developing space situational awareness, we recently launched a small communication satellite named ‘BRIK II’. This project was conducted in close cooperation with the Dutch small satellite or SmallSat enterprise and the Royal Aerospace Laboratory (NLR). The launch was contracted to Virgin Orbit, which gave us an opportunity to experiment with Responsive Launch Capability. Furthermore, the dual-use nature of space capabilities offers exciting opportunities to cooperate among European militaries and industries with the aim of improving Europe’s strategic autonomy in space. Even though the Ministry of Defence has not yet issued a formal space policy, the RNLAF is ready to scale up its efforts to develop a national military use of space capability in order to safeguard national and European interests in this new domain. Obviously, we are also building this capability on the foundation of our transatlantic partnership. This is illustrated by our participation in the Responsive Space Capability programme, among other projects.
Cyber Warfare Team
Geopolitical developments have led to strategic competition in cyberspace. Hyper-connected societies have become more vulnerable to threats in the virtual and cognitive domains. Cyber security has become an essential part of any company’s or organization’s efforts to mitigate the risks of cybercrime and other digital attacks. Modern 5th generation capabilities rely heavily on connectivity and thus have become vulnerable to cyber threats. That is why the RNLAF Cyber Warfare Team currently focusses on defensive and preventive strategies to Cyber Readiness in a two-way approach. Firstly, we educate our personnel on Cyber Awareness and Cyber Security, so our people can function as smart sensors. Secondly, we run risk and vulnerability management (on- and off-base) and central monitoring of our essential digital systems and networks in our Cyber Security Operations Center (CSOC). In addition, offensive cyber and electromagnetic activities are employed in cooperation with the Defence Cyber Command. The Cyber Warfare Team is another example of a typical 5th generation unit that is very small in numbers, but potentially high in impact. This is also in line with the RNLAF motto: ‘Parvus Numero Magnus Merito’ (Small in numbers, great in achievements).
F-35 OT&E Squadron
Having received less than half of the initially ordered F-35 fleet, we have been able to reach Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in December of 2021. Even before the delivery of the first aircraft, a small OT&E unit has put significant effort into developing the necessary skills, concepts, and Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) required to operate the F-35. This OT&E unit was initially co-located with our United States, United Kingdom, and Australian partners. This test unit has transferred its results to the first F-35 squadron in the Netherlands. All fields of expertise involved in F-35 operations had to adapt their way of working to the newly available technologies that are incorporated into the operations and maintenance concepts. On the operational side, we have seen a shift in the balance between live flying and simulated training efforts. Not only does the F-35 simulator provide the latest technology in live-virtual-constructive training, but the joint all-domain context also drives the need to simulate more challenging scenarios. On the maintenance side, the system presents fewer challenges in repairing single items, which leads to a more system-oriented approach by the technicians. The traditional three-tiered organization of the maintenance system is becoming obsolete, which requires the maintenance organization to transform itself to meet the new requirements and guarantee the required high levels of serviceability together with commercial partners.
Conclusions and Key Takeaways
The transition of the RNLAF to becoming a 5th Generation Air Force is well underway. Using an innovative approach by starting small, failing fast, and cooperating with digital partners has paid off for a number of lighthouse units. Apart from procuring and implementing 5th generation capabilities, it has been crucial to focus on transforming the organization and mindset. A large part of this mindset is about learning by doing. We have been able to make huge steps because of this approach. Putting data and software at the core of the transition has proven to be as important as the hardware we operate. Even though the transition is still ongoing, I feel confident that we are on the right track. It makes me proud to see how our women and men apply innovative approaches on a daily basis to make our vision a reality. To sum it up, the key takeaways are:
5th generation capabilities open up new ways to meet the challenge of a rapidly evolving threat.
Software and data drive the effectiveness of our hardware and our weapon systems.
5th generation air forces should foster an innovative, pioneering spirit and provide room for failing fast and scaling up at speed.
Small lighthouse projects – learning by doing – function as accelerators for innovation, cooperation, and results.
Doing is the new designing!
‘Lighthouse project’ is a term that is used in the NE Armed Forces to identify a project or unit that tests new concepts and demonstrates new capabilities in order to lay the foundation for scaling up and implementing these concepts and capabilities.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 13
|
https://www.royal-house.nl/members-royal-house/in-memoriam/prince-bernhard/public-appointments
|
en
|
Public appointments
|
http://www.royal-house.nl/binaries/small/content/gallery/royalhouse/channel-afbeeldingen/facebook.png
|
http://www.royal-house.nl/binaries/small/content/gallery/royalhouse/channel-afbeeldingen/facebook.png
|
[
"https://www.royal-house.nl/binaries/svg/content/gallery/royalhouse/channel-afbeeldingen/logo/logo-kh-en.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
After the Second World War, Prince Bernhard played an important part in the economic reconstruction of the Netherlands. He made goodwill visits to many countries to promote Dutch trade relations
|
en
|
/binaries/content/assets/royalhouse/iconen/favicon.ico
|
https://www.royal-house.nl/members-royal-house/in-memoriam/prince-bernhard/public-appointments
|
From 1954 to 1976 the Prince was chair of the Bilderberg Group, a debating forum for politicians, businesspeople and other prominent figures from Europe, the United States and Canada. The Group meets informally once a year at different venues to discuss current political, economic and social developments. It takes its name from the venue of its first meeting, the Bilderberg Hotel in Arnhem.
Military career
Shortly before his marriage, Prince Bernhard swore the oath of allegiance as an officer and was commissioned in a number of military ranks. In 1939 he became Aide-de-Camp Extraordinary to Queen Wilhelmina. During his stay in London, he gained his pilot's wings. In 1941 he became Honorary Air Commodore in the RAF and in 1964 was promoted to Honorary Air Marshal.
In 1944 Queen Wilhelmina appointed him Supreme Commander of the Netherlands Armed Forces and the Netherlands Forces of the Interior (the military resistance). In September 1945 the Prince was honourably discharged from these posts and, at the same time, appointed Inspector-General of the Royal Netherlands Army. For his services during the Second World War, Prince Bernhard was awarded the highest military decoration - the Cross of Commander of the Military Order of William - in 1946. For his achievements as a pilot on active service, he received the Flying Cross. In 1984 he was awarded the Resistance Cross.
In 1946 Prince Bernhard was appointed Inspector-General of the Royal Netherlands Navy, and Inspector-General of the Royal Netherlands Air Force in 1953. In 1954 he was appointed General of the Royal Netherlands Army, Air Marshal of the Royal Netherlands Air Force and Admiral of the Royal Netherlands Navy. In 1970 the three posts of Inspector-General were combined into one - that of Inspector-General of the Armed Forces.
In the mid-1970s, American aircraft maker Lockheed approached government officials in several countries in order to help it sell certain products - among them Prince Bernhard in his capacity as Inspector-General of the Armed Forces. A committee appointed by Prime Minister Joop Den Uyl found no proof that the Prince had received any payments.In September 1976, following the enquiry, the Prince retired from military duties.
Culture
Prince Bernhard was the founder of the Prince Bernhard Fund, which was set up in London in 1940. The original aim of the Fund was to collect financial contributions for the Allied war effort. The Fund now supports culture and nature conservation projects in the Netherlands through grants, assignments, prizes and scholarships. In 1999 the Fund's name was changed to the Prince Bernhard Cultural Fund.
The Prince was also a governor of the Erasmus Prize Trust, which he founded in 1958. Every year, the Trust honours people or organisations for outstanding services to culture in Europe.
From 1956 to 1977, Prince Bernhard was chair of the European Cultural Foundation, which was founded by the Swiss philosopher Denis de Rougemont in Geneva in 1954.
Nature conservation
Prince Bernhard was highly committed to nature conservation. In 1961 he established the World Wildlife Fund (now the World Wide Fund for Nature), a global force in nature conservation.
As the WWF's first president, Prince Bernhard regularly visited countries in Asia, Africa and South America. On his retirement in 1977, he was appointed Founder President and remained President of the Netherlands Branch of the WWF.
|
|||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 26
|
https://avitrader.com/2022/11/15/boeing-delivers-20th-ch-47f-chinook-to-royal-netherlands-air-force/
|
en
|
Boeing delivers 20th CH-47F Chinook to Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 1x, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 2x",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 1x, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 2x",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 1x, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 2x",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 1x, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 2x",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06-1024x233.png 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06-300x68.png 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06-768x175.png 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06-1320x300.png 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06.png 1376w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06-1024x233.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-300x200.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-768x512.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-370x247.jpg 370w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-1320x880.jpg 1320w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Boeing_delivers_20th_Chinook_to_RNAF-1024x683.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AMR_21.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AMR_21.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Discover_Airlines_-300x200.webp 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Discover_Airlines_-768x512.webp 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Discover_Airlines_.webp 900w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Discover_Airlines_-300x200.webp",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS-300x200.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS-768x512.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS-1320x880.jpg 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS.jpg 2048w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AirBaltic_Airbus_A220_FFS-300x200.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/KEL_06.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Standard_Aero_Aero_Turbine-Acquisition-300x161.webp 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Standard_Aero_Aero_Turbine-Acquisition.webp 535w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Standard_Aero_Aero_Turbine-Acquisition-300x161.webp",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Embraer_Super_Tucano_A-29-300x169.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Embraer_Super_Tucano_A-29-768x432.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Embraer_Super_Tucano_A-29.jpg 800w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Embraer_Super_Tucano_A-29-300x169.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ROY_04.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ROY_04.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-300x169.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-768x432.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-2048x1152.jpg 2048w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-370x208.jpg 370w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-1320x742.jpg 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-600x337.jpg 600w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ATSG_Boeing_767-300BCF_-300x169.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-300x225.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-1024x768.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-768x576.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-2048x1536.jpg 2048w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-1320x990.jpg 1320w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/SAS-Scandinavian-Airlines-300x225.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/JOR_21-scaled.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/JOR_21-scaled.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/OMAN-Air-First_B787-9_delivery-300x156.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/OMAN-Air-First_B787-9_delivery-1024x534.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/OMAN-Air-First_B787-9_delivery-768x400.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/OMAN-Air-First_B787-9_delivery.jpg 1170w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/OMAN-Air-First_B787-9_delivery-300x156.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Abdulkhaliq_Saeed-300x300.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Abdulkhaliq_Saeed-150x150.jpg 150w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Abdulkhaliq_Saeed.jpg 440w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Abdulkhaliq_Saeed-300x300.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/WER_10.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/WER_10.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Air_New_Zealand_Virgin_Australia-300x111.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Air_New_Zealand_Virgin_Australia-1024x378.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Air_New_Zealand_Virgin_Australia-768x284.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Air_New_Zealand_Virgin_Australia.jpg 1292w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Air_New_Zealand_Virgin_Australia-300x111.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/CALC-300x128.png 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/CALC.png 766w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/CALC-300x128.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-300x200.jpeg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-1024x683.jpeg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-768x512.jpeg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-1536x1024.jpeg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-2048x1366.jpeg 2048w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-1320x880.jpeg 1320w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Deutsche_Aircraft_Crane_-300x200.jpeg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Textron_Aviation-Cessna-SkyCourier-300x200.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Textron_Aviation-Cessna-SkyCourier.jpg 480w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Textron_Aviation-Cessna-SkyCourier-300x200.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Atlas_Air_Boeing_747-8_Frighter-300x210.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Atlas_Air_Boeing_747-8_Frighter-358x250.jpg 358w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Atlas_Air_Boeing_747-8_Frighter.jpg 575w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Atlas_Air_Boeing_747-8_Frighter-300x210.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Aergo_Captial_SMBC_TWay-737-300x198.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Aergo_Captial_SMBC_TWay-737-1024x674.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Aergo_Captial_SMBC_TWay-737-768x506.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Aergo_Captial_SMBC_TWay-737.jpg 1280w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Aergo_Captial_SMBC_TWay-737-300x198.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK-300x169.webp 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK-1024x576.webp 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK-768x432.webp 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK-1536x864.webp 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK-1320x743.webp 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK.webp 1920w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LHT_EVA-Air_AeroSHARK-300x169.webp",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-300x200.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-768x512.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-1320x880.jpg 1320w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/magniX_NASA_Dash7_aircraft-300x200.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-300x200.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-768x512.jpg 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-370x247.jpg 370w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-1320x880.jpg 1320w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Swissport_Cargo_handling_-300x200.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Servotecnica_Slip_rings-300x210.png 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Servotecnica_Slip_rings.png 609w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Servotecnica_Slip_rings-300x210.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Air_Asia-300x194.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Air_Asia-370x239.jpg 370w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Air_Asia.jpg 600w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Air_Asia-300x194.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_-300x233.webp 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_-1024x795.webp 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_-768x596.webp 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_-1536x1192.webp 1536w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_-1320x1024.webp 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_.webp 1920w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/BCT_Aviation_Maintenance_-300x233.webp",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/QWCS24.png 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/QWCS24-300x68.png 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/QWCS24-1024x233.png 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/QWCS24-768x175.png 768w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/QWCS24.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582-x-284.png 1213w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582-x-284-300x146.png 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582-x-284-1024x500.png 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582-x-284-768x375.png 768w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582-x-284.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582x284.jpg 582w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582x284-300x146.jpg 300w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/582x284.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/new-300x250-banner-copy.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/new-300x250-banner-copy.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Aircraft-Interiors-300x2173-1.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Aircraft-Interiors-300x2173-1.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/900x300.jpg 900w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/900x300-300x100.jpg 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/900x300-768x256.jpg 768w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/900x300.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Marketplace-withfont-copy.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Marketplace-withfont-copy.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/MRO-2024-08-Cover-pers-scaled.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/MRO-2024-08-Cover-pers-scaled.jpg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/MediaPackCover2024.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/MediaPackCover2024.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-150x150.png 150w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-300x300.png 300w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-768x765.png 768w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-1024x1020.png 1024w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-251x250.png 251w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-400x400.png 400w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-1320x1315.png 1320w, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2.png 1522w",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tamarjorssencrop.fw_-2-150x150.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Malte_Tamm--150x150.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Malte_Tamm--150x150.png",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewBlueFinalv1.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewBlueFinalv1.svg",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 1x, https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg 2x",
"https://avitrader.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/AviTraderLogoNewWhiteFinalv1-2.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Heike Tamm"
] |
2022-11-15T00:00:00
|
Boeing has delivered the 20th CH-47F Chinook to the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF), concluding the country's latest fleet update. “Our continuing partnership with the Royal Netherlands Air Force exemplifies the value of a modern and versatile Chinook fleet,” said Ken Eland, Vice President and H-47 programme manager. “These state-of-the art aircraft will significantly improve its […]
|
en
|
AviTrader Aviation News
|
https://avitrader.com/2022/11/15/boeing-delivers-20th-ch-47f-chinook-to-royal-netherlands-air-force/
|
Main Menu
AviTrader sponsorship ad
Boeing delivers 20th CH-47F Chinook to Royal Netherlands Air Force
10:47 am
Military & Defense
Boeing has delivered the 20th CH-47F Chinook to the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF), concluding the country's latest fleet update.
“Our continuing partnership with the Royal Netherlands Air Force exemplifies the value of a modern and versatile Chinook fleet,” said Ken Eland, Vice President and H-47 programme manager. “These state-of-the art aircraft will significantly improve its defense and humanitarian assistance capabilities.”
The Netherlands is one of eight NATO countries to operate the Chinook and has fielded the aircraft continuously since receiving its first CH-47D models in 1995. In 2016, the RNLAF purchased 14 new CH-47F Chinooks through the U.S. Department of Defense's Foreign Military Sales programme. In 2017, the RNLAF signed an agreement to upgrade its remaining six D-model Chinook helicopters to the latest F-model configuration, ensuring commonality of systems for its entire 20-aircraft fleet.
Share this Article
Lufthansa subsidiary Discover Airlines has condemned the strike call issued by the pilots' union Cockpit (VC) and the cabin crew union UFO as irresponsible, the FAZ reported. The strike is set to begin at 00:01 today and last for four days, concluding on Frida... Read More »
Latvian national airline airBaltic is set to significantly boost its training capabilities with the addition of a second Airbus A220 full-flight simulator (FFS), scheduled for delivery in the fourth quarter of 2024. This new simulator will play a key role in s... Read More »
StandardAero has announced its acquisition of Aero Turbine Inc., a provider of maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) services and consultative repair solutions for military engines and accessories. The acquisition was made from Gallant Capital, a Los Angeles-... Read More »
Embraer has announced the sale of up to six A-29 Super Tucano aircraft to Uruguay's Air Force (FAU). The contract, part of a fleet renewal programme aimed at expanding the FAU's operational capacity, includes the acquisition of one aircraft with a commitment t... Read More »
China is set to more than double its commercial airplane fleet by 2043 as the country's aviation industry expands and modernises to meet the growing demand for both passenger and cargo air travel. This projection comes from Boeing's 2024 Commercial Market Outl... Read More »
SAS and the Norwegian cabin unions have successfully concluded mediation, reaching an agreement after a four-day strike. The industrial action, which primarily impacted flights in Norway, caused limited disruptions. However, by tomorrow, August 28, SAS anticip... Read More »
Oman Air has taken delivery of its latest Boeing B787-9 aircraft, the first of three scheduled for arrival this year. This addition is part of an existing order that includes eight more aircraft to be delivered by 2027, bringing the airline's total Dreamliner ... Read More »
The Board of Directors of Saudia Technic has appointed Engineer Abdulkhaliq Saeed as the company's new CEO, succeeding Captain Fahd H. Cynndy. Captain Cynndy will transition to the role of Managing Director, focusing on the growth of Saudia Group's owned compa... Read More »
Virgin Australia and Air New Zealand are set to renew their trans-Tasman collaboration following approval of a new codeshare agreement by Australian and New Zealand regulators. Under this agreement, Virgin Australia customers will be able to book direct flight... Read More »
China Aircraft Leasing Group Holdings (CALC) has reported its unaudited interim results for the six months ending June 30, 2024, showcasing an 8.7% increase in total revenue to HK$2,528.1 million. Profit attributable to shareholders amounted to HK$131.7 millio... Read More »
Crane Aerospace & Electronics (Crane A&E), a division of the Crane Company, has been selected by German original equipment manufacturer (OEM) Deutsche Aircraft to provide the proximity sensing system for its 40-seat regional turboprop, the D328eco. Thi... Read More »
Textron Aviation has announced that its Cessna SkyCourier twin utility turboprop has received type certification from the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP), enhancing the aircraft's capacity to support operations in remote regions of Southeast... Read More »
Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings is expanding its fleet with the addition of three Boeing 747-8 freighters to meet the growing global demand for large wide-body airfreight capacity, particularly in cross-border e-commerce shipping. The three new 747-8Fs, secured t... Read More »
Aergo Capital Limited has acquired two Boeing 737-800 aircraft, with manufacturer serial numbers 40308 and 34989, from SMBC Aviation Capital. The aircraft are currently leased to Korean low-cost carrier T'way. Fred Browne, CEO of Aergo, expressed enthusiasm ab... Read More »
Lufthansa Technik (LHT) has unveiled EVA Air as the first Asian airline to adopt the drag-reducing AeroSHARK surface technology, developed in partnership with BASF. The Taipei-based airline has committed to modifying its entire cargo fleet of nine Boeing 777F ... Read More »
MagniX, a pioneering company in electric aviation, has launched the next phase of the NASA electrified powertrain flight demonstration (EPFD) programme with the unveiling of a De Havilland DHC-7 (Dash 7) aircraft, which will be retrofitted with magniX's state-... Read More »
Air cargo tonnages experienced a sharp decline in Week 33 (August 12. to 18.), dropping by 7% compared to the previous week. The decrease was particularly steep from Asia Pacific (9%) and Europe (11%) origins. A detailed analysis, based on over 450,000 weekly ... Read More »
Servotecnica, a developer of slip rings and customised mechatronic solutions, has announced an expansion of its operations in Fair Oaks, California, to better support and service its rapidly growing slip ring customer base. Specialising in compact and high-rel... Read More »
Capital A Berhad (Capital A) has reported the successful signing of a US$443 million revenue bond for AirAsia, marking a crucial step in its ongoing efforts to strengthen its financial position and accelerate growth in its airline business. This financing is a... Read More »
BCT Aviation Maintenance has gained European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) approval for the expansion of its base maintenance services to include C checks for B737-series aircraft. This development enhances the company's ability to provide comprehensive ... Read More »
Aviation News Categories
2023 MEDIA KIT
VP Sales & Business Development Americas
Tamar Jorssen
[email protected]
Phone: +1 (778) 213 8543
VP International Sales & Marketing
Malte Tamm
[email protected]
Phone: +49 (0)162 8263049
Please leave this field empty
Subscribe to the most widely accepted news source in the aviation industry!
Free Daily, Weekly and MRO Publications delivered to your Inbox!
News Alerts, Editorials, Marketplace, Executive Interviews +more
Your Email Address: *
Select publications: Daily News Alert Weekly Aviation Headline News Monthly MRO e-Magazine
*we respect your privacy and AviTrader will not share your email address to any 3rd Parties.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 87
|
https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/usafserials.html
|
en
|
USASC-USAAS-USAAC-USAAF-USAF Military Aircraft Serial Numbers--1908 to Present
|
[
"http://www.joebaugher.com/emailaddress.jpg",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/smredball.gif",
"https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/train.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
On August 1, 1907, the Aeronautical Division of the United States Army Signal Corps was established, and the United States Army purchased its first heavier-than-air aircraft, a Wright Model A, in 1908. It was allocated the serial number 1. Further Army aircraft were assigned serial numbers in sequence of their purchase. Unfortunately, early records from these days are rather incomplete, and there are numerous gaps and conflicts. To add to the confusion, it often happened that at the time an aircraft was rebuilt, it was assigned a brand new serial number. Some aircraft from this period (for example the DH-4 "Liberty Plane") are known to have carried at least four serial numbers during their careers. After a while, certain serial number blocks were introduced--the 200 block was reserved for seaplanes, the 40000 block for experimental aircraft, and the 94000 block for prototypes and aircraft under evaluation.
The new Army Aeronautical Division was renamed the United States Army Air Service (USAAS) on May 14, 1918. The sequential serial number scheme continued until the end of US Fiscal Year (FY) 1921 (which was June 30, 1921). At that time, the numbers had reached 69592, plus a special block of 1919-1921 experimental procurements in the 94022/94112 range.
Starting on July 1, 1921 (the beginning of FY 1922) a new serial number system was adopted based on procurement within each Fiscal Year. Each serial number now consisted of a base number corresponding to the last two digits of the FY in which money was allocated to manufacture the aircraft, and a sequence number indicating the sequential order in which the particular aircraft was ordered within that particular FY. For example, airplane 22-1 was the first aircraft ordered in FY 1922, 23-1 was the first example ordered in FY 1923, etc. This system is still in use today.
It is important to recognize that the serial number reflects the Fiscal Year in which the order for the aircraft is placed, NOT the year in which it is delivered. Nowadays, the difference between the time the order is placed and the time the aircraft is actually delivered can be as much as several years.
On July 2, 1926, the Army Air Service was renamed the United States Army Air Corps (USAAC). On June 20, 1941, the USAAC was renamed the United States Army Air Force (USAAF). On September 18, 1947, the United States Army Air Force was split off from the US Army and became a separate service, the United States Air Force. Throughout all of these changes the earlier fiscal-year serial number system remained unchanged.
In 1947, at about the same time that the USAF was officially formed, DoD regulation 5304.9003 was promulgated which required that the sequence number now have at least 3 digits. This means that fiscal year serials with individual sequence numbers less than 100 are filled up with zeroes to bring them up to 3 digits in length. So 48-1 is written as 48-001 in official documentation. Sequence numbers greater than 9999 are written with 5 digits. In 1958, the minimum number of digits in the sequence number was raised to four, so that the 1958 aircraft series started at 58-0001.
Lend-Lease
Following the passage of the Lend-Lease Act in 1941, USAAF serial numbers were allocated to US-built aircraft intended for service with Allied air forces during the Second World War. This was done strictly for administrative purposes, even though these aircraft were never intended for USAAF service. Later, during the Cold War, aircraft supplied to US allies under the Mutual Aid Program or the Mutual Defense Assistance Program were assigned USAF serial numbers for record-keeping purposes, even though they never actually served with the USAF.
Not all the aircraft which served with the US Army Air Force were issued USAAF serial numbers. The best-known examples are those aircraft acquired abroad by the US Army during the Second World War. In most cases, they operated under their foreign designations and serials. For example, the Spitfires acquired in the UK under "Reverse Lend-Lease" were operated under their British designations and their British serial numbers. In addition, some US-built aircraft that were ordered by Britain prior to Lend-Lease but later impressed into USAAF service still retained their Royal Air Force serials.
Rebuilt Aircraft
Occasionally, USAF aircraft are extensively remanufactured to bring them up to modern standards or to fulfill completely new roles for which they were not originally designed. In many cases, these aircraft are re-serialed with new numbers relevant to their year of re-manufacture. However, this rule is not always followed--re the rather grotesque modifications inflicted on some C-135 aircraft which did not result in new serial numbers.
Aircraft Inherited from the Navy
The US Navy and the US Marine Corps have an entirely different serial numbering scheme, based on numerically progressive numbers allocated by the Bureau of Aeronautics. Occasionally, aircraft are transferred from the Navy to the USAF. If the transfer is anticipated to be permanent, it is usually the case that the transferred aircraft are given USAF serial numbers. Most often, the USAF serials of these transferred Navy aircraft are inserted within the regular sequence of numbers, but sometimes these new USAF serials are constructed by retroactively adding additional numbers at the end of the sequence number block for the fiscal year in which they were originally ordered by the Navy. Aircraft that are only temporarily transferred to the USAF from the Navy usually retain their Navy serial numbers even though painted in USAF markings, but it sometimes happens that aircraft loaned by the Navy are assigned brand-new USAF serials. Unfortunately, the system is not always consistent.
Exceptions to the Rule
In recent years, the assignment of USAF serial numbers has not always been in strict numerical order within the FY. Furthermore, an aircraft is sometimes listed in a given FY block when it was actually ordered in a different FY. This is most often done for reasons of special convenience. For example, the serials of the two "Air Force One" VC-137s (62-6000 and 72-7000) might indicate that they were ordered ten years apart, whereas the actual difference was only seven years. The Presidential VC-25s were ordered in FY 1986 under the serials 86-8800 and 86-8900, but these numbers were changed to 82-8000 and 92-9000 by special order to create a series following the two earlier VC-137Cs. When some civilian aircraft have been acquired by the USAF, either by purchase or by seizure, serial numbers have sometimes been assigned out of sequence, with their numbers deliberately chosen to match their former civilian registration numbers. Other times, serial number allocation is done for reasons of secrecy, to conceal the existence of classified aircraft from prying eyes. For example, the serial numbers of the F-117s were initially assigned in strict numerical order, but they were sprinkled among several different fiscal years. In other cases, the serial numbers (e.g. the serial numbers for the new F-22 Raptor fighters) were derived from the manufacturer's construction numbers rather than from the sequence in which they were ordered. Another odd example was the A-1 Skyraiders acquired from the Navy for use in Vietnam--they had USAF serial numbers constructed by taking the plane's Navy serial number (Bureau Number) and prefixing in front of it the fiscal year number in which the plane was ordered by the Navy. For example Navy A-1E Skyraider BuNo 132890 became 52-132890 on USAF rolls.
Missiles and Drones
During the 1950s and 1960s, it was common practice to include missiles and unmanned aircraft in USAF serial number batches. Consequently, it is not always possible to determine the total number of aircraft ordered by the USAF simply by looking at serial number ranges.
Army Aircraft
Following the splitoff of the USAF from the US Army, the Army continued to use the same serial number system for its aircraft, with the serials for Army and Air Force aircraft being intermixed within the same FY sequence.
Beginning in FY 1967, the Army began using serials beginning at 15000 for each FY, so Army aircraft could usually be distinguished from USAF aircraft by their high serial numbers. In addition, if an Army aircraft of helicopter had a serial number with less than 4 digits, extra zeros were added to pad the number out to 5 digits.
In FY 1971, the Army went over to a new serial series for their helicopters, which started at 20000 and had continued consecutively since then. Within each FY, the US Army numbers are much higher than the USAF numbers are ever likely to get, so there is not much danger of any overlap.
The Display of Serial Numbers on Aircraft
By 1914, when the Army first began to acquire tractor-engined aircraft, the official serial number began to be painted in large block figures on both sides of the fuselage or on the rudder. These numbers were so large that they could be easily seen and recognized from a considerable distance. At the time of American entry into the First World War, the large numbers were retained on the fuselage and sometimes added to the top of the white rudder stripe. By early 1918, the letters "S.C." (for "Signal Corps") were often added as a prefix to the displayed serial number. When the Army Air Service was created in May of 1918, the letters SC were replaced by "A.S". (for "Air Service"). In July of 1926, the Army Air Service was renamed the Army Air Corps, and the serial number prefix became A.C. for "Air Corps". However, these prefix letters were not part of the official serial number, and were finally dropped in 1932.
By late 1924, the fuselage serial numbers began to get smaller in size, until they standardized on four-inch figures on each side of the fuselage. In 1926, the words "U.S. Army" were often added to the fuselage number, and in 1928 the manufacturer's name and the Army designation were also added to the display, but this was not always done.
The three-line fuselage data block was reduced in size to one-inch characters in 1932 and placed on the left hand side of the fuselage near the cockpit. This is known as the Technical Data Block (TDB). The data block not only displayed the full serial number, but also the exact model type and sometimes the aircraft's home base or the branch of the military with which it served. The TDB eventually became the only place on the aircraft where the serial number was actually displayed. It was often true that the only other sort of identification shown was a unit and base identification code displayed on both sides of the fuselage or on the fin. This made it difficult to identify the actual serial number of the aircraft, leading to a lot of confusion.
The Technical Data Block is still used today, although it is now called the Aircraft Data Legend, and by the early 1990s it was reduced in size to letters only 1/2 inch high and moved to a new position near the ground refuelling receptacle. T.O 1-1-4 states that the Technical Data Block can be either on the fuselage side or near the ground refuelling receptacle.
For a few years during the late 1940s and early 1950s, the serial number displayed in the Technical Data Block often carried a suffix letter, which was not actually part of the official serial number. Five letters were used--A for US Air Force, G for US Army, N for Air National Guard, R for Air Force Reserve, and T for Reserve Officers Training Course (ROTC). For a while the letter M was used for USAF aircraft associated with American embassies in foreign countries, but this use was discontinued in August 1955.
The lack of a readily-visible serial number on Army aircraft began to be a serious problem, and on October 28, 1941, shortly after the USAAF had been formed, an order was given that numbers of no less that 4 digits would be painted on the tail fin of all Army aircraft (where feasible) in a size large enough to be seen from at least 150 yards away. This was officially called the radio call number, but was almost universally known as the tail number. Since military aircraft were at that time not expected to last more than ten years, the first digit of the fiscal year number was omitted in the tail number as was the AC prefix and the hyphen. For example, Curtiss P-40B serial number 41-5205 had the tail number 15205 painted on its tail fin, Curtiss P-40K serial number 42-11125 had the tail number 211125 painted on the fin, and P-51B 42-106559 had 2106559 painted on the tail. Since the Army (later Air Force) used the last four digits of the tail number as a radio call sign, for short serial numbers (those less than 100), the tail number was expanded out to four digits by adding zeros in front of the sequence number. For example, 41-38 would have the tail number written as 1038.
Consequently, in most situations for a World War II-era aircraft where the tail number is visible, you can deduce the serial number simply by putting a dash after the first digit, prefixing a 4, and you automatically have the serial number. Unfortunately, there were many deviations from these rules--there are examples in which only the last 4 or 5 digits were painted on the tail, which makes identification of the aircraft particularly difficult.
In the 1950s, many airplanes left over from the World War II era were still in service, exceeding their expected service lives of less than 10 years. In order to avoid potential confusion with later aircraft given the same tail number, these older aircraft had the number zero and a dash added in front of the tail number to indicate that they were over 10 years old. It was hoped that this would avoid confusion caused by duplication of tail numbers between two aircraft built over ten years apart. However, this was not always done, and it was not always possible uniquely to identify an aircraft by a knowledge of its tail number. This practice was eventually discontinued when people started referring to the number 0 as being a letter O, standing for Obsolete. The requirement for the 0- prefix was officially dropped on April 24, 1972.
For a few years during the late 1940s and early 1950s, the serial number displayed in the Technical Data Block often carried a suffix letter, which was not actually part of the official serial number. Five letters were used--A for US Air Force, G for US Army, N for Air National Guard, R for Air Force Reserve, and T for Reserve Officers Training Course (ROTC)
In 1958, a regulation was promulgated which decreed that that the tail number should be expanded to a minimum of 5 digits in length. Sometimes the tail number was cut down in length to five digits by deliberately omitting both of the fiscal year digits--for example 64-14841 would be presented on the tail as 14841. Sometime, one or more of the first digits of the sequence number would also be omitted. This practice lead to a lot of confusion.
Camouflage began to reappear on USAF aircraft during the Vietnam War, and this led to a change in tail number presentation. The letters "AF" were added directly above the last two digits of the fiscal year, followed by the last three digits of the sequence number. The three-digit sequence number has a height of the AF and fiscal year letters combined and is sometimes called the "large" component of the tail number. For example, F-4E serial number 67-0288 had the tail number 67(small) 288 (large). This could of course lead to confusion, since aircraft 67-1288, 67-2288, etc would have exactly the same tail numbers as 67-0288 under this scheme. This would not ordinary cause a whole lot of difficulty unless of course some of these larger serial numbers also happened to be F-4Es (which they were not). Unfortunately, the system was not always consistent--for example F-4D serial number 66-0234 had a tail number that looks like this: 60(small) 234(large). It appears as if this number was obtained by omitting the first digit of the fiscal, and combining the remaining "6" with the "0234". Consequently, one often has to do a lot of educated guessing in order to derive the aircraft serial number from a knowledge of its tail number, and a knowledge of the aircraft type and sometimes even the version is required. I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has noted different tail number presentations on recent USAF aircraft.
However, Air Mobility Command and USAF Europe aircraft still display the previous format for the tail number, with all digits being the same size and the first digit being the last digit of the Fiscal Year and the remaining 4 digits being the last 4 digits of the sequence number. There is no AF displayed, just the name of the command a couple of feet above it. AMC regulations state that the tail number must be the last five digits of the serial number. If the serial number does not have five significant characters at the end, the last digit of the fiscal year becomes the first character, and zeroes are used to fill up the space to make five digits. This would make 58-0001 appear as 80001. The Technical Order refers to radio call numbers on the fin, the full serial number only appearing within the Aircraft Data Legend block. In those rare cases in which the Air Force purchased more than 10,000 aircraft in a single fiscal year (1964 was such a year), aircraft with serial numbers greater than 10,000 would have both digits of the fiscal year omitted--for example the tail number of 64-14840 is 14840, not 44840. An exception was the tail number of EC-130H serial number 73-1583, which had its tail number displayed as 731583, i.e., the full serial number without the hyphen. Again, I would like to hear from anyone who has seen different types of serial number displays on Air Mobility Command aircraft.
Buzz Numbers
In the years immediately following World War 2, many USAAF/USAF aircraft used markings that would make it possible to identify low-flying aircraft from the ground. This was intended to discourage the unsafe practice of pilots of high-performance aircraft making low passes (colloquially known as "buzzing") over ground points. Consequently, these numbers came to be known as buzz numbers.
The system used two letters and three numbers, painted as large as practically feasible on each side of the fuselage and on the underside of the left wing. The two letter code identified the type and model of the aircraft, and the three digits consisted of the last three numbers of the serial number. For example, all fighters were identified by the letter P (later changed to F), and the second letter identified the fighter type. For example, the buzz number code for the F-86 Sabre was FU, for the F-100 Super Sabre it was FW. The buzz number for F-100A 53-1551 was FW-551, the buzz number for F-86D 53-1020 was FU-020.
On occasion, two planes of the same type and model would have the same last three digits in their serial numbers. When this happened, the two aircraft were distinguished by adding the suffix letter A to the buzz number of the later aircraft, preceded by a dash.
Some stateside aircraft during World War II carried enlarged code numbers on their sides, but I don't know if the purpose of these large markings were to act as "buzz numbers".
The system was in wide use throughout the 1950s, but was gradually phased out during the 1960s. The January 1965 edition of Technical Order 1-1-4 dropped all mention of any buzz number requirement, and these numbers started getting painted over and were largely gone by the middle of 1965.
Army Serial Numbers
After the the United States Army Air Force was split off from the US Army and became a separate service, the United States Air Force on September 18, 1947, both the Army and the Air Force continued to use the same set of serial numbers for their aircraft. Army aircraft serials were seamlessly intermixed with Air Force serials, with no gaps or overlaps.
But in 1966, the Army started using five digit sequence numbers that were greater than any sequence numbers used by the USAF, so that observers would not confuse aircraft between the two services. In addition, Army sequence numbers that were allocated within the Air Force sequence were often padded with extra zeros to make them have a total of 5 digits. Unfortunately, there is some confusion, since this system was not always consistently followed, and there were numerous departures from this norm. Although the Army started using 5 digit serial numbers starting in 1964, there was a mixed bag of four and five digit numbers in actual use. For tail number presentations (or pylon numbers for helicopters), the early years were pretty consistent, using the last digit of the fiscal year and just the four digits of the serial number being shown. When the five digit serial numbers started being used, there was a mixture of tail number presentations of just the five digits with no year (and sometimes a leading zero!), as well as presentations in which the last digit of the year was shown, along with all five of the sequence numbers. Sometimes both the digits of the year number were painted over and then just the the five-digit sequence number was presented. Sometimes, Army helicopters used the last three digits of the sequence number as a call sign and you will often see those three digits painted on the nose, the side window or highlighted on the pylon itself. There are even a few older aircraft with the two digit year and the entire five digit serial number shown, just to round out all the options. (Ref, Nick Van Valkenburgh, Jul 26, 2013)
In 1971, the Army started using sequence numbers starting at 20000, and the numbers were not restarted with each succeeding fiscal year.
In written correspondence, the leading zeros were often dropped. It is not at all clear when the system of padding sequence numbers with zeros actually started. It also seems that the Army continues to use both systems for its aircraft serial numbers, one a sequence number greater than any sequence numbers used by the USAF, plus lower sequence number padded with zeros. (Ref, Nick Van Valkenburgh, Jul 26, 2013)
The Boneyards
The ultimate end for many USAF and US Army aircraft and helicopters once they leave active service is the boneyards at the Davis-Monthan AFB near Tucson, Arizona. Navy and Coast Guard aircraft are also transferred here, as well as some foreign-owned aircraft as well as government-owned aircraft. At the end of World War 2, the base was selected as a storage site for decommissioned military aircraft. The dry climate of Tucson and the alkali soil made it ideal for aircraft storage and preservation. Excess DoD and Coast Guard aircraft are stored there after they are removed from service. Sometimes the aircraft are actually returned to active service, either as remotely-controlled drones or are sold to friendly foreign governments, but most often they are scavenged for spare parts to keep other aircraft flying or are scrapped.
Over the years the offical name of the Davis-Monthan storage facility has changed several times. Here is a list of the names of the facility tnat have been used over the years (ref: Dennis Loyd):
Davis-Monthan Army Airfield, Arizona
233rd Army Air Force Base Unit (Combat Crew Training School (Very Heavy)) 25 Mar 1944 14 Nov 1945 Assigned to Second Air Force (some B-29s began coming in Oct/Nov 1945)
4105th Army Air Force Base Unit (Air Base)15 Nov 1945 20 Oct 1946 Base transferred to HQ San Antonio Air Technical Service Command.
4105th Army Air Force Base Unit (Aircraft Storage) 21 Oct 1946 17 Sep 1947
Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona
4105th Air Force Base Unit (Aircraft Storage) 18 Sep 1947 27 Aug 1948 Assigned to San Antonio Air Materiel Area (renamed of HQ San Antonio Air Technical Service Command)
3040th Aircraft Storage Depot 28 Aug 1948 31 May 1956
Arizona Aircraft Storage Branch 1 Jun 1956 31 Jul 1959
2704th Air Force Aircraft Storage and Disposition Group 1 Aug 1959 31 Jan 1965 Assigned to San Bernardino Air Materiel Area
Military Aircraft Storage and Disposition Center (MASDC) 1 Feb 1965 30 Sep 1985
Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC) 1 Oct 1985 30 Sep 2007
309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) 1 Oct 2007 - Present
AMARC was officially redesignated May 2, 2007 as the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG), but it still uses the title AMARC for worldwide recognition and legacy reasons. If I know of the date at which an aircraft was transferred to the facility, I list it here.
When an aircraft entered the facility, it was initially assigned a code number (known as a Production Control Number, or PCN) consisting of four letters, followed by a three-digit number. The first two letters specify the service (AA for Air Force, AN for Navy, AC for Coast Guard, AX for government agency aircraft, AY for foreign allied aircraft). The second pair of letters specify the type of aircraft (e.g FP for the F-4 Phantom), and the three digit number specifies the order in which the particular plane of that type was entered into the facility. For example, the first F-4 admitted to the facility was be numbered AAFP001, with two zeros being added to pad out number of digits to 3. So the PCN was useful in telling at a glance who owned the aircraft, what type of aircraft it was, and the order in which it arrived at the facility
Prior to Oct 1994 the number in the PCN code had three digits, but AMARC realised that they were soon going to have more than 1000 F-4s on inventory, and the decision was made that it was necessary to expand the number format to four digits in order to accommodate new Phantom arrivals. So RF-4C 64-1021 was given the number AAFP969 on Oct 19, 1994 and the next arrival 64-1068 was given the number AAFP0970 the same day. All later F-4s arrivals were numbered in the four-digit style. I imagine that once AMARC had altered their database field to use 6 characters, they then decided to use that style for ALL new arrivals from Oct '94, and a zero was prefixed when the order number was less than 1000. Ref: eLaReF, Jun 17, 2012.
To add to the confusion, an aircraft could receive multiple PCNs if it came back to the facility multiple times - for example - an aircraft might have come in to the facility for service life extension (it would have been given a PCN for the duration of its refit). Then it would have been returned to the operational fleet. During its service, if the operators determine that all aircraft of this type need something else to be checked, the aircraft would return to the facility for that check as part of some minor repair work. On arrival it would have received a new (2nd) PCN. On completion of the minor repairs, the aircraft would return to the operators. Eventually when the operators determine that the aircraft is no longer needed and they retire it to storage, a third PCN would have been assigned. If it happened that the aircraft were returned to service yet again and then brought back to the facility for storage, it would get a *fourth* PCH. (Ref: Robert D. Raine, Jun 27, 2013)
An aircraft can also be assigned a different PCN if it is administratively tranferred to a different service while it is sitting in the boneyards. For example - AMARG currently stores a C-131 that originally arrived as a Navy asset (and was assigned a Navy PCN). The Navy transferred the aircraft to the Air Force (so the Navy PCN was removed and replaced by an Air Force PCN). The USAF then transferred it to another government agency, so the USAF PCN was removed and replaced by a U.S. Gov't agency PCN beginning with the prefix "AX." Same plane, three different PCNs. (Ref: Robert D. Raine, Jun 27, 2013)
Recently, AMARG introduced a new computer system and decided to stop bothering to assign a PCN when an aircraft arrives at the facility. Everything is now tracked by serial number, since no two aircraft ever have exactly the same serial number. PCNs were not removed from older aircraft, but new PCNs are no longer assigned to aircraft when they arrive. (Ref: Robert D. Raine, Jun 27, 2013).
A list of the serial numbers of aircraft transferred to the facility can be found on the website at www.amarcexperience.com.
Manufacturer's Serial Numbers
When an aircraft is constructed, the company which built it assigns it a manufacturer's serial number. This number is usually displayed on a plate mounted somewhere inside the aircraft. When the aircraft is sold to the Air Force, it is issued a military serial number by the Defense Department. These two numbers bear no relationship with each other, but they are often confused with each other. When I know the manufacturer's serial number of a particular military aircraft, I list it. If a military aircraft ultimately ends up in civilian hands, it is issued a civil registration number by the owner's national civilian aviation authority. In the USA, these numbers are issued by the FAA, and are known as N-numbers in the USA, since they all begin with the letter N. Typically, the FAA uses the aircraft's manufacturer serial number to track these aircraft. For example, a lot of C-47 Skytrain aircraft ended up in civilian hands after their military service ended, and they are tracked by using their manufacturer's serial numbers.
Missing Air Crew Reports
During World War II, Missing Air Crew Reports (MACRs) were written to record the facts of the last known circumstances regarding missing air crews. First authorized in May of 1943, MACRs were prepared by the unit shortly after the aircrew loss, and they were then sent to AAF Heaquarters where they were filed. The MACRs were numbered in the order of their issuance. Some MACRs were prepared after the war was over, as needs and circumstances dictated. In addition, some MACRs were prepared at the end of the war to cover losses that took place prior to the introduction of the MACR system. This why some 1942/43 losses have larger MACR numbers than those that took place after May 1943. A list of MACR numbers (along with the aircraft type, the unit, and the date) can be found at ArmyAirForces.com of World War II. Full copies of MACRs can be ordered from the National Archives at National Archives Military Records.
The following is a list of serial numbers for US Army and USAF aircraft. It is incomplete, with numerous gaps--especially in later years. If I know the final disposition of a particular aircraft, or if the aircraft has some special historical significance, this information is listed here too.
Enjoy yourself browsing through these lists--there are lots of neat historical interludes provided here. These lists are by no means complete or error-free and I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has additions or corrections.
There are a lot of people who want to know about the operational history or ultimate disposition of a particular aircraft referred to in this database, but about which I have little or no information. If you have a specific question about the history of a particular USAAF/USAF aircraft, you might try the Air Force Historical Research Agency which is located at Maxwell AFB, Alabama. They have cards on virtually every aircraft ever owned or operated by the USAAC/USAAF/USAF, and they might be able to answer your question fairly quickly. Another source of information is the Individual Aircraft Record Card file located at the National Air and Space Museum Archives Division. They also may be able to help you. However, you are always welcome to e-mail me in any case and I will see if I can dig up something.
Search Engine
If you want to search this site for a serial number or for a particular aircraft type, go to Jeremy Kuris's search engine:
Search Engine For This Site
Send e-mail with comments and/or suggestions to
Cumulative Serial Number Series: 1908-1921
1908-1921 Serial Numbers Last revised May 6, 2023
Serial Number Listings by Fiscal Year: 1922-present
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 4
|
https://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article8.html
|
en
|
The ultimate F
|
[
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/F-16.net-logo.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album54/acl.png?m=1371940298",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/f-16-photos/album37/album13/aaj.jpg?m=1371897672",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/f-16-photos/album37/album13/abf.jpg?m=1370457671",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/agd.jpg?m=1371931114",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/rss-feed.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/facebook.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/twitter.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/linkedin.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/graphics/F-16.net.ico
| null |
Introduction
The Royal Netherlands Air Force purchased a total of 213 F-16A/B aircraft. The Netherlands were one of the four European Participating Air Forces, and one of 5 countries to build the F-16 locally. Force reductions saw the fleet reduced to 68 aircraft, all of them upgraded to MLU standard. Some surplus aircraft have been sold to Jordan and Chile.
Inventory
Initial Order
The Netherlands was one of the four initial European NATO customers for the F-16, along with Belgium, Denmark, and Norway. The initial Dutch order for F-16A/B aircraft was for 102 examples (80 single-seat F-16A's and 22 two-seat F-16B's), which were to be assembled at Fokker. This line first opened up for business in April of 1978, and was the second of the European F-16 final assembly lines to open, SABCA in Belgium being the first. The first Dutch built F-16 took off on its maiden flight on May 3rd, 1979, with test pilot Henk Temmen at the controls. Initial delivery of the F-16A/B to the KLu took place in June of 1979.
Follow-On Order
In March of 1980, the Netherlands announced plans (finally approved by the Dutch Parliament in December 1983) to buy an additional 111 aircraft (97 F-16A's and 14 F-16B's). This brought the total F-16 inventory to 213 aircraft, 177 A models and 36 B models. The last F-16 rolled off the line at Fokker's Schiphol plant on February 27th, 1992. It was #J-021 (#89-0021), and was the last of 213 examples delivered to the KLu.
Fleet Reduction
In 2003, the Dutch government decided to cut the F-16 force by 25%. From 2004 onwards, The Netherlands will provide 108 F-16s to NATO, with 90 being available for operational deployments. As many as 36 F-16s would be sold; however, increased attrition losses might reduce this number.
On November 21st, 2005 Jordan signed a LOI to buy three Dutch F-16s, all two-seaters. These aircraft #J-650, #J-653 and #J-654 will be delivered in 2009. All these F-16s have been modified with the MLU upgrade. ANother 3 two-seaters were added to the order in 2007.
In December of 2005 the Chilean government signed a contract with the Netherlands to supply it with up to 18 Dutch F-16s (11 Alpha models and 7 Bravo models). These will form a new squadron aside the newly delivered block 50 F-16s. Another lot was ordered in May of 2008 for delivery in 2010. These 18 F-16s are all A-models and will equip another Chilean squadron.
RNLAF Inventory Program Model Block Qty. Serials Delivered Initial Order F-16A block 1 12 J-212/J-223 1979-1980 F-16B Block 1 6 J-259/J-264 1979-1980 F-16A block 5 14 J-224/J-237 1980-1981 F-16B Block 5 2 J-265/J-266 1980-1981 F-16A block 10 20 J-238/J-257 1981-1982 F-16B Block 10 5 J-267/J-271 1981-1982 F-16A Block 15 34 J-258
J-616/J-648 1982-1984 F-16B Block 15 9 J-649/J-657 1982-1984 Follow-On Order F-16A Block 15 50 J-864/J-881
J-192/J-207
J-358/J-367
J-135/J-140 1984-1987 F-16B Block 15 9 J-882
J-884/J-885
J-208/J-211
J-368/J-369 1984-1987 F-16A block 15OCU 47 J-141/J-146
J-054/J-063
J-508/J-516
J-710
J-001/J-021 1987-1992 F-16B Block 15OCU 5 J-064/J-068 1988-1989
Modifications & Armament
Armament
In the interception role, KLu F-16s are equipped with AIM-9N, -9L, and -9M Sidewinder AAM's. AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles are used for longer-range interceptions. All F-16 units have Mk82/84 bombs and cluster weapons.
In 1997, the RNLAF awarded Hughes Missile Systems Company a contract for 36 AGM-65G missiles. During operations over former Yugoslavia, the RNLAF detachment in Italy leased AGM-65D missiles from the USAF, pending delivery of the AGM-65G.
312 squadron has a tactical nuclear commitment, carried out with US supplied nuclear weapons.
The RNlAF has also acquired LGBs (GBU-24, GBU-10, GBU-12, CBU-87), and will acquire AIM-9X and JDAM.
F-16(R) and Recce Pods
In 1983, F-16s from 306 sqn took over the Oldelft Orpheus camera pods which were previously carried by RF-104G Starfighters. The 306 sqn was selected since it was the RNlAF's designated recce unit. 18 F-16A's were modified to accomodate the Orpheus pod on the fuselage centerline station, and fitted with radar altimeter and a control box for the Oldelft Orpheus pod. Modified F-16s are designated F-16A(R). The F-16A(R) was first flown on January 27th, 1983. The Orpheus pod contains a camera and IR line-scanner equipment.
In 2002, 306 sqn lost its recce role, and replaced 313 sqn as the F-16 Theatre Operational Conversion unit. The recce role is now assigned to three frontline squadrons (311 sqn, 315 sqn, and 322 sqn). Since all MLUs are technically capable of carrying a recce pod, no modifications are required. The RNlAF now uses the Medium Altitude Reconnaissance System (MARS). MARS uses Reccon Optical cameras, mounted in a standard Per Udsen Modular Recconaissance pod. The first operational flight with the MARS pod was carried out on June 6th, 2000, by two F-16AMs of 315 Squadron (#J-136 and #J-145), although the pod was already inservice for testing purposes since 1997.
Mid-life Update
All operational F-16A/B's operated by the Netherlands went through the Mid-Life Update (MLU) by 2003. A Multinational Operational Test and Evaluation center for the F-16A/B Mid-Life Update was established at Leeuwarden air base during 1997. As part of continuing defense cuts, the number of KLu F-16s to undergo MLU was reduced from 170 to 138 in mid-1993.
Other
The Dutch Air Force has purchased a number of LANTIRN targeting systems, and has also agreed on the Joint Helmet-mounted Cueing System. The RNlAF has purchased 108 ALQ-131 pods for use on its F-16s. The ALQ-131 pods been upgrade to Block-2 configuration. In combination with the Lantirn targeting pod, 60 examples of the GEC/MARCONI navigation pods were acquired. However these are carried very rarely by Dutch F-16s. In 2006 an order was also placed for 8 Elbit Reccelite pods and Litening AT pods. These are to be delivered in 2008.
Operational Service
Units
Please refer to the F-16 Units section for an overview of units.
Deployments
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 91
|
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/cold-war
|
en
|
Canada and the Cold War
|
[
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/950x479/media/media/ea0ae3c1-f33c-4ff2-9cc0-5710b01da816.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/950x579/cc_43.png",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/950x579/media/media/20935640-68d7-46fd-abd9-35d4ab56594d.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/950x579/90s_312088236.jpg",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/logo-tce.svg?v=96550f8de20f4537bc4ad37b01dff7f1",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-search.svg?v=a1e99ea3dd07831352832b022428584e",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-exit.svg?v=2601c4155c28e62e1eb2ebc7de9bd1ee",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-facebook-white.svg?v=3decbb62f20c49bf2a86d220cbf213d8",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-twitter-x-white.svg?v=762dd4e2da316070386a19085588add2",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-facebook.svg?v=7fb8b09ec62e4de8848271514745bd2a",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-twitter-x.svg?v=deacd0b3626a2053dbdc3843f1e13d44",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-email.svg?v=c763267e8d2e1fab14f745261b8a8c7a",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/i-google.svg?v=657db3c0413ddd5da4c7a6ee570546f7",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/new_article_images/CubanMissileCrisis/7322067464_e858ddfc17_z.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/media/ef877228-646a-42e0-8096-b939feb24100.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/media/51271c17-62c2-4218-a3d3-55323d04a04e.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/media/72b158ab-21db-4572-9fec-db8a9548c9cf.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/new_article_images/AvroArrow/Arrow%20unveiling.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/new_article_images/ColdWar/e010858630-v8.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/media/fe8757c3-dd58-4969-92f1-316d16aa4e6c.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/media/new_article_images/CubanMissileCrisis/578px-Kubkrise1962MRBMSite3.jpg",
"https://d3d0lqu00lnqvz.cloudfront.net/StLaurents/TCE%20Terra%20Nova%20replen.jpg",
"http://i.imgur.com/oqQUQK3.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/340x207/media/new_article_images/CubanMissileCrisis/578px-Kubkrise1962MRBMSite3.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/340x207/media/media/24561e5f-6a40-423a-aae3-8324fa0b339e.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/340x207/media/media/27a9f511-f7b9-4bb6-93f7-3b48aa643ff8.jpg",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/tce_placeholder.jpg?v=e9dca980c9bdb3aa11e832e7ea94f5d9",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/340x207/media/media/a8f651d1-144a-49a7-af14-dc0c180d3168.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/340x207/media/media/2dafdb1b-4b70-4fdb-8cd4-a7ea969412c3.jpg",
"https://d14fiu1i7ba797.cloudfront.net/340x207/media/media/57c47a67-cdaa-4e44-b900-8a96bde9c2d7.jpg",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/tce_placeholder.jpg?v=e9dca980c9bdb3aa11e832e7ea94f5d9",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/historica-canada-logo.png?v=d8609094fb353837d01f458c7a6f905b",
"https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/images/gov-canada.svg?v=fdda8701f4d83ce99144e160774c2965"
] |
[
"//www.youtube.com/embed/Y78IvUr2cPM",
"//www.youtube.com/embed/ock2w7hPKm8",
"//www.youtube.com/embed/sDbcZxMx1_U"
] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Cold War refers to the period between the end of the Second World War and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. During this time, the world was largel...
|
en
|
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/cold-war
|
Beginnings
The Cold War was rooted in the collapse of the American-British-Soviet alliance that defeated Germany and Japan in the Second World War. The Allies were already divided ideologically. They were deeply suspicious of the other side’s world plans. American and British diplomatic relations with Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union severely cooled after the war, over several issues. In particular, the Soviets placed and kept local communist parties in power as puppet governments in once-independent countries across Eastern Europe. This was done without due democratic process. This situation led former British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill to state on 5 March 1946 that an “iron curtain” had fallen across the European continent.
Gouzenko Affair
In February 1946, the Canadian government revealed that it had given political asylum to Igor Gouzenko. He was a Soviet cipher clerk stationed at the Soviet Union’s embassy in Ottawa. Just weeks after the end of the Second World War, Gouzenko left the embassy with documents that proved his country had been spying on its wartime allies: Canada, Britain and the United States. According to the documents, the Soviet embassy was home to several spies. They were connected to agents in Montreal, the United States and the United Kingdom who had been providing Moscow with classified information.
Did You Know?
English writer George Orwell first used the term Cold War in a 19 October 1945 essay entitled “You and the Atomic Bomb” in a British magazine. In it, he described what he predicted would be a nuclear stalemate between two or three superpowers, each of which possessed weapons that could wipe out millions of people in a few seconds.
On 16 April 1947, American financier and presidential adviser Bernard Baruch used the phrase Cold War to describe the relationship between the US and Soviet Union in a speech written for him by British journalist Herbert Bayard Swope. “Let us not be deceived,” he said, “we are today in the midst of a Cold War. Our enemies are to be found abroad and at home. Let us never forget this: Our unrest is the heart of their success.”
These revelations caused a potentially dangerous international crisis. Canadians targeted by Soviet espionage worked in sensitive positions. They were privy to diplomatic, scientific and military secrets. This included highly classified information concerning research on radar, code-breaking and the atomic bomb. Several historians and critics consider the Gouzenko affair, as it was known, to mark the beginning of the Cold War era. They also believe it set the stage for the “Red Scare” of the 1950s.
The Gouzenko affair led to widespread investigations in Canada, the US and Great Britain. In Canada, 39 suspects were arrested and 18 were convicted. Some of the most high-profile Canadians who were convicted included: Fred Rose, who was a member of Parliament; Sam Carr of the Labor-Progressive Party (see Communist Party of Canada); and Canadian Army Captain Gordon Lunan.
Cold War Deep Freeze
The period 1947 to 1953 became the Cold War’s “deep freeze.” East-West negotiations on the future of Europe broke down and stopped. The international climate worsened with several high-profile events. Canadians were involved in some of them, including the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a western security pact designed to defend Western Europe against Soviet invasion; and the Korean War (1950–53) in which Canadian forces fought with the United Nations against communist North Korean and Chinese forces supported by the Soviets.
NATO
In the late 1940s, Ottawa and other Western capitals watched with concern as the Soviet Union created a buffer zone in Eastern Europe — the “iron curtain” — between itself and the West. The Soviet Union imposed its will on East Germany, Poland and other central and southeastern European nations. The USSR pursued a policy of aggressive military expansion at home and subversion abroad. There was real fear that France, Italy or other nations might become communist and eventually ally themselves with the Soviets.
In response, Western allies formed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949. At the core of the treaty was a security provision. It stated that “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.” NATO was Canada’s first peacetime military alliance. Signed on 4 April 1949, it included 11 other nations: the United States, Iceland, Britain, France, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal and Italy. Other European countries joined later in the Cold War: Greece and Turkey in 1952, West Germany in 1955 and Spain in 1982.
As a result of the formation of NATO, the Soviet Union established the Warsaw Pact on 14 May 1955, immediately following West Germany joining the western alliance. The Warsaw Pact was a collective defence treaty consisting of the Soviet Union and seven of its satellite states in Central and Eastern Europe: Albania (withdrew in 1968), Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland and Romania.
Non-Aligned Movement
The year 1955 also saw the beginnings of what became known as the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). At the Bandung Conference of Asian and African countries that year, attendees called for “abstention from the use of arrangements of collective defence to serve the particular interests of the big powers.” In particular, they believed that in the context of the Cold War, developing countries should abstain from allying with either of the two superpowers and instead band together in support of national self-determination.
The NAM was founded in 1961, under the initial leadership of India, Indonesia, Ghana, Egypt and Yugoslavia. As a condition of membership, NAM states could not be part of a multinational military alliance (such as NATO or the Warsaw Pact) or have a bilateral military agreement with one of the big powers if “deliberately concluded in the context of Great Power conflicts.”
Korean War
NATO existed largely as a paper alliance until the Korean War. It was the first major conflict of the Cold War. It led the NATO states — many of them fighting in Korea under the banner of the United Nations — to build up their military forces. For Canada, this resulted in a huge increase in the defence budget and, eventually, the return of troops to Europe. By the mid-1950s, about 10,000 Canadian troops were stationed in France and West Germany.
More than 26,000 Canadians served in Korea, during both the combat phase and as peacekeepers afterward. The last Canadian soldiers left Korea in 1957. After the two world wars, Korea remains Canada’s third-bloodiest overseas conflict. It took the lives of 516 Canadians and wounded more than 1,000.
Arctic Sovereignty
Amid fears of Soviet aggression, the United States heightened its military capabilities in the Arctic. This posed a potential threat to Canadian claims to the North. (See Canadian Arctic Sovereignty). The Department of Resources and Development, which oversaw Inuit affairs at the time, decided to populate Ellesmere and Cornwallis islands with Inuit, even though the areas were devoid of human population. In 1953 and 1955, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) moved approximately 92 Inuit from Northern Quebec and what is now Nunavut to settle two locations on these High Arctic islands. Trade and economics also played a role in the relocations. (See Inuit High Arctic Relocations.)
Did You Know?
Cold War tensions brought unprecedented attention to the Canadian North. The current version of the Canadian Rangers was established in 1947 to work in remote, isolated and coastal regions of Canada. Their mission is to support Canadian Armed Forces national security and public safety operations. In the decades that followed, the Rangers developed as a sub-component of the Canadian Army Reserve.”
Domestic Concerns
As the Gouzenko affair showed, the Cold War was felt as much at home as abroad. There were communist “witch hunts” in Canadian government and society. These were perhaps more subdued than the ones in the US, but they had real consequences. Communists were identified and purged from trade unions. LGBTQ individuals, who were considered susceptible to blackmail and coercion, were purged from the federal public service and the armed forces. (See Canada’s Cold War Purge of LGBTQ from Public Service and Canada’s Cold War Purge of LGBTQ from the Military.)
Canadian diplomats with allegedly questionable loyalties were put under suspicion. Tragically, Canadian ambassador to Egypt E. Herbert Norman committed suicide in Cairo in 1957. This came after almost a decade of various accusations and investigations by American intelligence agencies into his communist associations during the 1930s. Although he did have those associations, the Canadian government affirmed its confidence in him.
Canada and the Cold War
Serious East-West diplomatic discussions resumed after the death of Stalin in 1953. But international tensions remained high for the next several decades. On a global scale, Canada contributed armed forces to peacekeeping operations throughout the world; this included areas divided between communist and anti-communist factions. Canadian political and military leaders were at times critical of American actions against communism in the Middle East, Latin America and Asia; but they still prepared for possible war against the Soviets in Europe.
Did You Know?
By the 1950s, there was a growing concern that Soviet bombers would attack North America from the Canadian Arctic. In fact, NATO intelligence suggested that such an attack could occur as early as 1954. In response, in 1953–54, the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) commissioned Avro to design and build the Arrow. It was an all-weather nuclear fighter jet meant to fly higher and faster than any aircraft in its class. (See Avro Arrow.)
Canadian Forces in Europe
The Canadian NATO commitment in Europe included an army brigade group in West Germany and air force fighter jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons in France and West Germany. This marked the first time during peace that Canada had stationed armed forces abroad. Canada’s contributions included 4 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group, which was stationed in Germany during the Cold War. It also committed infantry battalion groups to Allied Command Europe Mobile Force (Land). The units were stationed in Canada but could be deployed quickly to Europe if necessary. Canada also contributed air power to NATO. It formed 1 Air Division (1 AD) in 1951 as the country’s air contribution to NATO in Europe. This eventually became 1 Canadian Air Group.
Under the government of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Canada reduced the size of its land and air forces stationed in Europe. In response to allied criticism, the Canadian government created the Canadian Air-Sea Transportable (CAST) Brigade Group in 1968. This new formation was stationed in Canada but could deploy to Norway in times of tension on 30 days notice from the Norwegian government.
Did You Know?
Before 1970, when the regulations changed, Canadian service personnel and their dependants who died while stationed in Germany and France were buried there, in local civilian cemeteries. Almost 1,400 Canadians are buried in the two countries, with 474 in Werl alone.
For Canada’s government and its people, the fear of nuclear war remained ever-present throughout the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Canadians were active at various levels in trying to avoid such a calamity.
“MAD”
For much of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union held each other to a nuclear standoff known by its acronym, MAD, for mutual assured destruction. The theory behind MAD — thankfully never put to a practical test — was that even after an initial surprise nuclear attack by one side, the other side would still retain enough of a second-strike capability to retaliate in kind. It was thought such a capability would act as a deterrent to both sides. If ever employed, the net result of mutual assured destruction would likely have been the end of civilization.
NORAD
In the early 1950s, defence agreements between Canada and the US centred on the construction of early warning radar networks across Canada to detect Soviet manned bombers carrying nuclear weapons. This eventually resulted in three lines of radar stations: the Pine Tree Line, the Mid-Canada Line and the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line. Such cooperation led to talks about the possible integration of air defence arrangements.
On 1 August 1957, the Canadian and American governments announced they would integrate their air-defence forces under a joint command called the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD). At this stage in the Cold War, both Canada and the US feared long-range Soviet attack. The Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) and the United States Air Force (USAF) would work together to ensure protection.
Did You Know?
The “Diefenbunker” is an underground bunker designed to withstand the force of a nuclear blast. It was built between 1959 and 1961 in Carp, Ontario, during a peak in Cold War tensions. It was named after then-Prime Minister John Diefenbaker. It is now the location of Canada’s Cold War Museum. (See Diefenbunker, Canada’s Cold War Museum.) Similar bunkers were built at the provincial level.
Bomarc Missile Crisis
In late 1958, Prime Minister John Diefenbaker’s Conservative government announced an agreement with the US to deploy American “Bomarc” antiaircraft missiles in Canada. This controversial defence decision was one of many flowing from the 1957 NORAD agreement.
Some argued that the missiles would be an effective replacement for the Avro Arrow, which the Diefenbaker government scrapped in early 1959. The missiles would theoretically intercept any Soviet attacks on North America before they reached Canada’s industrial heartland. (See Civil Defence.)
However, the government did not make it clear that the missiles would be fitted with nuclear warheads. When this came to light in 1960, a dispute erupted as to whether Canada should adopt nuclear weapons. In the end, the Liberal government of Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson decided to accept the nuclear warheads in 1963. (See Bomarc Missile Crisis.)
Cuban Missile Crisis
On 15 October 1962, an American spy plane discovered that Soviet missiles were being installed in Cuba. This was seen as a direct threat to the United States and Canada. Canadian forces were placed on heightened alert during the crisis that followed. But Prime Minister John Diefenbaker’s hesitant response aggravated US President John F. Kennedy; it fuelled already difficult relations between Canada and the US in the 1960s. The crisis brought the world to the edge of nuclear war. It ended on 28 October 1962, when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev agreed to dismantle and remove the Soviet missiles in return for Kennedy’s promise not to invade Cuba. (See Cuban Missile Crisis.)
The Cold War at Sea
During the Second World War, the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) became a recognized expert in antisubmarine warfare (ASW). This continued as its main role in the Cold War. In conjunction with NATO navies, the RCN patrolled and monitored the North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans for Soviet submarines. Canada designed and built 20 world-class destroyer escorts specifically for ASW, cooperated with the US in monitoring a system of underwater sensors to detect submarine activity, pioneered the use of shipborne ASW helicopters and replaced its fleet of ASW fixed-wing aircraft (see Tracker and Argus).
In January 1968, NATO established the Standing Naval Force Atlantic (STANAVFORLANT, abbreviated to SNFL and pronounced “sniffle” by sailors) as a permanent maritime quick reaction force. SNFL was designed to respond rapidly to a crisis and establish a NATO presence and resolve. The force consists of six to 10 destroyers, frigates and tankers attached for up to six months. Canada is one of five permanent contributors. During the Cold War, SNFL was normally positioned off the northwest coast of Europe and tasked to defend the North Atlantic. RCN commodores and rear admirals commanded SNFL on a rotational basis. (See also Canada and Antisubmarine Warfare during the Cold War.)
Fall of the Soviet Union
The Cold War began winding down in the late 1980s amid new efforts at openness by the Soviet leadership and a surge of freedom movements inside the European communist states. Between the summers of 1989 and 1990, democratically elected governments replaced all the former communist regimes in Poland, Hungary, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Romania and Bulgaria. Among the most visible signals of the collapse of communism were the tearing down of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 (which had separated West and East Germany since 1961) and the fall of the Soviet Union in December 1991.
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 88
|
en
|
File:Royal Netherlands Air Force emblem.svg
|
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force_emblem.svg/443px-Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force_emblem.svg.png?20141123063143",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Green_copyright.svg/64px-Green_copyright.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/CC_some_rights_reserved.svg/90px-CC_some_rights_reserved.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Cc-by_new_white.svg/24px-Cc-by_new_white.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Cc-sa_white.svg/24px-Cc-sa_white.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force_emblem.svg/90px-Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force_emblem.svg.png?20141123063143",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2014-11-22T00:00:00
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/commons.png
|
This image depicts a coat of arms of a (former) Dutch governmental jurisdiction, municipality, province, water board (Dutch: "Waterschap") or diocese. These coats of arms have been registered with the Hoge Raad van Adel [1], and are/were being used by the organisation to which the coat of arms was granted by Royal Decree (Dutch: Koninklijk Besluit). Every person is allowed to use the image of the arms, with some restrictions, see fragment below of the Ministerial Notice of 3 September 1979 (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken) (Dutch).
Fragment from the memo: The depiction of a municipal coat of arms is allowed: the municipality holds no rights of creation of the coat of arms. There is also no objection against the use of a municipal coat of arms al for localising objects that are traded or that are being advertised, just as long it is ensured that no impression of municipal involvement or responsibility is created.
In view of Dutch legislation the use of the arms or reproductions thereof is regarded as being in the public domain. Everybody is allowed to make a drawing of the arms (on paper or electronically) in his/her own style based on the Royal Decree and claim it to be the arms of the municipality and uses it within the restrictions shown above. But there is copyright on each individual representation of the arms. This copyright lies with the artist that made that specific drawing based on the Royal Decree, not by the municipality.
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 93
|
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2023/08/18/ukraine-war-prompts-new-us-air-tactics-in-europe/
|
en
|
Ukraine war prompts new US air tactics in Europe
|
[
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/pf/resources/img/air-logo-white.png?d=133",
"https://archetype-air-force-times-prod.web.arc-cdn.net/resizer/v2/P7OWDTIXEBE6LGY2LV5PO2H7DI.jpg?auth=4568d65efb52b07d193bbe2ad56e7d56139db282ea7b74dc5236f97cdca14702&width=1000&height=667",
"https://archetype-air-force-times-prod.web.arc-cdn.net/resizer/v2/6AUE67XT3VEM7LJH3GL5SLCBOE.png?auth=4c180651a43e879c7aabe879243dcfa1ecdef5e9fb16c912d00ae5f8237f467d&width=617&height=380",
"https://archetype-air-force-times-prod.web.arc-cdn.net/resizer/v2/Z4WHUZYTSNHPVACI3MHZH4ZND4.jpg?auth=cec0257b1c7c72faf7beb489bef5ae834ff21a2695d6155a2e248f4e49bf466c&width=6720&height=4480",
"https://archetype-air-force-times-prod.web.arc-cdn.net/resizer/v2/SQ5DQOL7ZFDBHOBZTLRY4DSU5Y.jpg?auth=efe260bb95a2085149f0b9c4991c26e102220b6eee4c6242ecf11df0ebd4814b&width=2000&height=1220",
"https://archetype-air-force-times-prod.web.arc-cdn.net/resizer/v2/JNYDWWEXE5DGJEMLXO5WHVWOTY.jpg?auth=cb1e5ef26ffc36910aa085b7366cd5d88b6474c611098875d219ccecadae9b91&width=3846&height=2552",
"https://archetype-air-force-times-prod.web.arc-cdn.net/resizer/v2/K7CXKZD7Y5FEZNBWHDBUIFI6RQ.jpg?auth=b89be589a95439b21bf088a3aa637423422bc485e32d68c3e6854c11f46cc33c&width=3000&height=1688",
"https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/v2/https%3A%2F%2Fd3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net%2F08-20-2024%2Ft_8fe4b65d205347a499286b798bc6c79e_name_NF_MM_THUMB_01.jpg?auth=61acf0bc4f5a07c015e1ae064f83d4b395520ce3438ed9c0ee28fba6ee1fbd64&width=1920&height=1080",
"https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/v2/https%3A%2F%2Fd3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net%2F08-23-2024%2Ft_df8da15b7a874f2db22d4742040d5ec2_name_DEBRIEF_THUMB_1.jpg?auth=1e3cf6340555524a86dde46bd03dfa9a5b5b5bd414482d391c13e187a56b4610&width=1920&height=1080",
"https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/v2/https%3A%2F%2Fd3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net%2F08-23-2024%2Ft_48c755fc1bd74f57a2f6c918e29f61ac_name_LTR_THUMB_1.jpg?auth=59c492886f47eddd8f3593f1dfd5c00efe88f8261d151fb5cad7f4e618730b33&width=1920&height=1080",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/pf/resources/img/air-logo-white.png?d=133"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"ukraine",
"usafe",
"u-s-air-forces-in-europe",
"russia",
"gen-james-hecker",
"gen-christopher-cavoli",
"nato",
"u-s-european-command",
"dn-dnr",
"afa-2023",
"circulated-air-force-times",
"circulated-military-times",
"circulated-defense-news",
"air-force-times"
] | null |
[
"Rachel Cohen",
"Rachel S. Cohen"
] |
2023-08-18T00:00:00
|
Countering anti-access, area-denial capabilities has become U.S. Air Forces in Europe boss Gen. James Hecker's top priority.
|
en
|
/pf/resources/img/favicons/air/apple-touch-icon.png?d=133
|
Air Force Times
|
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2023/08/18/ukraine-war-prompts-new-us-air-tactics-in-europe/
|
Nineteen months into Russia’s war on Ukraine, its lessons are shaping how the U.S. Air Force thinks about combat over Europe.
The conflict is pushing the Pentagon to focus on tactics instead of the strategic-level chess moves that have defined the U.S.-Russia military relationship in Europe since the end of the Cold War, Gen. James Hecker, the Air Force’s top officer in Europe, told Air Force Times in a recent interview.
No longer are allied air forces passively circling over Europe for the sake of visibility. U.S. pilots and their counterparts now use air policing missions to practice offensive and defensive maneuvers along NATO’s eastern border.
Struck by Russia’s inability to control Ukrainian airspace and Ukraine’s inability to fully secure it, NATO has begun working through the details of how it would maintain ownership of its own skies while breaking through enemy defenses to secure more airspace.
Hecker said his top priority has become figuring out how to counter air and missile defenses, electronic jamming and other anti-access, area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, as they are known in military parlance, that would keep the U.S. out of Russian territory.
And it’s a main focus of U.S. and allied discussions at NATO’s highest levels.
A revamp of NATO’s regional security plans led by Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli, the head of U.S. European Command and one of the transatlantic alliance’s two strategic commanders, has spurred a new look at how member militaries would fight future wars if deterrence fails.
Those are “geographically specific plans that describe how we will defend key and relevant places in our alliance” against Russia and terror groups, Royal Netherlands Navy Adm. Rob Bauer, chairman of NATO’s military committee, said in May.
To the greatest extent seen since the end of the Cold War, he said, the alliance is setting goals to develop the capabilities it needs to thwart specific threats, like hypersonic weapons and unmanned vehicles.
“Together this family of plans will significantly improve our ability and readiness to deter and defend against any threats, including on short or no notice, and ensure timely reinforcement of all allies,” NATO said in a statement at its July 11 summit in Lithuania. “We have committed to fully resource and regularly exercise these plans to be prepared for high-intensity and multi-domain collective defense.”
A closer look
For the allied air forces, that requires a closer look at how to defend their own airspace and gain access into an enemy’s. Delegates from each member nation began answering that question at NATO’s first weapons and tactics conference, or “WEPTAC,” at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, July 17-28.
Officials discussed the aircraft and weapons that the alliance would need for the counter-A2/AD mission in Europe, and hashed out techniques airmen would use in the field, Hecker said.
U.S. Air Force officials have pointed to unmanned aircraft, stealthy and long-range assets, and electronic weapons as options to distract or destroy defensive systems and clear the way for more traditional combat aircraft.
“We did a lot of the tactical-level planning for that kind of mission,” Hecker said. “We will use that planning to actually do rehearsals and practices as we continue our enhanced air policing on [NATO’s] eastern border.”
U.S. airmen have begun honing those moves in training sorties with European aircraft on the eastern flank, he said. It’s one example of how allied airpower has evolved alongside the conflict across NATO’s border.
After Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, armed NATO jets flew around-the-clock air patrols to discourage the conflict from spilling into other European nations. That kept Russian forces at bay but arguably left NATO airmen less ready for conflict, Hecker said.
“If you just do circles with missiles on board, you’re not actually practicing what you’re going to do in combat,” he said.
Once leaders were convinced that the alliance’s airspace was safe, airmen changed tack. Now pilots on patrol also take part in anti-access training along NATO’s border — pairing the deterrent value of an air patrol with the tactical value of real-world practice.
NATO will also put those tactics to the test at a major new training exercise, Ramstein Flag, in Greece at the end of 2024, Hecker said.
“We don’t want to go to war with Russia, and I don’t think they want to go to war with us either,” he said. “But we need to make sure that we have the forces capable of deterring them, so that nothing bad will happen.”
NATO will look for other opportunities to try out new tactics in large exercises, particularly those that combine multiple types of aircraft for more realism, Hecker said.
Those events could include Ukrainian pilots at the end of their training to fly the U.S.-built F-16 Fighting Falcon, he added.
POLITICO reported Aug. 4 that eight Ukrainians who are fluent in English are ready to learn to operate the fighter jet once a syllabus is created by a coalition of European countries and approved by the United States. It’s unclear when that might come to fruition.
Ahead of Ramstein Flag, U.S. Air Forces in Europe will continue trying to reform the classification rules that hinder how it shares combat data with others in NATO, from satellite imagery to targeting information collected by the F-35 Lightning II fighter jet.
“There’s things that we could share when it comes to A2/AD that would make us more integrated … and we could do the mission better, if they knew the capabilities that different countries had,” Hecker said. “We’re getting through some of those barriers and we’re able to brief certain folks on some of those capabilities, so we can fight better … as a team.”
Hecker also wants to ensure the alliance could carry out its combat objectives even if its communications are disrupted. And U.S. airmen can learn from Ukraine’s success at keeping its military aircraft from being targeted on the ground, by continually moving and maintaining a light footprint, he said.
The growing catalog of training events are part of a new era on NATO’s path to grow national investments in the alliance’s mutual defense since 2014.
Asked whether the U.S. should commit additional air squadrons to Europe, Hecker instead pointed to another sign of those investments: the rising number of European countries that have signed onto the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.
Within the next 10 years, Hecker said, more than 600 F-35s will be spread across the continent — only 54 of which are slated to be American.
“The European NATO allies are really stepping up to the plate and taking it seriously,” Hecker said. “I think you’re going to see, over the next several years, better tactics, better integration, and all that means better deterrence.”
That growing commitment can ensure a strong military presence in Europe without relying too heavily on the Pentagon, whose top priority is sending forces to deter Chinese aggression in the Pacific.
“You’re never going to have as many forces as you want … but I think we’re sitting in a pretty good position right now,” Hecker said of U.S. airmen in Europe. “I think everyone understands where we are with the National Defense Strategy, and it doesn’t get very heated during those discussions.”
Rachel Cohen is the editor of Air Force Times. She joined the publication as its senior reporter in March 2021. Her work has appeared in the Washington Post, the Frederick News-Post (Md.), Air and Space Forces Magazine, Inside Defense, Inside Health Policy and elsewhere.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 1
|
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://simple.wikipedia.org/static/images/icons/wikipedia.png",
"https://simple.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-wordmark-en.svg",
"https://simple.wikipedia.org/static/images/mobile/copyright/wikipedia-tagline-simple.svg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Embleem_Koninklijke_Luchtmacht.svg/220px-Embleem_Koninklijke_Luchtmacht.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/OOjs_UI_icon_edit-ltr-progressive.svg/10px-OOjs_UI_icon_edit-ltr-progressive.svg.png",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://simple.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://simple.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Contributors to Wikimedia projects"
] |
2022-01-30T18:21:41+00:00
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikipedia.png
|
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force
|
The Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) is the air force of the Netherlands.
The Air Force was founded in the year 1913. The aerobatic display team was active from 1979 to 2019, named the Solo Display Team.
The Dutch Air Force started on 1 July 1913 at Soesterberg airfield with 4 pilots. When it started it only had 1 aircraft, the brik.
Only a few months later 3 French Farman HF.20.
But these airplanes where fast to old and was replaced with the Nieuport and Caudron.
The Netherlands stayed neutral during World War I.
New airfields where build at Gilze-Rijen air base, Arnhem, Venlo and Vlissingen.
The Dutch goverment cut the defence budget for the army and the army was almost gone.
As political tensions in Europe increased in the late 1930s the goverment tried to rebuild the army in 1938.
In August of 1939 the army was ready. But because of low budget the air force only operated
176 combat aircraft of the types:
16 Fokker T.V
36 Fokker D.XXI
35 Fokker G.I
7 Fokker D.XVII
17 Douglas DB-8A-3N
20 Fokker C.X
33 Fokker C.V
20 Koolhoven FK-51
In May of 1940 German troops invade the Netherlands. Within five days the Dutch Army was defeated by the luftwaffe.
All of the Brigade's bombers, along with 30 Fokker D.XXI and 17 Fokker G.I fighters where shot down; 2 D.XXI and 8 G.I where destroyed on the ground.
2 G.I where captured by the German forces.
The Spitfire Mk.IX was used by 322 Squadron RNLAF until 1954, but was replaced as new squadrons were established.
The Gloster Meteor F Mk.IV was used by 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327 and 328 Squadrons from 1948–1957. Bases included Soesterberg and Leeuwarden.
The Gloster Meteor F Mk.VIII was used by 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327 and 328 sqn from 1951–1958.
CTL consisted of seven new strike squadrons (306, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315 and 316 sqn), all equipped with Republic F-84G Thunderjet's. These aircraft were supplied by the United States under the Mutual Defense Aid Program from 1952–1956. 311 was the first flying squadron to be stood up at Volkel on 1 May 1951.
322, 323, 324, 325, 326 and 327 Sqn operated the Hawker Hunter F Mk.4 between 1955–1964, and 322, 324, 325 and 326 Sqn operated the Hawker Hunter F Mk.6 between 1957–1968.
700, 701 and 702 Sqn operated the North American F-86K Sabre all-weather fighter between 1955–1964.
306, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315 and 316 Sqn changed aircraft configuration from 1955–1970 as the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak and RF-84F Thunderflash became available.
The Indonesian government claimed Western New Guinea following the end of the Second World War. The Dutch government considered the area Dutch territory. Negotiations over the country were conducted for years, but tensions grew until Indonesia broke diplomatic relations with the Netherlands at the end of the 1950s.
In response, in 1958, the Netherlands deployed military reinforcements to New Guinea, including an Air Force detachment for the air defense of the island Biak as there was evidence that Indonesia was infiltrating the island in advance of a military operation
one Hawker Hunter Mk.4 air defence squadron;
a radar navigation system at Biak, and;
a reserve airstrip at Noemfoer.
The Dutch government deployed a squadron consisting of 12 Hawker Hunter Mk.4 AD fighters and two Alouette II SAR helicopters. They were transported to Southeast Asia by the Karel Doorman. One year later the Dutch government deployed another 12 Hawker Hunter Mk6 AD fighters; these aircraft carried more fuel and had a larger combat radius.
In August 1962 Indonesia was ready to attack New Guinea. Despite reinforcements the Dutch defences would be insufficient to withstand the coming attack. Therefore, and because of international political pressure the Dutch government was forced to agree to the peaceful surrender of New Guinea. Dutch forces were withdrawn from the territory.
During the cold war Dutch Air Force flying units were integrated in NATO's Second Allied Tactical Air Force tasked with defending northern West Germany against Warsaw Pact forces.
306, 311, 312, 322 and 323 Sqn changed configuration again from 1962–1984 after the dual role F-104 Starfighter was introduced.
313, 314, 315 and 316 Sqn switched over to the NF-5 Freedom Fighter from 1969–1991. The NF-5 was a development of the Canadair CF-5 fighter. Northrop incorporated some NF-5 features into the F-5E/F Tiger II.
Since 1979 all RNLAF fast-jet squadrons (originally 306, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 322 and 323) have operated the multi role F-16 Fighting Falcon.
In 1992 Ypenburg Air Base closed. After the USAF handed over their section of Soesterberg in September 1994, Soesterberg then became a RNLAF transport helicopter base with 298 Squadron
(CH-47D Chinook) and 300 Squadron (AS 532U2 Cougar Mk2 and SA 316 Alouette III) stationed at the base.
RNLAF F-16s participated in all operations over Yugoslavia from 1993: Deny Flight, including Deliberate Force in 1995 and ending with Operation Allied Force in 1999 from two bases in Italy. Initially from Villafranca AB in the north of Italy, later moving south to Amendola AB. During the operations over FRY RNLAF F-16s flew reconnaissance (306 Sqn detachments from Volkel AB were in theatre throughout the operations), enforced the Bosnian no-fly zone, dropped bombs on Udbina AB (1994), successfully dropped an unguided bomb on a moving Serb tank during the fall of Srebrenica (1995), and took part in Deliberate Force later in the summer of 1995.
Between 1994 and 1997 Dutch GCI personnel, along with Canadian GCI controllers, provided many hundreds of hours of fighter control and surveillance as integrated members of USAF/ANG Air Control Squadrons. In May 1999 during the Kosovo crisis a RNLAF F-16AM pilot Major Peter Tankink shot down a Yugoslavian MiG-29 with an AMRAAM, but the force was more recognized for its high bombing accuracy. Allied Force was also the operational debut for the upgraded F-16AM. Besides the CAP missions, offensive bombing and photo reconnaissance missions were flown. KDC-10 tankers refuelled allied aircraft over the Adriatic Sea, and C-130 Hercules transports flew daily sorties from Eindhoven AB to logistically support the operation. Dutch F-16s also dropped cluster bombs on Niš. In total, RNLAF aircraft flew 1,194 sorties during operation Allied Force, which is about 7.5% of the total 37,000 sorties flown.
On 2 October 2002 a tri-national detachment of 18 Dutch, Danish and Norwegian F-16 ground attack aircraft and one Dutch KDC-10 tanker deployed to Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan in support of ground forces in Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. On 1 October 2003 the Dutch F-16 detachment returned to the Netherlands and the KDC-10 returned even earlier (1 April 2003). The RNLAF returned to Manas AB on 8 September 2004 with five F-16 and one KDC-10 in support of the presidential elections of Afghanistan. This time the aircraft flew under the NATO ISAF flag. On 24 March 2005 the whole Dutch detachment transferred from Manas AB to Kabul International Airport. A detachment of six AH-64D Apache helicopters were already stationed at Kabul International Airport from April 2004 until March 2005.
In February 2006 four Dutch F-16s were joined by four Royal Norwegian Air Force F-16s in a detachment known as the 1st Netherlands-Norwegian European Participating Forces Expeditionary Air Wing (1 NLD/NOR EEAW). This was a follow up of the participation with the Belgian Air Force.
As part of the expanded NATO ISAF mission in southern Afghanistan in August 2006, the Royal Netherlands Air Force had three CH-47D Chinook of 298 Sq stationed at Kandahar Airfield. On 12 November 2006 eight F-16s transferred from Kabul International Airport to Kandahar Airfield, Additionally, a detachment of six (later four) AH-64D Apache helicopters had been stationed of Tarin Kowt, Uruzgan province. The CH-47D Chinooks of 298 sq rotated with Cougars from 300 sq. All helicopters together with a few F-16s returned to the Netherlands in November 2010. The other four F-16s transferred from Kandahar Airfield to Mazar-e-Sharif International Airport in November 2011. The F-16 flight, providing Close Air Support for ground forces and Recce Flights (specialised in counter-ied's), ended their mission officially on 1 July 2014.
On 31 August 2006 a Royal Netherlands Air Force (Michael "Sofac" Donkervoort) pilot was killed when his plane crashed during a mission to support British ground troops in Helmand province.
On 7 December 2007 military use of Twente Air Base ceased. The aerodrome is now known as Enschede Airport Twente. Flying officially ended at Soesterberg Air Base on 12 November 2008. The last jet ever to take off was a Hellenic AF F-4E. The base formally closed on 31 December 2008. The 298th and 300th squadron have been moved to Gilze-Rijen Air Base. A part of the base remains in use as a glider field, however. Also, the former USAFE side will be in use by ground units Relocated from Kamp van Zeist and will be called "Camp New Amsterdam". Finally, the AF museum (Royal Netherlands Military Aviation Museum) returned to the base and will use most of the existing hangars.
In 2013 the Royal Netherlands Air Force provided Strategic Airlift Support with a KDC-10 in support of French operations in Mali.
The RNLAF was hit hard by the Dutch defence cuts after the 2008 financial crisis. 311 Squadron was disbanded in September 2012, leaving four squadrons of F-16s, and one DC-10 Transport Aircraft was disposed of.
In October 2014 the Netherlands Air Force joined the US and its Allies fighting ISIL, deploying eight F-16s (of which two are in reserve) to Jordan.
On 31 October 2014 323 Tactess squadron (F-16) disbanded and its aircraft and personnel were merged into 322 Squadron. The following Wednesday (5 November) the squadron reformed in the US as the RNLAF's first Joint Strike Fighter unit.
303 Squadron (Agusta Bell AB 412SP) provided search and rescue within Dutch Flight Information Region) until 1 January 2015 when the unit was disbanded.
As per 2017 the Air Defence – Quick Reaction Force of two F-16 fighters are integrated for Belgian, Dutch and Luxembourg airspace and rotated between Dutch and Belgian ADF squadrons.
From 2014 The Royal Netherlands Air Force provided eight F-16s in support of the coalition fighting IS. The aircraft were initially deployed in Iraq and later Syria. The mission was handed over to the Belgian Air Force in July 2016 after more than 2100 missions were flown, with weapons used over 1800 times. The Royal Netherlands Air Force contributed extensively to the missions flown by the coalition forces and were in high demand.
Since 2017 RNLAF KDC-10 and C-130 Hercules are deployed to an airfield in the Middle East to assist the USA led coalition in Operation Inherent Resolve.
In January 2018 the Dutch F-16s returned to the Middle East for a year-long deployment.
In the country of the Netherlands there are 11 air bases. They are.
Deelen Air Base
Eindhoven Air Base
Gilze-Rijen Air Base
Leeuwarden Air Base
Valkenburg Naval Air Base (closed)
Air Operations Control Station Nieuw-Milligen
Soesterberg Air Base (closed)
Volkel Air Base
De Peel Air Base (closed)
Woensdrecht Air Base
Ypenburg Air Base (closed)
Aircraft Origin Type Variant In service Notes Combat Aircraft F-35 Lightning II United States Multirole F-35A 16 22 on order F-16 Fighting falcon United States Multirole F-16AM 40 Tanker Airbus A330 MRTT Europe Aerial Refueling/
Transport
5 4 on order, used for the NATO MMR fleet Transport Gulfstream IV United States VIP transport 1 C-130 Hercules United States Tactical Airlift C-130H 4 2 are C-130H-30 variants Dornier Do 228 Germany SAR / Patrol Do 228-
212
2 flown for the Netherlands Coastguard Helicopters Boeing CH-47 United States transport / heavy lift CH-47H 20 AH-64 Apache United states Attack AH-64D 28 Being upgraded to AH-64E Eurocopter AS532 France transport / CSAR 12 NHIndustries NH90 European
Union
Transport / ASW T/NFH 19 flown by Royal Netherlands Navy Trainer Aircraft Pilatus PC-7 Switzerland trainer 13 F-35 Lightning II United States conversion trainer 8 Conducting training at Luke AFB, 2 are used
for OPTEV
F-16 Fighting falcon United States conversion trainer 7 UAV MQ-9 Reaper United States MALE UAV 4 on order
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 45
|
https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/gatt47_01_e.htm
|
en
|
legal texts - Marrakesh Agreement
|
[
"https://www.wto.org/images/img24high.gif",
"https://www.wto.org/images/ddflogo.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"www.wto.org",
"World Trade Organization",
"world trade",
"trade disputes",
"ministerial",
"WTO publications",
"intellectual property",
"government procurement",
"Mike Moore",
"goods",
"services",
"economic research",
"Statistics",
"OMC",
"about the WTO",
"trade",
"agriculture",
"textiles",
"services",
"intellectual property",
"anti-dumping",
"subsidies",
"environment",
"investment",
"research and analysis",
"international trade",
"trade topics",
"principles of the trading system"
] | null |
[] | null |
Most of the WTOs agreements were the outcome of the 1986-94 Uruguay Round of trade negotiations. Some, including GATT 1994, were revisions of texts that previously existed under GATT as multilateral or plurilateral agreements. Some, such as GATS, were new. The full package of multilateral Uruguay Round agreements is called the rounds Final Act.
|
en
| null |
The Governments of the Commonwealth of Australia, the Kingdom of Belgium, the United States of Brazil, Burma, Canada, Ceylon, the Republic of Chile, the Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Czechoslovak Republic, the French Republic, India, Lebanon, the Grand-Duchy of Luxemburg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Kingdom of Norway, Pakistan, Southern Rhodesia, Syria, the Union of South Africa, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America:
Recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising standards of living, ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and effective demand, developing the full use of the resources of the world and expanding the production and exchange of goods,
Being desirous of contributing to these objectives by entering into reciprocal and mutually advantageous arrangements directed to the substantial reduction of tariffs and other barriers to trade and to the elimination of discriminatory treatment in international commerce,
Have through their Representatives agreed as follows:
Part I
back to top
Article I: General Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment
1. With respect to customs duties and charges of any kind imposed on or in connection with importation or exportation or imposed on the international transfer of payments for imports or exports, and with respect to the method of levying such duties and charges, and with respect to all rules and formalities in connection with importation and exportation, and with respect to all matters referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article III,* any advantage, favour, privilege or immunity granted by any contracting party to any product originating in or destined for any other country shall be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the like product originating in or destined for the territories of all other contracting parties.
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not require the elimination of any preferences in respect of import duties or charges which do not exceed the levels provided for in paragraph 4 of this Article and which fall within the following descriptions:
(a) Preferences in force exclusively between two or more of the territories listed in Annex A, subject to the conditions set forth therein;
(b) Preferences in force exclusively between two or more territories which on July 1, 1939, were connected by common sovereignty or relations of protection or suzerainty and which are listed in Annexes B, C and D, subject to the conditions set forth therein;
(c) Preferences in force exclusively between the United States of America and the Republic of Cuba;
(d) Preferences in force exclusively between neighbouring countries listed in Annexes E and F.
3. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall not apply to preferences between the countries formerly a part of the Ottoman Empire and detached from it on July 24, 1923, provided such preferences are approved under paragraph 5(1), of Article XXV which shall be applied in this respect in the light of paragraph 1 of Article XXIX.
4. The margin of preference* on any product in respect of which a preference is permitted under paragraph 2 of this Article but is not specifically set forth as a maximum margin of preference in the appropriate Schedule annexed to this Agreement shall not exceed:
(a) in respect of duties or charges on any product described in such Schedule, the difference between the most-favoured-nation and preferential rates provided for therein; if no preferential rate is provided for, the preferential rate shall for the purposes of this paragraph be taken to be that in force on April 10, 1947, and, if no most-favoured-nation rate is provided for, the margin shall not exceed the difference between the most-favoured-nation and preferential rates existing on April 10, 1947;
(b) in respect of duties or charges on any product not described in the appropriate Schedule, the difference between the most-favoured-nation and preferential rates existing on April 10, 1947.
In the case of the contracting parties named in Annex G, the date of April 10, 1947, referred to in subparagraph (a) and (b) of this paragraph shall be replaced by the respective dates set forth in that Annex.
back to top
Article II: Schedules of Concessions
1. (a) Each contracting party shall accord to the commerce of the other contracting parties treatment no less favourable than that provided for in the appropriate Part of the appropriate Schedule annexed to this Agreement.
(b) The products described in Part I of the Schedule relating to any contracting party, which are the products of territories of other contracting parties, shall, on their importation into the territory to which the Schedule relates, and subject to the terms, conditions or qualifications set forth in that Schedule, be exempt from ordinary customs duties in excess of those set forth and provided therein. Such products shall also be exempt from all other duties or charges of any kind imposed on or in connection with the importation in excess of those imposed on the date of this Agreement or those directly and mandatorily required to be imposed thereafter by legislation in force in the importing territory on that date.
(c) The products described in Part II of the Schedule relating to any contracting party which are the products of territories entitled under Article I to receive preferential treatment upon importation into the territory to which the Schedule relates shall, on their importation into such territory, and subject to the terms, conditions or qualifications set forth in that Schedule, be exempt from ordinary customs duties in excess of those set forth and provided for in Part II of that Schedule. Such products shall also be exempt from all other duties or charges of any kind imposed on or in connection with importation in excess of those imposed on the date of this Agreement or those directly or mandatorily required to be imposed thereafter by legislation in force in the importing territory on that date. Nothing in this Article shall prevent any contracting party from maintaining its requirements existing on the date of this Agreement as to the eligibility of goods for entry at preferential rates of duty.
2. Nothing in this Article shall prevent any contracting party from imposing at any time on the importation of any product:
(a) a charge equivalent to an internal tax imposed consistently with the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article III* in respect of the like domestic product or in respect of an article from which the imported product has been manufactured or produced in whole or in part;
(b) any anti-dumping or countervailing duty applied consistently with the provisions of Article VI;*
(c) fees or other charges commensurate with the cost of services rendered.
3. No contracting party shall alter its method of determining dutiable value or of converting currencies so as to impair the value of any of the concessions provided for in the appropriate Schedule annexed to this Agreement.
4. If any contracting party establishes, maintains or authorizes, formally or in effect, a monopoly of the importation of any product described in the appropriate Schedule annexed to this Agreement, such monopoly shall not, except as provided for in that Schedule or as otherwise agreed between the parties which initially negotiated the concession, operate so as to afford protection on the average in excess of the amount of protection provided for in that Schedule. The provisions of this paragraph shall not limit the use by contracting parties of any form of assistance to domestic producers permitted by other provisions of this Agreement.*
5. If any contracting party considers that a product is not receiving from another contracting party the treatment which the first contracting party believes to have been contemplated by a concession provided for in the appropriate Schedule annexed to this Agreement, it shall bring the matter directly to the attention of the other contracting party. If the latter agrees that the treatment contemplated was that claimed by the first contracting party, but declares that such treatment cannot be accorded because a court or other proper authority has ruled to the effect that the product involved cannot be classified under the tariff laws of such contracting party so as to permit the treatment contemplated in this Agreement, the two contracting parties, together with any other contracting parties substantially interested, shall enter promptly into further negotiations with a view to a compensatory adjustment of the matter.
6. (a) The specific duties and charges included in the Schedules relating to contracting parties members of the International Monetary Fund, and margins of preference in specific duties and charges maintained by such contracting parties, are expressed in the appropriate currency at the par value accepted or provisionally recognized by the Fund at the date of this Agreement. Accordingly, in case this par value is reduced consistently with the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund by more than twenty per centum, such specific duties and charges and margins of preference may be adjusted to take account of such reduction; provided that the CONTRACTING PARTIES (i.e., the contracting parties acting jointly as provided for in Article XXV) concur that such adjustments will not impair the value of the concessions provided for in the appropriate Schedule or elsewhere in this Agreement, due account being taken of all factors which may influence the need for, or urgency of, such adjustments.
(b) Similar provisions shall apply to any contracting party not a member of the Fund, as from the date on which such contracting party becomes a member of the Fund or enters into a special exchange agreement in pursuance of Article XV.
7. The Schedules annexed to this Agreement are hereby made an integral part of Part I of this Agreement.
Part II
back to top
Article III*: National Treatment on Internal Taxation and Regulation
1. The contracting parties recognize that internal taxes and other internal charges, and laws, regulations and requirements affecting the internal sale, offering for sale, purchase, transportation, distribution or use of products, and internal quantitative regulations requiring the mixture, processing or use of products in specified amounts or proportions, should not be applied to imported or domestic products so as to afford protection to domestic production.*
2. The products of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of any other contracting party shall not be subject, directly or indirectly, to internal taxes or other internal charges of any kind in excess of those applied, directly or indirectly, to like domestic products. Moreover, no contracting party shall otherwise apply internal taxes or other internal charges to imported or domestic products in a manner contrary to the principles set forth in paragraph 1.*
3. With respect to any existing internal tax which is inconsistent with the provisions of paragraph 2, but which is specifically authorized under a trade agreement, in force on April 10, 1947, in which the import duty on the taxed product is bound against increase, the contracting party imposing the tax shall be free to postpone the application of the provisions of paragraph 2 to such tax until such time as it can obtain release from the obligations of such trade agreement in order to permit the increase of such duty to the extent necessary to compensate for the elimination of the protective element of the tax.
4. The products of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of any other contracting party shall be accorded treatment no less favourable than that accorded to like products of national origin in respect of all laws, regulations and requirements affecting their internal sale, offering for sale, purchase, transportation, distribution or use. The provisions of this paragraph shall not prevent the application of differential internal transportation charges which are based exclusively on the economic operation of the means of transport and not on the nationality of the product.
5. No contracting party shall establish or maintain any internal quantitative regulation relating to the mixture, processing or use of products in specified amounts or proportions which requires, directly or indirectly, that any specified amount or proportion of any product which is the subject of the regulation must be supplied from domestic sources. Moreover, no contracting party shall otherwise apply internal quantitative regulations in a manner contrary to the principles set forth in paragraph 1.*
6. The provisions of paragraph 5 shall not apply to any internal quantitative regulation in force in the territory of any contracting party on July 1, 1939, April 10, 1947, or March 24, 1948, at the option of that contracting party; Provided that any such regulation which is contrary to the provisions of paragraph 5 shall not be modified to the detriment of imports and shall be treated as a customs duty for the purpose of negotiation.
7. No internal quantitative regulation relating to the mixture, processing or use of products in specified amounts or proportions shall be applied in such a manner as to allocate any such amount or proportion among external sources of supply.
8. (a) The provisions of this Article shall not apply to laws, regulations or requirements governing the procurement by governmental agencies of products purchased for governmental purposes and not with a view to commercial resale or with a view to use in the production of goods for commercial sale.
(b) The provisions of this Article shall not prevent the payment of subsidies exclusively to domestic producers, including payments to domestic producers derived from the proceeds of internal taxes or charges applied consistently with the provisions of this Article and subsidies effected through governmental purchases of domestic products.
9. The contracting parties recognize that internal maximum price control measures, even though conforming to the other provisions of this Article, can have effects prejudicial to the interests of contracting parties supplying imported products. Accordingly, contracting parties applying such measures shall take account of the interests of exporting contracting parties with a view to avoiding to the fullest practicable extent such prejudicial effects.
10. The provisions of this Article shall not prevent any contracting party from establishing or maintaining internal quantitative regulations relating to exposed cinematograph films and meeting the requirements of Article IV.
back to top
Article IV: Special Provisions relating to Cinematograph Films
If any contracting party establishes or maintains internal quantitative regulations relating to exposed cinematograph films, such regulations shall take the form of screen quotas which shall conform to the following requirements:
(a) Screen quotas may require the exhibition of cinematograph films of national origin during a specified minimum proportion of the total screen time actually utilized, over a specified period of not less than one year, in the commercial exhibition of all films of whatever origin, and shall be computed on the basis of screen time per theatre per year or the equivalent thereof;
(b) With the exception of screen time reserved for films of national origin under a screen quota, screen time including that released by administrative action from screen time reserved for films of national origin, shall not be allocated formally or in effect among sources of supply;
(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (b) of this Article, any contracting party may maintain screen quotas conforming to the requirements of subparagraph (a) of this Article which reserve a minimum proportion of screen time for films of a specified origin other than that of the contracting party imposing such screen quotas; Provided that no such minimum proportion of screen time shall be increased above the level in effect on April 10, 1947;
(d) Screen quotas shall be subject to negotiation for their limitation, liberalization or elimination.
back to top
Article V: Freedom of Transit
1. Goods (including baggage), and also vessels and other means of transport, shall be deemed to be in transit across the territory of a contracting party when the passage across such territory, with or without trans-shipment, warehousing, breaking bulk, or change in the mode of transport, is only a portion of a complete journey beginning and terminating beyond the frontier of the contracting party across whose territory the traffic passes. Traffic of this nature is termed in this article traffic in transit.
2. There shall be freedom of transit through the territory of each contracting party, via the routes most convenient for international transit, for traffic in transit to or from the territory of other contracting parties. No distinction shall be made which is based on the flag of vessels, the place of origin, departure, entry, exit or destination, or on any circumstances relating to the ownership of goods, of vessels or of other means of transport.
3. Any contracting party may require that traffic in transit through its territory be entered at the proper custom house, but, except in cases of failure to comply with applicable customs laws and regulations, such traffic coming from or going to the territory of other contracting parties shall not be subject to any unnecessary delays or restrictions and shall be exempt from customs duties and from all transit duties or other charges imposed in respect of transit, except charges for transportation or those commensurate with administrative expenses entailed by transit or with the cost of services rendered.
4. All charges and regulations imposed by contracting parties on traffic in transit to or from the territories of other contracting parties shall be reasonable, having regard to the conditions of the traffic.
5. With respect to all charges, regulations and formalities in connection with transit, each contracting party shall accord to traffic in transit to or from the territory of any other contracting party treatment no less favourable than the treatment accorded to traffic in transit to or from any third country.*
6. Each contracting party shall accord to products which have been in transit through the territory of any other contracting party treatment no less favourable than that which would have been accorded to such products had they been transported from their place of origin to their destination without going through the territory of such other contracting party. Any contracting party shall, however, be free to maintain its requirements of direct consignment existing on the date of this Agreement, in respect of any goods in regard to which such direct consignment is a requisite condition of eligibility for entry of the goods at preferential rates of duty or has relation to the contracting partys prescribed method of valuation for duty purposes.
7. The provisions of this Article shall not apply to the operation of aircraft in transit, but shall apply to air transit of goods (including baggage).
back to top
Article VI: Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties
1. The contracting parties recognize that dumping, by which products of one country are introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value of the products, is to be condemned if it causes or threatens material injury to an established industry in the territory of a contracting party or materially retards the establishment of a domestic industry. For the purposes of this Article, a product is to be considered as being introduced into the commerce of an importing country at less than its normal value, if the price of the product exported from one country to another
(a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country, or,
(b) in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either
(i) the highest comparable price for the like product for export to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or
(ii) the cost of production of the product in the country of origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit.
Due allowance shall be made in each case for differences in conditions and terms of sale, for differences in taxation, and for other differences affecting price comparability.*
2. In order to offset or prevent dumping, a contracting party may levy on any dumped product an anti-dumping duty not greater in amount than the margin of dumping in respect of such product. For the purposes of this Article, the margin of dumping is the price difference determined in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1.*
3. No countervailing duty shall be levied on any product of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of another contracting party in excess of an amount equal to the estimated bounty or subsidy determined to have been granted, directly or indirectly, on the manufacture, production or export of such product in the country of origin or exportation, including any special subsidy to the transportation of a particular product. The term countervailing duty shall be understood to mean a special duty levied for the purpose of offsetting any bounty or subsidy bestowed, directly, or indirectly, upon the manufacture, production or export of any merchandise.*
4. No product of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of any other contracting party shall be subject to anti-dumping or countervailing duty by reason of the exemption of such product from duties or taxes borne by the like product when destined for consumption in the country of origin or exportation, or by reason of the refund of such duties or taxes.
5. No product of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of any other contracting party shall be subject to both anti-dumping and countervailing duties to compensate for the same situation of dumping or export subsidization.
6. (a) No contracting party shall levy any anti-dumping or countervailing duty on the importation of any product of the territory of another contracting party unless it determines that the effect of the dumping or subsidization, as the case may be, is such as to cause or threaten material injury to an established domestic industry, or is such as to retard materially the establishment of a domestic industry.
(b) The CONTRACTING PARTIES may waive the requirement of subparagraph (a) of this paragraph so as to permit a contracting party to levy an anti-dumping or countervailing duty on the importation of any product for the purpose of offsetting dumping or subsidization which causes or threatens material injury to an industry in the territory of another contracting party exporting the product concerned to the territory of the importing contracting party. The CONTRACTING PARTIES shall waive the requirements of subparagraph (a) of this paragraph, so as to permit the levying of a countervailing duty, in cases in which they find that a subsidy is causing or threatening material injury to an industry in the territory of another contracting party exporting the product concerned to the territory of the importing contracting party.*
(c) In exceptional circumstances, however, where delay might cause damage which would be difficult to repair, a contracting party may levy a countervailing duty for the purpose referred to in subparagraph (b) of this paragraph without the prior approval of the CONTRACTING PARTIES; Provided that such action shall be reported immediately to the CONTRACTING PARTIES and that the countervailing duty shall be withdrawn promptly if the CONTRACTING PARTIES disapprove.
7. A system for the stabilization of the domestic price or of the return to domestic producers of a primary commodity, independently of the movements of export prices, which results at times in the sale of the commodity for export at a price lower than the comparable price charged for the like commodity to buyers in the domestic market, shall be presumed not to result in material injury within the meaning of paragraph 6 if it is determined by consultation among the contracting parties substantially interested in the commodity concerned that:
(a) the system has also resulted in the sale of the commodity for export at a price higher than the comparable price charged for the like commodity to buyers in the domestic market, and
(b) the system is so operated, either because of the effective regulation of production, or otherwise, as not to stimulate exports unduly or otherwise seriously prejudice the interests of other contracting parties.
back to top
Article VII: Valuation for Customs Purposes
1. The contracting parties recognize the validity of the general principles of valuation set forth in the following paragraphs of this Article, and they undertake to give effect to such principles, in respect of all products subject to duties or other charges* or restrictions on importation and exportation based upon or regulated in any manner by value. Moreover, they shall, upon a request by another contracting party review the operation of any of their laws or regulations relating to value for customs purposes in the light of these principles. The CONTRACTING PARTIES may request from contracting parties reports on steps taken by them in pursuance of the provisions of this Article.
2. (a) The value for customs purposes of imported merchandise should be based on the actual value of the imported merchandise on which duty is assessed, or of like merchandise, and should not be based on the value of merchandise of national origin or on arbitrary or fictitious values.*
(b) Actual value should be the price at which, at a time and place determined by the legislation of the country of importation, such or like merchandise is sold or offered for sale in the ordinary course of trade under fully competitive conditions. To the extent to which the price of such or like merchandise is governed by the quantity in a particular transaction, the price to be considered should uniformly be related to either (i) comparable quantities, or (ii) quantities not less favourable to importers than those in which the greater volume of the merchandise is sold in the trade between the countries of exportation and importation.*
(c) When the actual value is not ascertainable in accordance with subparagraph (b) of this paragraph, the value for customs purposes should be based on the nearest ascertainable equivalent of such value.*
3. The value for customs purposes of any imported product should not include the amount of any internal tax, applicable within the country of origin or export, from which the imported product has been exempted or has been or will be relieved by means of refund.
4. (a) Except as otherwise provided for in this paragraph, where it is necessary for the purposes of paragraph 2 of this Article for a contracting party to convert into its own currency a price expressed in the currency of another country, the conversion rate of exchange to be used shall be based, for each currency involved, on the par value as established pursuant to the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund or on the rate of exchange recognized by the Fund, or on the par value established in accordance with a special exchange agreement entered into pursuant to Article XV of this Agreement.
(b) Where no such established par value and no such recognized rate of exchange exist, the conversion rate shall reflect effectively the current value of such currency in commercial transactions.
(c) The CONTRACTING PARTIES, in agreement with the International Monetary Fund, shall formulate rules governing the conversion by contracting parties of any foreign currency in respect of which multiple rates of exchange are maintained consistently with the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund. Any contracting party may apply such rules in respect of such foreign currencies for the purposes of paragraph 2 of this Article as an alternative to the use of par values. Until such rules are adopted by the Contracting Parties, any contracting party may employ, in respect of any such foreign currency, rules of conversion for the purposes of paragraph 2 of this Article which are designed to reflect effectively the value of such foreign currency in commercial transactions.
(d) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to require any contracting party to alter the method of converting currencies for customs purposes which is applicable in its territory on the date of this Agreement, if such alteration would have the effect of increasing generally the amounts of duty payable.
5. The bases and methods for determining the value of products subject to duties or other charges or restrictions based upon or regulated in any manner by value should be stable and should be given sufficient publicity to enable traders to estimate, with a reasonable degree of certainty, the value for customs purposes.
back to top
Article VIII: Fees and Formalities connected with Importation and Exportation*
1. (a) All fees and charges of whatever character (other than import and export duties and other than taxes within the purview of Article III) imposed by contracting parties on or in connection with importation or exportation shall be limited in amount to the approximate cost of services rendered and shall not represent an indirect protection to domestic products or a taxation of imports or exports for fiscal purposes.
(b) The contracting parties recognize the need for reducing the number and diversity of fees and charges referred to in subparagraph (a).
(c) The contracting parties also recognize the need for minimizing the incidence and complexity of import and export formalities and for decreasing and simplifying import and export documentation requirements.*
2. A contracting party shall, upon request by another contracting party or by the CONTRACTING PARTIES, review the operation of its laws and regulations in the light of the provisions of this Article.
3. No contracting party shall impose substantial penalties for minor breaches of customs regulations or procedural requirements. In particular, no penalty in respect of any omission or mistake in customs documentation which is easily rectifiable and obviously made without fraudulent intent or gross negligence shall be greater than necessary to serve merely as a warning.
4. The provisions of this Article shall extend to fees, charges, formalities and requirements imposed by governmental authorities in connection with importation and exportation, including those relating to:
(a) consular transactions, such as consular invoices and certificates;
(b) quantitative restrictions;
(c) licensing;
(d) exchange control;
(e) statistical services;
(f) documents, documentation and certification;
(g) analysis and inspection; and
(h) quarantine, sanitation and fumigation.
back to top
Article IX: Marks of Origin
1. Each contracting party shall accord to the products of the territories of other contracting parties treatment with regard to marking requirements no less favourable than the treatment accorded to like products of any third country.
2. The contracting parties recognize that, in adopting and enforcing laws and regulations relating to marks of origin, the difficulties and inconveniences which such measures may cause to the commerce and industry of exporting countries should be reduced to a minimum, due regard being had to the necessity of protecting consumers against fraudulent or misleading indications.
3. Whenever it is administratively practicable to do so, contracting parties should permit required marks of origin to be affixed at the time of importation.
4. The laws and regulations of contracting parties relating to the marking of imported products shall be such as to permit compliance without seriously damaging the products, or materially reducing their value, or unreasonably increasing their cost.
5. As a general rule, no special duty or penalty should be imposed by any contracting party for failure to comply with marking requirements prior to importation unless corrective marking is unreasonably delayed or deceptive marks have been affixed or the required marking has been intentionally omitted.
6. The contracting parties shall co-operate with each other with a view to preventing the use of trade names in such manner as to misrepresent the true origin of a product, to the detriment of such distinctive regional or geographical names of products of the territory of a contracting party as are protected by its legislation. Each contracting party shall accord full and sympathetic consideration to such requests or representations as may be made by any other contracting party regarding the application of the undertaking set forth in the preceding sentence to names of products which have been communicated to it by the other contracting party.
back to top
Article X: Publication and Administration of Trade Regulations
1. Laws, regulations, judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application, made effective by any contracting party, pertaining to the classification or the valuation of products for customs purposes, or to rates of duty, taxes or other charges, or to requirements, restrictions or prohibitions on imports or exports or on the transfer of payments therefor, or affecting their sale, distribution, transportation, insurance, warehousing inspection, exhibition, processing, mixing or other use, shall be published promptly in such a manner as to enable governments and traders to become acquainted with them. Agreements affecting international trade policy which are in force between the government or a governmental agency of any contracting party and the government or governmental agency of any other contracting party shall also be published. The provisions of this paragraph shall not require any contracting party to disclose confidential information which would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the public interest or would prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of particular enterprises, public or private.
2. No measure of general application taken by any contracting party effecting an advance in a rate of duty or other charge on imports under an established and uniform practice, or imposing a new or more burdensome requirement, restriction or prohibition on imports, or on the transfer of payments therefor, shall be enforced before such measure has been officially published.
3. (a) Each contracting party shall administer in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner all its laws, regulations, decisions and rulings of the kind described in paragraph 1 of this Article.
(b) Each contracting party shall maintain, or institute as soon as practicable, judicial, arbitral or administrative tribunals or procedures for the purpose, inter alia, of the prompt review and correction of administrative action relating to customs matters. Such tribunals or procedures shall be independent of the agencies entrusted with administrative enforcement and their decisions shall be implemented by, and shall govern the practice of, such agencies unless an appeal is lodged with a court or tribunal of superior jurisdiction within the time prescribed for appeals to be lodged by importers; Provided that the central administration of such agency may take steps to obtain a review of the matter in another proceeding if there is good cause to believe that the decision is inconsistent with established principles of law or the actual facts.
(c) The provisions of subparagraph (b) of this paragraph shall not require the elimination or substitution of procedures in force in the territory of a contracting party on the date of this Agreement which in fact provide for an objective and impartial review of administrative action even though such procedures are not fully or formally independent of the agencies entrusted with administrative enforcement. Any contracting party employing such procedures shall, upon request, furnish the CONTRACTING PARTIES with full information thereon in order that they may determine whether such procedures conform to the requirements of this subparagraph.
back to top
Article XI*: General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions
1. No prohibitions or restrictions other than duties, taxes or other charges, whether made effective through quotas, import or export licences or other measures, shall be instituted or maintained by any contracting party on the importation of any product of the territory of any other contracting party or on the exportation or sale for export of any product destined for the territory of any other contracting party.
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not extend to the following:
(a) Export prohibitions or restrictions temporarily applied to prevent or relieve critical shortages of foodstuffs or other products essential to the exporting contracting party;
(b) Import and export prohibitions or restrictions necessary to the application of standards or regulations for the classification, grading or marketing of commodities in international trade;
(c) Import restrictions on any agricultural or fisheries product, imported in any form,* necessary to the enforcement of governmental measures which operate:
(i) to restrict the quantities of the like domestic product permitted to be marketed or produced, or, if there is no substantial domestic production of the like product, of a domestic product for which the imported product can be directly substituted; or
(ii) to remove a temporary surplus of the like domestic product, or, if there is no substantial domestic production of the like product, of a domestic product for which the imported product can be directly substituted, by making the surplus available to certain groups of domestic consumers free of charge or at prices below the current market level; or
(iii) to restrict the quantities permitted to be produced of any animal product the production of which is directly dependent, wholly or mainly, on the imported commodity, if the domestic production of that commodity is relatively negligible.
Any contracting party applying restrictions on the importation of any product pursuant to subparagraph (c) of this paragraph shall give public notice of the total quantity or value of the product permitted to be imported during a specified future period and of any change in such quantity or value. Moreover, any restrictions applied under (i) above shall not be such as will reduce the total of imports relative to the total of domestic production, as compared with the proportion which might reasonably be expected to rule between the two in the absence of restrictions. In determining this proportion, the contracting party shall pay due regard to the proportion prevailing during a previous representative period and to any special factors* which may have affected or may be affecting the trade in the product concerned.
back to top
Article XII*: Restrictions to Safeguard the Balance of Payments
1. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article XI, any contracting party, in order to safeguard its external financial position and its balance of payments, may restrict the quantity or value of merchandise permitted to be imported, subject to the provisions of the following paragraphs of this Article.
2. (a) Import restrictions instituted, maintained or intensified by a contracting party under this Article shall not exceed those necessary:
(i) to forestall the imminent threat of, or to stop, a serious decline in its monetary reserves; or
(ii) in the case of a contracting party with very low monetary reserves, to achieve a reasonable rate of increase in its reserves.
Due regard shall be paid in either case to any special factors which may be affecting the reserves of such contracting party or its need for reserves, including, where special external credits or other resources are available to it, the need to provide for the appropriate use of such credits or resources.
(b) Contracting parties applying restrictions under sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph shall progressively relax them as such conditions improve, maintaining them only to the extent that the conditions specified in that sub-paragraph still justify their application. They shall eliminate the restrictions when conditions would no longer justify their institution or maintenance under that subparagraph.
3. (a) Contracting parties undertake, in carrying out their domestic policies, to pay due regard to the need for maintaining or restoring equilibrium in their balance of payments on a sound and lasting basis and to the desirability of avoiding an uneconomic employment of productive resources. They recognize that, in order to achieve these ends, it is desirable so far as possible to adopt measures which expand rather than contract international trade.
(b) Contracting parties applying restrictions under this Article may determine the incidence of the restrictions on imports of different products or classes of products in such a way as to give priority to the importation of those products which are more essential.
(c) Contracting parties applying restrictions under this Article undertake:
(i) to avoid unnecessary damage to the commercial or economic interests of any other contracting party;*
(ii) not to apply restrictions so as to prevent unreasonably the importation of any description of goods in minimum commercial quantities the exclusion of which would impair regular channels of trade; and
(iii) not to apply restrictions which would prevent the importations of commercial samples or prevent compliance with patent, trade mark, copyright, or similar procedures.
(d) The contracting parties recognize that, as a result of domestic policies directed towards the achievement and maintenance of full and productive employment or towards the development of economic resources, a contracting party may experience a high level of demand for imports involving a threat to its monetary reserves of the sort referred to in paragraph 2 (a) of this Article. Accordingly, a contracting party otherwise complying with the provisions of this Article shall not be required to withdraw or modify restrictions on the ground that a change in those policies would render unnecessary restrictions which it is applying under this Article.
4. (a) Any contracting party applying new restrictions or raising the general level of its existing restrictions by a substantial intensification of the measures applied under this Article shall immediately after instituting or intensifying such restrictions (or, in circumstances in which prior consultation is practicable, before doing so) consult with the CONTRACTING PARTIES as to the nature of its balance of payments difficulties, alternative corrective measures which may be available, and the possible effect of the restrictions on the economies of other contracting parties.
(b) On a date to be determined by them,* the CONTRACTING PARTIES shall review all restrictions still applied under this Article on that date. Beginning one year after that date, contracting parties applying import restrictions under this Article shall enter into consultations of the type provided for in subparagraph (a) of this paragraph with the CONTRACTING PARTIES annually.
(c) (i) If, in the course of consultations with a contracting party under subparagraph (a) or (b) above, the CONTRACTING PARTIES find that the restrictions are not consistent with provisions of this Article or with those of Article XIII (subject to the provisions of Article XIV), they shall indicate the nature of the inconsistency and may advise that the restrictions be suitably modified.
(ii) If, however, as a result of the consultations, the CONTRACTING PARTIES determine that the restrictions are being applied in a manner involving an inconsistency of a serious nature with the provisions of this Article or with those of Article XIII (subject to the provisions of Article XIV) and that damage to the trade of any contracting party is caused or threatened thereby, they shall so inform the contracting party applying the restrictions and shall make appropriate recommendations for securing conformity with such provisions within the specified period of time. If such contracting party does not comply with these recommendations within the specified period, the CONTRACTING PARTIES may release any contracting party the trade of which is adversely affected by the restrictions from such obligations under this Agreement towards the contracting party applying the restrictions as they determine to be appropriate in the circumstances.
(d) The CONTRACTING PARTIES shall invite any contracting party which is applying restrictions under this Article to enter into consultations with them at the request of any contracting party which can establish a prima facie case that the restrictions are inconsistent with the provisions of this Article or with those of Article XIII (subject to the provisions of Article XIV) and that its trade is adversely affected thereby. However, no such invitation shall be issued unless the CONTRACTING PARTIES have ascertained that direct discussions between the contracting parties concerned have not been successful. If, as a result of the consultations with the CONTRACTING PARTIES, no agreement is reached and they determine that the restrictions are being applied inconsistently with such provisions, and that damage to the trade of the contracting party initiating the procedure is caused or threatened thereby, they shall recommend the withdrawal or modification of the restrictions. If the restrictions are not withdrawn or modified within such time as the CONTRACTING PARTIES may prescribe, they may release the contracting party initiating the procedure from such obligations under this Agreement towards the contracting party applying the restrictions as they determine to be appropriate in the circumstances.
(e) In proceeding under this paragraph, the CONTRACTING PARTIES shall have due regard to any special external factors adversely affecting the export trade of the contracting party applying the restrictions.*
(f) Determinations under this paragraph shall be rendered expeditiously and, if possible, within sixty days of the initiation of the consultations.
5. If there is a persistent and widespread application of import restrictions under this Article, indicating the existence of a general disequilibrium which is restricting international trade, the CONTRACTING PARTIES shall initiate discussions to consider whether other measures might be taken, either by those contracting parties the balance of payments of which are under pressure or by those the balance of payments of which are tending to be exceptionally favourable, or by any appropriate intergovernmental organization, to remove the underlying causes of the disequilibrium. On the invitation of the CONTRACTING PARTIES, contracting parties shall participate in such discussions.
back to top
Article XIII*: Non-discriminatory Administration of Quantitative Restrictions
1. No prohibition or restriction shall be applied by any contracting party on the importation of any product of the territory of any other contracting party or on the exportation of any product destined for the territory of any other contracting party, unless the importation of the like product of all third countries or the exportation of the like product to all third countries is similarly prohibited or restricted.
2. In applying import restrictions to any product, contracting parties shall aim at a distribution of trade in such product approaching as closely as possible the shares which the various contracting parties might be expected to obtain in the absence of such restrictions and to this end shall observe the following provisions:
(a) Wherever practicable, quotas representing the total amount of permitted imports (whether allocated among supplying countries or not) shall be fixed, and notice given of their amount in accordance with paragraph 3 (b) of this Article;
(b) In cases in which quotas are not practicable, the restrictions may be applied by means of import licences or permits without a quota;
(c) Contracting parties shall not, except for purposes of operating quotas allocated in accordance with subparagraph (d) of this paragraph, require that import licences or permits be utilized for the importation of the product concerned from a particular country or source;
(d) In cases in which a quota is allocated among supplying countries the contracting party applying the restrictions may seek agreement with respect to the allocation of shares in the quota with all other contracting parties having a substantial interest in supplying the product concerned. In cases in which this method is not reasonably practicable, the contracting party concerned shall allot to contracting parties having a substantial interest in supplying the product shares based upon the proportions, supplied by such contracting parties during a previous representative period, of the total quantity or value of imports of the product, due account being taken of any special factors which may have affected or may be affecting the trade in the product. No conditions or formalities shall be imposed which would prevent any contracting party from utilizing fully the share of any such total quantity or value which has been allotted to it, subject to importation being made within any prescribed period to which the quota may relate.*
3. (a) In cases in which import licences are issued in connection with import restrictions, the contracting party applying the restrictions shall provide, upon the request of any contracting party having an interest in the trade in the product concerned, all relevant information concerning the administration of the restrictions, the import licences granted over a recent period and the distribution of such licences among supplying countries; Provided that there shall be no obligation to supply information as to the names of importing or supplying enterprises.
(b) In the case of import restrictions involving the fixing of quotas, the contracting party applying the restrictions shall give public notice of the total quantity or value of the product or products which will be permitted to be imported during a specified future period and of any change in such quantity or value. Any supplies of the product in question which were en route at the time at which public notice was given shall not be excluded from entry; Provided that they may be counted so far as practicable, against the quantity permitted to be imported in the period in question, and also, where necessary, against the quantities permitted to be imported in the next following period or periods; and Provided further that if any contracting party customarily exempts from such restrictions products entered for consumption or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption during a period of thirty days after the day of such public notice, such practice shall be considered full compliance with this subparagraph.
(c) In the case of quotas allocated among supplying countries, the contracting party applying the restrictions shall promptly inform all other contracting parties having an interest in supplying the product concerned of the shares in the quota currently allocated, by quantity or value, to the various supplying countries and shall give public notice thereof.
4. With regard to restrictions applied in accordance with paragraph 2 (d) of this Article or under paragraph 2 (c) of Article XI, the selection of a representative period for any product and the appraisal of any special factors* affecting the trade in the product shall be made initially by the contracting party applying the restriction; Provided that such contracting party shall, upon the request of any other contracting party having a substantial interest in supplying that product or upon the request of the CONTRACTING PARTIES, consult promptly with the other contracting party or the CONTRACTING PARTIES regarding the need for an adjustment of the proportion determined or of the base period selected, or for the reappraisal of the special factors involved, or for the elimination of conditions, formalities or any other provisions established unilaterally relating to the allocation of an adequate quota or its unrestricted utilization.
5. The provisions of this Article shall apply to any tariff quota instituted or maintained by any contracting party, and, in so far as applicable, the principles of this Article shall also extend to export restrictions.
back to top
Article XIV*: Exceptions to the Rule of Non-discrimination
1. A contracting party which applies restrictions under Article XII or under Section B of Article XVIII may, in the application of such restrictions, deviate from the provisions of Article XIII in a manner having equivalent effect to restrictions on payments and transfers for current international transactions which that contracting party may at that time apply under Article VIII or XIV of the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund, or under analogous provisions of a special exchange agreement entered into pursuant to paragraph 6 of Article XV.*
2. A contracting party which is applying import restrictions under Article XII or under Section B of Article XVIII may, with the consent of the CONTRACTING PARTIES, temporarily deviate from the provisions of Article XIII in respect of a small part of its external trade where the benefits to the contracting party or contracting parties concerned substantially outweigh any injury which may result to the trade of other contracting parties.*
3. The provisions of Article XIII shall not preclude a group of territories having a common quota in the International Monetary Fund from applying against imports from other countries, but not among themselves, restrictions in accordance with the provisions of Article XII or of Section B of Article XVIII on condition that such restrictions are in all other respects consistent with the provisions of Article XIII.
4. A contracting party applying import restrictions under Article XII or under Section B of Article XVIII shall not be precluded by Articles XI to XV or Section B of Article XVIII of this Agreement from applying measures to direct its exports in such a manner as to increase its earnings of currencies which it can use without deviation from the provisions of Article XIII.
5. A contracting party shall not be precluded by Articles XI to XV, inclusive, or by Section B of Article XVIII, of this Agreement from applying quantitative restrictions:
(a) having equivalent effect to exchange restrictions authorized under Section 3 (b) of Article VII of the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund, or
(b) under the preferential arrangements provided for in Annex A of this Agreement, pending the outcome of the negotiations referred to therein.
back to top
Article XV: Exchange Arrangements
1. The CONTRACTING PARTIES shall seek co-operation with the International Monetary Fund to the end that the CONTRACTING PARTIES and the Fund may pursue a co-ordinated policy with regard to exchange questions within the jurisdiction of the Fund and questions of quantitative restrictions and other trade measures within the jurisdiction of the CONTRACTING PARTIES.
2. In all cases in which the CONTRACTING PARTIES are called upon to consider or deal with problems concerning monetary reserves, balances of payments or foreign exchange arrangements, they shall consult fully with the International Monetary Fund. In such consultations, the CONTRACTING PARTIES shall accept all findings of statistical and other facts presented by the Fund relating to foreign exchange, monetary reserves and balances of payments, and shall accept the determination of the Fund as to whether action by a contracting party in exchange matters is in accordance with the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund, or with the terms of a special exchange agreement between that contracting party and the CONTRACTING PARTIES. The CONTRACTING PARTIES in reaching their final decision in cases involving the criteria set forth in paragraph 2 (a) of Article XII or in paragraph 9 of Article XVIII, shall accept the determination of the Fund as to what constitutes a serious decline in the contracting partys monetary reserves, a very low level of its monetary reserves or a reasonable rate of increase in its monetary reserves, and as to the financial aspects of other matters covered in consultation in such cases.
3. The CONTRACTING PARTIES shall seek agreement with the Fund regarding procedures for consultation under paragraph 2 of this Article.
4. Contracting parties shall not, by exchange action, frustrate* the intent of the provisions of this Agreement, nor, by trade action, the intent of the provisions of the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund.
5. If the CONTRACTING PARTIES consider, at any time, that exchange restrictions on payments and transfers in connection with imports are being applied by a contracting party in a manner inconsistent with the exceptions provided for in this Agreement for quantitative restrictions, they shall report thereon to the Fund.
6. Any contracting party which is not a member of the Fund shall, within a time to be determined by the CONTRACTING PARTIES after consultation with the Fund, become a member of the Fund, or, failing that, enter into a special exchange agreement with the CONTRACTING PARTIES. A contracting party which ceases to be a member of the Fund shall forthwith enter into a special exchange agreement with the CONTRACTING PARTIES. Any special exchange agreement entered into by a contracting party under this paragraph shall thereupon become part of its obligations under this Agreement.
7. (a) A special exchange agreement between a contracting party and the CONTRACTING PARTIES under paragraph 6 of this Article shall provide to the satisfaction of the CONTRACTING PARTIES that the objectives of this Agreement will not be frustrated as a result of action in exchange matters by the contracting party in question.
(b) The terms of any such agreement shall not impose obligations on the contracting party in exchange matters generally more restrictive than those imposed by the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund on members of the Fund.
8. A contracting party which is not a member of the Fund shall furnish such information within the general scope of section 5 of Article VIII of the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund as the CONTRACTING PARTIES may require in order to carry out their functions under this Agreement.
9. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude:
(a) the use by a contracting party of exchange controls or exchange restrictions in accordance with the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund or with that contracting partys special exchange agreement with the CONTRACTING PARTIES, or
(b) the use by a contracting party of restrictions or controls in imports or exports, the sole effect of which, additional to the effects permitted under Articles XI, XII, XIII and XIV, is to make effective such exchange controls or exchange restrictions.
back to top
Article XVI*: Subsidies
Section A — Subsidies in General
1. If any contracting party grants or maintains any subsidy, including any form of income or price support, which operates directly or indirectly to increase exports of any product from, or to reduce imports of any product into, its territory, it shall notify the CONTRACTING PARTIES in writing of the extent and nature of the subsidization, of the estimated effect of the subsidization on the quantity of the affected product or products imported into or exported from its territory and of the circumstances making the subsidization necessary. In any case in which it is determined that serious prejudice to the interests of any other contracting party is caused or threatened by any such subsidization, the contracting party granting the subsidy shall, upon request, discuss with the other contracting party or parties concerned, or with the CONTRACTING PARTIES, the possibility of limiting the subsidization.
Section B — Additional Provisions on Export Subsidies*
2. The contracting parties recognize that the granting by a contracting party of a subsidy on the export of any product may have harmful effects for other contracting parties, both importing and exporting, may cause undue disturbance to their normal commercial interests, and may hinder the achievement of the objectives of this Agreement.
3. Accordingly, contracting parties should seek to avoid the use of subsidies on the export of primary products. If, however, a contracting party grants directly or indirectly any form of subsidy which operates to increase the export of any primary product from its territory, such subsidy shall not be applied in a manner which results in that contracting party having more than an equitable share of world export trade in that product, account being taken of the shares of the contracting parties in such trade in the product during a previous representative period, and any special factors which may have affected or may be affecting such trade in the product.*
4. Further, as from 1 January 1958 or the earliest practicable date thereafter, contracting parties shall cease to grant either directly or indirectly any form of subsidy on the export of any product other than a primary product which subsidy results in the sale of such product for export at a price lower than the comparable price charged for the like product to buyers in the domestic market. Until 31 December 1957 no contracting party shall extend the scope of any such subsidization beyond that existing on 1 January 1955 by the introduction of new, or the extension of existing, subsidies.*
5. The CONTRACTING PARTIES shall review the operation of the provisions of this Article from time to time with a view to examining its effectiveness, in the light of actual experience, in promoting the objectives of this Agreement and avoiding subsidization seriously prejudicial to the trade or interests of contracting parties.
back to top
Article XVII: State Trading Enterprises
1.* (a) Each contracting party undertakes that if it establishes or maintains a State enterprise, wherever located, or grants to any enterprise, formally or in effect, exclusive or special privileges,* such enterprise shall, in its purchases or sales involving either imports or exports, act in a manner consistent with the general principles of non-discriminatory treatment prescribed in this Agreement for governmental measures affecting imports or exports by private traders.
(b) The provisions of subparagraph (a) of this paragraph shall be understood to require that such enterprises shall, having due regard to the other provisions of this Agreement, make any such purchases or sales solely in accordance with commercial considerations,* including price, quality, availability, marketability, transportation and other conditions of purchase or sale, and shall afford the enterprises of the other contracting parties adequate opportunity, in accordance with customary business practice, to compete for participation in such purchases or sales.
(c) No contracting party shall prevent any enterprise (whether or not an enterprise described in subparagraph (a) of this paragraph) under its jurisdiction from acting in accordance with the principles of subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this paragraph.
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not apply to imports of products for immediate or ultimate consumption in governmental use and not otherwise for resale or use in the production of goods* for sale. With respect to such imports, each contracting party shall accord to the trade of the other contracting parties fair and equitable treatment.
3. The contracting parties recognize that enterprises of the kind described in paragraph 1 (a) of this Article might be operated so as to create serious obstacles to trade; thus negotiations on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis designed to limit or reduce such obstacles are of importance to the expansion of international trade.*
4. (a) Contracting parties shall notify the CONTRACTING PARTIES of the products which are imported into or exported from their territories by enterprises of the kind described in paragraph 1 (a) of this Article.
(b) A contracting party establishing, maintaining or authorizing an import monopoly of a product, which is not the subject of a concession under Article II, shall, on the request of another contracting party having a substantial trade in the product concerned, inform the CONTRACTING PARTIES of the import mark-up* on the product during a recent representative period, or, when it is not possible to do so, of the price charged on the resale of the product.
(c) The CONTRACTING PARTIES may, at the request of a contracting party which has reason to believe that its interest under this Agreement are being adversely affected by the operations of an enterprise of the kind described in paragraph 1 (a), request the contracting party establishing, maintaining or authorizing such enterprise to supply information about its operations related to the carrying out of the provisions of this Agreement.
(d) The provisions of this paragraph shall not require any contracting party to disclose confidential information which would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the public interest or would prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of particular enterprises.
Next >
Notes:
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 53
|
https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/britain-ireland-france-and-low-countries/benelux-political-geography/netherlands
|
en
|
Encyclopedia.com
|
[
"https://www.encyclopedia.com/themes/custom/trustme/images/header-logo.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Get information",
"facts",
"and pictures",
"about Netherlands",
"at Encyclopedia.com",
"Make",
"research",
"projects",
"and school reports",
"about Netherlands",
"easy",
"with credible",
"articles",
"from our FREE",
"online encyclopedia and dictionary"
] | null |
[] | null |
NETHERLANDS [1] LOCATION, SIZE, AND EXTENT [2] TOPOGRAPHY [3] CLIMATE [4] FLORA AND FAUNA [5] ENVIRONMENT [6] POPULATION [7] MIGRATION [8] ETHNIC GROUPS [9] LANGUAGES [10] RELIGIONS [11] TRANSPORTATION [12] HISTORY [13] GOVERNMENT [14] POLITICAL PARTIES [15] LOCAL GOVERNMENT [16] JUDICIAL SYSTEM [1
|
en
|
/sites/default/files/favicon.ico
|
https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/britain-ireland-france-and-low-countries/benelux-political-geography/netherlands
|
NETHERLANDS
LOCATION, SIZE, AND EXTENT
TOPOGRAPHY
CLIMATE
FLORA AND FAUNA
ENVIRONMENT
POPULATION
MIGRATION
ETHNIC GROUPS
LANGUAGES
RELIGIONS
TRANSPORTATION
HISTORY
GOVERNMENT
POLITICAL PARTIES
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
JUDICIAL SYSTEM
ARMED FORCES
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
ECONOMY
INCOME
LABOR
AGRICULTURE
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
FISHING
FORESTRY
MINING
ENERGY AND POWER
INDUSTRY
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
DOMESTIC TRADE
FOREIGN TRADE
BALANCE OF PAYMENTS
BANKING AND SECURITIES
INSURANCE
PUBLIC FINANCE
TAXATION
CUSTOMS AND DUTIES
FOREIGN INVESTMENT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
HEALTH
HOUSING
EDUCATION
LIBRARIES AND MUSEUMS
MEDIA
ORGANIZATIONS
TOURISM, TRAVEL, AND RECREATION
FAMOUS NETHERLANDERS
DEPENDENCIES
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kingdom of the Netherlands
Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
CAPITAL: Constitutional capital: Amsterdam. Seat of government: The Hague ('S Gravenhage; Den Haag)
FLAG: The national flag, standardized in 1937, is a tricolor of red, white, and blue horizontal stripes.
ANTHEM: Wilhelmus van Nassouwen (William of Nassau).
MONETARY UNIT: The guilder was replaced by the euro as official currency as of 2002. The euro is divided into 100 cents. There are coins in denominations of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, and 50 cents and 1 euro and 2 euros. There are notes of 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, and 500 euros. €1 = $1.25475 (or $1 = €0.79697) as of 2005.
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES: The metric system is the legal standard.
HOLIDAYS: New Year's Day, 1 January; Queen's Day, 30 April; National Liberation Day, 5 May; Christmas, 25–26 December. Movable religious holidays include Good Friday, Holy Saturday, Easter Monday, Ascension, and Whitmonday.
TIME: 1 pm = noon GMT.
LOCATION, SIZE, AND EXTENT
Situated in northwestern Europe, the Netherlands has a total area of 41,526 sq km (16,033 sq mi), of which inland water accounts for more than 7,643 sq km (2,951 sq mi). The land area is 33,883 sq km (13,082 sq mi). Comparatively, the area occupied by the Netherlands is slightly less than twice the size of the state of New Jersey. The Netherlands extends 312 km (194 mi) n–s and 264 km (164 mi) e–w. The land area increases slightly each year as a result of continuous land reclamation and drainage. The Netherlands is bounded on the e by Germany on the s by Belgium, and on the w and n by the North Sea, with a total boundary length of 1,478 km (918 mi), of which 451 km (280 mi) is coastline.
The capital city of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, is in the western part of the country.
TOPOGRAPHY
The country falls into three natural topographical divisions: the dunes, the lowlands or "polders" (low-lying land reclaimed from the sea and from lakes and protected by dikes), and the higher eastern section of the country. About 27% of the land lies below sea level. A long range of sand dunes on the western coast protects the low alluvial land to the east from the high tides of the North Sea, and farther east and southeast are found diluvial sand and gravel soil. The highest point of land, the Vaalserberg, is situated in the extreme south and is 321 m (1,053 ft) above sea level; the lowest point, 7 m (23 ft) below sea level, is Prins Alexanderpolder, an area of reclaimed land situated northeast of Rotterdam. The most extensive polder is that of East Flevoland in the province of Flevoland; it has an area of nearly 55,000 hectares (136,000 acres). Many dikes have been constructed along the lower Rhine and Meuse (Maas) rivers, as well as on a portion of the North Sea coast and along nearly the whole of the coast of the former Zuider Zee (formally called the Ijsselmeer since its enclosure by a dike in 1932). There are many canals in the country, most of which have numerous locks.
CLIMATE
The Netherlands has a maritime climate, with cool summers and mild winters. The average temperature is 2°c (36°f) in January and 19°c (66°f) in July, with an annual average of about 10°c (50°f). Clouds generally appear every day, and in the winter months fog often abounds, while rainfall occurs frequently. Average annual rainfall is about 76.5 cm (30 in). The mild, damp climate is ideal for dairying and livestock raising, but the limited sunshine restricts the growing of food crops.
FLORA AND FAUNA
Plants and animals that thrive in temperate climates are found in the Netherlands. The most common trees are oak, elm, pine, linden, and beech. The country is famous for its flowers, both cultivated varieties (best known among them the Dutch tulip) and wild flowers such as daisies, buttercups, and the purple heather that blooms on the heaths in September. Birds are those characteristic of Western and Central Europe, with large numbers of seagulls swarming over the coastal areas from time to time. Many kinds of fish abound along the North Sea coast and in the lakes and rivers. Wild or large animals are practically nonexistent. As of 2002, there were at least 55 species of mammals, 192 species of birds, and over 1,200 species of plants throughout the country.
ENVIRONMENT
In recent years, as a result of rapid population and economic growth, the government has placed increased emphasis on preservation of the natural environment. One key concern is the pressure put on the countryside, traditionally the domain of the smallholder, by the demands of modern mechanized agriculture and the needs of a large urban population for recreational areas and waste disposal. To help solve this environmental problem, the government has instituted comprehensive land-use planning by means of a system of zoning that indicates the priorities for land use in each zone. Air and water pollution are significant environmental problems in the Netherlands.
The nation has one of the world's highest levels of industrial carbon dioxide emissions, which totaled 155 million metric tons in 1996. Efforts at controlling air pollution reduced sulphur dioxide emissions between 1980 and 1990 from 490,000 tons to 240,000 tons. In 2000, the total of carbon dioxide emissions was at 138.9 million metric tons. Severe pollution of the country's rivers results from industrial and agricultural pollution, including heavy metals, organic compounds, nitrates, and phosphates.
The Netherlands has about 11 cu km of renewable water resources, of which 61% of the annual withdrawal is used for industrial purposes. Solid waste in the nation's cities has been reported at an average of 7.6 million tons yearly. Aggravating the situation are the prevailing southwesterly winds, which carry the pollutants from coastal industries inland, and the great rivers that carry pollution into the Netherlands from originating countries farther inland.
In 1971, the Ministry of Health and Environment was established; a countrywide system of air pollution monitoring by the National Institute of Public Health has been in place since 1975. Since the mid-1970s, discharges of heavy metals into industrial wastewater and emissions of most major air pollutants from industrial use of fossil fuels have been substantially reduced. Progress has also been recorded in reducing automotive emissions. An excise tax surcharge on gasoline and diesel fuel was imposed for pollution abatement in 1981.
As of 2003, 14.2% of the country's total land area was protected, including 49 Ramsar wetland sites. According to a 2006 report issued by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), threatened species included 9 types of mammals, 11 species of birds, 7 species of fish, 1 type of mollusk, and 6 species of other invertebrates. Endangered species include Atlantic sturgeon, slender-billed curlew, Atlantic ridley, and Spengler's freshwater mussel.
POPULATION
The population of Netherlands in 2005 was estimated by the United Nations (UN) at 16,296,000, which placed it at number 59 in population among the 193 nations of the world. In 2005, approximately 14% of the population was over 65 years of age, with another 19% of the population under 15 years of age. There were 99 males for every 100 females in the country. According to the UN, the annual population rate of change for 2005–10 was expected to be 0.4%, a rate the government viewed as satisfactory. The projected population for the year 2025 was 16,934,000. The population density was 399 per sq km (1,033 per sq mi), with over 45% of the population concentrated in the three most densely populated provinces: Utrecht, North Holland, and South Holland.
The UN estimated that 62% of the population lived in urban areas in 2005, and that urban areas were growing at an annual rate of 1.04%. The constitutional capital, Amsterdam, had a population of 705,000 in that year. The Rotterdam metropolitan area had 1,112,000 inhabitants. Other major cities and their estimated populations include The Hague ('s Gravenhage; Den Haag), which is the seat of government, 472,087; Utrecht, 275,362; Eindhoven, 209,286; Tilburg, 200,251; Groningen, 181,020; and Haarlem, 150,213.
MIGRATION
In the past although the government encouraged emigration to curb overpopulation, more people migrated to the Netherlands than have left the country. Rapid economic growth in the 1960s drew many unskilled laborers from Mediterranean countries, and during the 1970s many people left Suriname for the Netherlands when the former Dutch colony became independent. At first both groups settled mainly in the western region, but after 1970 the pattern of internal migration changed, as increasing numbers left the western provinces to settle in the east and south. The traditional pattern of migration from the countryside to the cities has likewise been altered, and since the 1970s the trend has been largely from the larger cities to small towns and villages. By 2003 it was becoming harder for asylum migrants to find work. In addition, in 2004, employer groups asked for the streamline of admissions for skilled foreigner workers.
In 1990, some 57,344 persons left the Netherlands, of which 36,749 were Dutch nationals. In the same year, 81,264 immigrants arrived in the Netherlands, representing an increase of 24% over 1989. In 2002 the top 10 migrant-sending countries were Turkey, the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba, Morocco, Germany, the United Kingdom, China (excluding Taiwan), Angola, Suriname, and the United States. However, in 2003 for the first time since 1982, there were more emigrants (104,800) than immigrants (104,500). In that same year, the percent of foreign-born broke down as follows: 17.6% from Africa (mainly Morocco); 21.2% from the Americas (mainly from the Netherlands Antilles and South America); 34.3% from Asia (mainly from Indonesia); and 26.1% from Europe (with Germans the largest group). However, the large numbers of migrants from the Antilles has been decreasing, while emigration to these countries has increased. The number of Turks and Moroccans returning to their country of origin has been increasing between 2000 and 2004.
Since the election of a conservative government in 2002, the Dutch integration policy of multiculturalism (where all cultures were considered of equal value and there was no need for foreigners to integrate into Dutch society) was being eroded with new policies requiring immigrants to pass a test of Dutch language and culture. After the death of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh in 2004 at the hands of a Dutch-born man of Moroccan descent, a law was passed that made being a member of a "terrorist" organization a crime. By 2005, new policies included integration exams for foreign residents under age 65 with less than eight years of schooling in the Netherlands. In 2004, about 5.7% of Dutch residents were Muslim. According to Migration News, in 2005 Moroccan and Turkish groups created a working group, "Genoeg is genoeg" (Enough is enough), to coordinate a campaign against these hard-hitting immigration and integration policies.
At the beginning of 1996, there were 72,000 recognized refugees and 23,000 applications for asylum. By 1998, as many as 45,217 asylum applications were submitted. In 1999, 4,060 people were evacuated from Macedonia to the Netherlands. Following the trend in the 25 countries of the European Union, the Netherlands in 2004 had the lowest number of asylum seekers since 1988. In 2004, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had a total of 155,257 persons of concern in the Netherlands: 126,805 refugees and 28,452 asylum seekers. The main countries of origin for refugees were Iraq (28,640), Afghanistan (26,437), Bosnia and Herzegovina (19,943), and Somalia (13,046).
In 2005, the net migration rate was an estimated 2.8 migrants per 1,000 population.
ETHNIC GROUPS
The Dutch are an ethnically homogeneous people descended from Frankish, Saxon, and Frisian tribes. Ethnic homogeneity slightly changed as a result of the arrival of some 300,000 repatriates and immigrants from Indonesia, mostly Eurasian, and more than 140,000 from Suriname. The influx of Turks and other workers from the Mediterranean area has further added to the ethnic mix. The most recent estimates indicate that about 80% of the total population are Dutch; the principal minority groups are Turkish, Moroccan, Surinamese, and Antillean.
LANGUAGES
Dutch and Frisian are the official languages. Frisian, the native language of about 300,000 persons, is closely related to the AngloSaxon tongue but has many points in common with Dutch, which belongs to the Germanic language group. There are six Dutch dialects. Many Netherlanders speak and understand English, French, and German, which are taught in secondary schools.
RELIGIONS
Dutch society is becoming increasingly secular. According to the Social Cultural Planning Bureau, church membership has steadily declined from 76% in 1958 to 41% in 1995. Only about 26% of those claiming a religious affiliation are active in their religious community. According to a 2004 report, an estimated 31% of the population were nominally Roman Catholics, 14% were Dutch Reformed, 6% were Muslim, 6% were Calvinist Reformist, 3% were non-Christian (Hindu, Jewish, or Buddhist); and about 40% were atheist or agnostic.
The Dutch Reformed Church, whose membership has declined by more than 60% since 1950, is the largest Protestant denomination. The Calvinist Reformed Church is the second-largest Protestant group. Other Protestant denominations include Baptist, Lutheran, and Remonstrant. The Jewish community has less than 25,000 members. The Muslim community is primarily of the Sunni branch. Many of them are migrant workers from Morocco and Turkey or immigrants from other countries such as Iraq, Somalia, and Bosnia. There are about 95,000 Hindus, primarily from Suriname. The Hindu based movements of Ramakrishna, Hare Krishna, Sai Baba, and Osho are also represented. About 17,000 people are Buddhist.
TRANSPORTATION
Merchant shipping has always been of great economic importance to the seagoing Dutch. The Netherlands Maritime Institute is internationally famous, and the Dutch ship-testing station at Wageningen is known for its research in marine engineering. The Dutch merchant marine had 558 ships (of 1,000 GRT or over) totaling 4,796,460 GRT in 2005. Emphasis has been placed on the development of new vessels suitable for container transport and on improving the Dutch tanker fleet. Rotterdam is the Netherlands' chief port and the world's largest. There are also ports and harbors at Amsterdam, Delfzijl, Dordrecht, Eemshaven, Groningen, Haarlem, Ijmuiden, Maastricht, Terneuzen, and Utrecht.
In 2004, there were 5,046 km (3,136 mi) of navigable waterways of which 3,745 km (2,327 mi) are canals and are capable of handling vessels of up to 50 tons.
The railway system in 2004 consisted of 2,808 km (1,744 mi) of standard gauge rail lines, of which 2,061 km (1,280 mi) was electrified. Passenger transport on railways is subsidized as part of the national policy for promoting public transport. Public transport is provided for urban areas by municipal and regional transport companies, and minibus service in rural areas has ensured public transport for all towns with 1,000 residents or more. Also in 2001, there were 116,500 km (72,393 mi) of roadways, of which 104,850 km (65,153 mi) were paved, including 2,235 km (1,389 mi) of expressways. In 2003 there were 7,151,000 passenger cars and 1,080,000 commercial vehicles in use. The state subsidizes the construction of urban and rural cycle paths.
In 2004, there were an estimated 28 airports. In 2005 a total of 20 had paved runways, and there was also one heliport. Principal airports include Schiphol at Amsterdam, Reina Beatrix at Aruba, and Hato at Curacao. The world's first airline from the standpoint of continuous corporate existence and operation is Royal Dutch Airlines (Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij-KLM), which began regularly scheduled operations in 1920. The Netherlands government owns a large part of the outstanding capital stock. KLM serves some 115 cities in 70 countries. Also in 2003, about 23.455 million passengers were carried on domestic and international flights.
HISTORY
When, in about 55 bc, Julius Caesar conquered a large part of the lowlands near the mouths of the Rhine and Meuse (Maas) rivers, this region was populated by Celtic and Germanic tribes. To the north of the Rhine delta, several Germanic tribes had settled, among which the Batavi and the Frisians were the most important. The Batavi served with the Roman legions until they rebelled in ad 70, but even after the revolt was quelled, Batavian soldiers fought for Rome. About 300 years later, successive waves of powerful Germanic tribes, such as the Salic or West Franks, invaded this region, called the Low Countries, and gradually pushed the Frisians back to the east coast of the North Sea, except in the extreme northern section of the mainland where Saxons had settled. By the time of Charlemagne (742–814), the Saxons and Frisians had been completely conquered by the West Franks, and the Frankish language had replaced the languages of the Germanic tribes.
Soon after the death of Charlemagne and the disintegration of his realm, several duchies and counties were founded in the Low Countries by local leaders. With the coming of the Middle Ages, Holland (now the North and South Holland provinces) became the most important region and extended its power and territory under Count Floris V (r.1256–96). The ancient bishopric of Utrecht was another important principality. As the Middle Ages drew to a close, individual cities such as Amsterdam, Haarlem, and Groningen rose to eminence, together with the Duchy of Gelderland. In the 15th century, the dukes of Burgundy acquired, by various means, most of the Low Countries. Upon the extinction of the male line of the Burgundian dynasty and the marriage of Mary of Burgundy and Archduke (later Emperor) Maximilian I in 1477, however, the Austrian house of Habsburg fell heir to the lands.
The Habsburgs
Mary's son, Philip of Habsburg, married Joanna of Castile, heiress to the Spanish throne, and their son, Charles, became King Charles I of Spain in 1516 and Holy Roman Emperor Charles V in 1519. In 1547, he decreed the formal union of the Netherlands and Austria, and in 1549, the union of the Netherlands and Spain. By the end of his reign in 1555, he was master of the Low Countries. His son, Philip II, concentrated his efforts on the aggrandizement of Spain. To bring the Low Countries under his direct control, he tried to stamp out the rising force of Protestantism and suppressed the political, economic, and religious liberties long cherished by the population. As a result, both Roman Catholics and Protestants rebelled against him under the leadership of William the Silent, prince of Orange, who by marriage had acquired large properties in the Netherlands.
For 10 years, the 17 provinces comprising the Low Countries united in a common revolt. Much of the area was freed in 1577, with William as the acknowledged ruler, but not even his moderation and statesmanship sufficed to keep the northern and southern provinces united. In 1578, the southern region (now Belgium) began to turn against William. In 1579, the northern provinces concluded the Union of Utrecht, in which the province of Holland was the most prominent. The Union, or United Provinces, carried on the fight against Spain, and William was the soul of the resistance until his death by assassination in 1584. William's son Maurits, governor (stadtholder) of the republic from 1584 to 1624, carried on a successful campaign against Spain, but final recognition of Dutch independence by the Spanish government was not obtained until the end of the Eighty Years' War with the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). Meanwhile, the southern provinces remained loyal to Spain and to the Roman Catholic Church, and were thereafter known as the Spanish Netherlands.
Independence brought mixed success in the 17th century for the United Provinces. Dutch prosperity was nourished by settlements and colonies in the East Indies, India, South Africa, the West Indies, South America, and elsewhere. The government was oligarchic but based on republican and federative principles. The Dutch were noted for their religious freedom, welcoming religious refugees—Spanish and Portuguese Jews, French Huguenots, and English Pilgrims.
While they became a leading commercial and maritime power, controversy over the leadership, and external economic and military threats complicated political and economic stability. Trade and territory disagreements with England resulted in the First Anglo-Dutch War that began in 1652 but ended with the Treaty of Westminster in 1654. The English were quick to attack again, beginning the Second Anglo-Dutch War, which ended with successful Dutch attacks, but also in the loss of colonial possession in North America—of the area that now surrounds New York City—via a trade-off under the 1667 Treaty of Breda.
Arts, sciences, literature, and philosophy flourished alongside trade and banking during the Dutch "golden era." In 1672, however, England declared war on the Republic, igniting the Third Anglo-Dutch War; France, Münster, and Cologne soon followed in their own attack. The new stadtholder William III rose out of what is known as the "Disastrous Year" to triumphantly end the war with England in 1674 and lead a coalition against the aggressive France of Louis XIV. William III (r.1672–1702), great-grandson of William the Silent and grandson of the English King Charles I and his English wife, Mary, were invited by the English Parliament to occupy the British throne in 1688, but they continued to take keen interest in Dutch affairs. The Dutch republic of which William had been governor survived for nearly a century after his death. Its position was continually threatened, however, by intense rivalries among and within the provinces. Four naval wars with Britain from the middle of the 17th century to the end of the 18th also sapped Dutch strength. In 1795, a much-weakened republic was overrun by revolutionary French armies.
After the brief Napoleonic occupation, the great powers of Europe at the Congress of Vienna (1814–15) set up a new kingdom of the Netherlands, composed of the former United Provinces and the former Spanish or Austrian Netherlands, and installed a prince of the house of Orange as King William I. The constitution that was founded in 1814 was last revised in 1983. In 1830, a revolt by the southern provinces resulted in the establishment of the kingdom of Belgium. Thereafter, the much-reduced kingdom was mainly concerned with domestic problems, such as the school conflict over secular versus religious instruction, social problems stemming from the industrialization of the country, and electoral reforms.
In foreign affairs, relations with Belgium were gradually improved after a decade of war and tension following Belgian independence, and Dutch claims to the principality of Luxembourg ended with the death of William III in 1890.
The World Wars to the Present
Foreign policies based on neutrality successfully met their test in World War I. Although the Netherlands mobilized their army, they remained neutral, even as the Germans invaded Belgium and all the surrounding states were at war.
The Netherlands again declared their neutrality when World War II erupted in 1939. Neutrality was preserved until the German World War II war machine overran the country in May 1940. Queen Wilhelmina (r.1890–1948) refused to surrender to the Germans, and instead fled to Britain with other officials of her government. Although Dutch resistance lasted only five days, destruction was widespread; nearly the whole of downtown Rotterdam was wiped out, and the cities of Arnhem and Nijmegen suffered great damage. In addition, Dutch factory equipment was carried away to Germany, bridges and railroads were blown up or removed, cattle were stolen, and part of the land was flooded. The Dutch withstood severe repression until their liberation by Allied forces in May 1945. Wilhelmina abdicated in 1948 and was succeeded by her daughter, Juliana (r.1948–80).
The East Indies, most of which had been under Dutch rule for over 300 years, were invaded by Japanese forces in January 1942. After Japanese troops continued through the territory, the Dutch surrendered in March when Japanese arrived on Java. In 1945, a group of Indonesians proclaimed an independent republic and resisted Dutch reoccupation. After four years of hostilities and following UN intervention, the Netherlands recognized the independence of Indonesia in December 1949. Suriname (formerly Dutch Guiana), controlled by the Netherlands since 1815, became an independent nation on 25 November 1975. This Dutch colonial legacy was the root cause of several violent outbreaks during the late 1970s, as a group of South Moluccans, a few of the 40,000 Moluccans living in the Netherlands, used terrorism on Dutch soil to dramatize their demand for the independence of the South Molucca Islands from Indonesia. The Netherlands Antilles and Aruba continue to be dependent areas.
As for many western countries, the 1960s and 1970s brought extensive cultural and social change. Traditional class and religious lines that had supported separate education and social status were erased, leading to significant change for women's rights, sexuality, economic, and environmental issues.
Reform of the social security system was the major political issue in the 1990s, along with efforts to reduce public spending. Years of administrative tinkering with the social security system has reduced the number of claimants, increased labor force participation, and generated a central government budget surplus of 1% of GDP in 2000. The budget surplus prompted heated cabinet discussions as the Labor Party wished to use the extra money for redistribution while the neo-liberal conservatives hoped to lower tax rates. Buyant growth rates of more than 3% in the period 1996–2001 brought down the official unemployment level to 2.7%. However, the global economic downturn that began in 2001 was one cause of the Netherlands' shrinking economy in late 2002 and early 2003. The government also passed a number of radical social measures that received parliamentary approval in recent years including conditions for administering euthanasia, legalization of prostitution, legalization of gay marriages, and laws banning discrimination.
A founder of the European Coal and Steel Community, the Netherlands became part of the Economic and Monetary Union and strongly supports an independent European central bank, low inflation, and stable currency. It hosted two different intergovernmental conferences of the European Union and chaired the finalization of the Treaty of European Union (Maastricht Treaty) in 1991 and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997.
In May 2002, Pim Fortuyn, an anti-immigration leader of his own political party, was assassinated by a single gunman. His party, List Pim Fortuyn, came in second in the 15 May 2002 parliamentary elections. The conservative Christian Democrats, led by Jan Peter Balkenende, came in first, and Balkenende became prime minister of a center-right coalition government. In October, Balkenende's government collapsed following disagreements within the List Pim Fortuyn Party. Elections were held on 22 January 2003, and the Christian Democrats narrowly defeated the Labor Party in the Second Chamber. After 125 days, a coalition government was formed comprising the Christian Democrats, the free-market liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, and the socially liberal Democrats.
The Netherlands gave political support to the military action taken by the United States and United Kingdom against Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq in 2003. Although the Netherlands has a history of open immigration and integration, the increased controversies in Europe surrounding Islamic fundamentalism and immigration have plagued it as well. On 2 November 2004, filmmaker and publicist Theo van Gogh was assassinated reportedly by a Dutch-Moroccan Islamic youth group.
Queen Juliana abdicated in 1980 in favor of her daughter, Beatrix. Juliana died 20 March 2004. In 1966, Beatrix had married Claus von Amsberg, a German diplomat, and his title remained that of Prince of the Netherlands when Beatrix became Queen. Their firstborn son, and Crown Prince, Willem-Alexander was born in 1967. Beatrix and Claus von Amsberg had two other sons, Johan Friso and Constantijn, before Prince Claus's death in 2002. Prince Willem-Alexander has two daughters with his wife, Princess Máxima: Princess Catharina-Amalia was born 7 June 2003, and Princess Alexia was born 26 June 2005.
GOVERNMENT
The Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy, under the house of Orange-Nassau. The monarch and the Council of Ministers together are called the Crown, and is the center of executive power. The prime minister is the active head of government, is a member of the Council of Ministers, the head of the cabinet, and usually the leader of the largest party within the ruling party coalition. Executive power is also shared with the cabinet, which must have the support of a majority in the parliament. Cabinet ministers may not be members of the parliament. The Council of State, instituted as an advisory body for the government in 1532, is appointed by and presided over by the monarch. It is composed of a vice president, councilors (28 maximum), and honorary members (25 maximum). The council considers all legislation proposed by the sovereign or the cabinet before it is submitted to the parliament. While functioning in an advisory capacity, the council has executive powers when it implements orders of the sovereign and it has judiciary powers when it acts in disputes and citizen appeals concerning the government.
Legislative power is exercised jointly by the crown and the States-General (Staten-Generaal), a bicameral parliament. The upper house (Eerste Kamer) consists of 75 members elected for four years by the provincial representative councils on the basis of proportional representation. The lower house (Tweede Kamer) has 150 members elected for four years directly by the people, also on the basis of proportional representation. Only the lower house has the right to introduce bills and to move amendments, but the upper house can accept or reject bills passed by the other chamber.
All Dutch citizens who have reached the age of 18 years and reside within the Netherlands have the right to vote. All citizens who have reached the age of 18 years are eligible for election to the States-General.
Every year on the third Tuesday in September, the session of the States-General is opened at the Hague by the monarch. In the speech from the throne, the government's program for the year is announced. The monarch acts as an adviser to the cabinet, may propose bills, and signs all bills approved by the legislature. Theoretically she could refuse to sign a bill, but this never occurs in practice because the cabinet is responsible for the actions of the ruler. Thus, if the queen should refuse to sign a bill, the cabinet must resign and she must then find a new cabinet acceptable to the parliament.
Immediately following elections, the monarch appoints a formateur to advise on the program and composition of the new cabinet, and form the Council of Ministers. If he fails to bring together a new ministry, a new formateur is appointed, and so on until a new cabinet has been formed.
POLITICAL PARTIES
Throughout the political history of the Netherlands, religion has played an important role. During World War II, strenuous efforts were made to reduce this role, but denominational parties continued to exercise considerable influence. However, since the mid1960s the general trend has been toward the polarization of politics into conservative and progressive parties, and denominational parties have lost voter support.
The religious political party with the largest membership throughout the postwar period was the Catholic People's Party (Katholieke Volkspartij—KVP), which favored democratic government and a middle-of-the-road social policy. It began to lose votes in the 1960s and the KVP joined the Anti-Revolutionary Party (Anti-Revolutionaire Partij—ARP) and the right-wing Christian Historical Union (Christelijk-Historische Unie—CHU) to form the Christian Democratic Appeal (Christen-Democratisch Appèl—CDA) to contest the 1977 elections, and has since been a major political force. The Labor party (Partij van de Arbeid—PvdA) vied for political leadership with the KVP in the first decades of the postwar period, polling about the same number of votes in national elections until 1972, when the PvdA won a plurality of nearly 25% of the total vote and emerged as the dominant member of a centrist coalition government. The Labor Party, a social democratic party that resulted from the merger of three socialist and liberal parties, has appealed mainly to national interests rather than to socialist ones, although it does favor redistribution and solidarity. Since 1986, it has pursued de-radicalization and has moved to the political center. The conservative People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie—VVD) advocates free enterprise, separation of church and state, and individual liberties.
Since 1965, discontent with the major political parties and erosion of party discipline have led to the establishment of change-oriented parties like Democrats 66 (Democraten 66—D66), which pushes for greater democratic accountability, political transparency, and involvement of the citizen in the policy process. Smaller parties include the left-wing Green Left (GroenLinks—GL), which is the product of a merger of socialist and ecology parties in 1991. Three small social conservative Calvinist parties have been at the heart of much political debate and change in the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century: the Political Reformed Party (Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij—SGP) which was denied state funding in 2005 for prohibiting women from becoming full members, the Reformed Political Union (Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond—GPV) and the Reformatorian Political Federation (Reformatorische Politieke Federation—RPF) merged in 2001 to form the far-right Christian Union (ChristenUnie), the fifth-largest party in 2005, that combines fundamental religious values on abortion, gay marriage, and euthanasia, with socially democratic views on economic, immigration, and environmental issues.
As no single party commands a majority in the States-General, the governing cabinet is a coalition of various party representatives, according to their numerical strength. In 1994, for the first time in 80 years, a coalition emerged which did not include a confessional party. The Labor party won a plurality of votes in spite of an absolute loss of votes. Its closest ally, D66, absolutely refused to join a coalition government with the Christian Democrats. In 1994, the first "purple" cabinet emerged, led by Wim Kok of the Labor party, and composed of D66 and the VVD. In 1998 the government fell after D66 failed to push through parliament a bill to make more use of referendums. A month later, in June 1998, voters brought back the purple coalition and Kok led another government of VVD, D66, and PvdA.
Willem Kok initially let it be known in various interviews that he would stand again in the 2002 election, greatly increasing the likelihood of another four years of Labor Party leadership. However, in April 2002, Kok's government resigned following an official report criticizing its role in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre in the former Yugoslavia, when some 100 lightly armed Dutch peacekeepers failed to stop Bosnian Serb forces from murdering around 7,000 Muslims.
Elections were held on 15 May 2002, and resulted in a victory for the Christian Democrats. A surprise showing was made by the List Pim Fortuyn (LPF); a political party formed just a month earlier by the anti-immigrant politician Pim Fortuyn. Fortuyn was assassinated just prior to the election, but his party came in second. Labor, the VVD, and D66 all suffered losses. Christian Democratic leader Jan Peter Balkenende became prime minister; however, his government collapsed in October 2002, and new elections were held on 22 January 2003.
Following the January 2003 elections, the 150 seats in the Second Chamber of the Legislature were distributed as follows: CDA, 28.6% (44 seats); PvdA, 27.3% (42 seats); VVD, 17.9% (28 seats); SP, 6.3% (9 seats); LPF, 5.7% (8 seats); GL, 5.1% (8 seats); D66, 4.1% (6 seats); the Christian Union (CU), 2.1% (3 seats); and the conservative Calvinist party Political Reformed Party (SGP), 1.6% (2 seats). The PvdA scored an increase of 19 seats over the May 2002 elections, and the LPF suffered a loss of 18 seats. After prohibitive disagreement in the formation of a CDA-PvdA cabinet, the center-right CDA, the conservative VVD, and the center-left D66 formed a coalition with Balkenende again as prime minister.
The next general elections were scheduled for May 2007.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Through 2005, the country was divided into 12 provinces, each governed by a locally direct-elected representative provincial council (provinciale staten). The size of the council depends on the number of inhabitants in the province. Members are elected for four-year terms. From among their members, the councils elect provincial executives (gedeputeerde staten) with six to eight members. Each province has a commissioner appointed by and representing the Crown.
The smaller municipalities (496 in 2003) are administered by municipal councils, which are elected directly for four-year terms by the local inhabitants and make local bylaws. The executive powers of the municipality are entrusted to a corporate board consisting of a burgomaster and two to six aldermen; the latter are elected from and by the council, while the burgomaster (mayor) is appointed by the Crown. The important function of flood control and water management is exercised by autonomous public authorities, some of which date as far back as the 13th century.
JUDICIAL SYSTEM
The judiciary is independent and the judges irremovable except for malfeasance or incapacity. Roman law still is basic, but the judicial system is largely patterned on that of France. There is no jury system, and the state rather than the individual acts as initiator of legal proceedings. Administrative justice is separate from civil and criminal justice and not uniform in dispensation.
The supreme judiciary body is the Supreme Court of the Netherlands (Court of Cassation). As of 2005 it was staffed by 24 justices. Its principal task is to supervise administration of justice and to review the judgments of lower courts. There are five courts of appeal (gerechtshoven), which act as courts of first instance only in fiscal matters. They are divided into chambers of three justices each. The 19 district courts (arrondissementsrechtsbanken) deal as courts of first instance with criminal cases and civil cases not handled by the 62 subdistrict courts. Most of these courts are manned by single magistrates. In 2002, the subdistrict courts were incorporated administratively into the district courts; a subdistrict court section is now formed at these courts. There also are juvenile courts and special arbitration courts (for such institutions as the Stock Exchange Association and professional organizations).
Normally appointed for life, judges are usually retired at age 70.
ARMED FORCES
In 2005 there were 53,130 active personnel in the Netherlands' armed forces, with reserves numbering 54,400. The army numbered 23,150. Equipment included 283 main battle tanks, 569 armored infantry fighting vehicles, 94 armored personnel carriers, and 407 artillery pieces. The navy had 17,130 personnel including 3,100 marines. Its fleet included four tactical submarines and 14 surface combatants (six destroyers and eight frigates). The naval aviation unit of 950 was equipped with 10 maritime patrol aircraft and 21 antisubmarine/search and rescue helicopters. The air force has 11,050 active personnel plus 5,000 reservists subject to immediate recall. The air force had 108 combat capable aircraft and 30 attack helicopters. A paramilitary force known as the Royal Military Constabulary numbered 6,800 persons. The United States stationed about 303 personnel in the Netherlands. The Netherlands maintained forces abroad in Germany, Iceland, Italy and the Netherlands Antilles. The nation also participated in UN and peacekeeping missions in five other countries including Iraq and Afghanistan. The military budget in 2005 totaled $9.7 billion.
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
The Netherlands is a founding member of the United Nations, having joined on 10 December 1945. It participates in ECE, ECLAC, ESCAP, and several nonregional specialized agencies, such as the FAO, the World Bank, IAEA, ILO, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNIDO, and the WHO. In addition, the Netherlands is a member of the WTO, the Asian Development Bank, the African Development Bank, the Council of Europe, the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, G-10 (Paris Club), the Western European Union, the European Union, NATO, OSCE, and OECD. The Netherlands is a permanent observer at OAS. The Netherlands is the home site of the International Court of Justice, Eurojust, Europol, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and the International Criminal Court.
On 1 January 1948, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg established a joint customs union, Benelux; since that time, the three countries have freed nearly all of their mutual imports from quantitative restrictions. On 3 February 1958, the Benelux Economic Union was established to make it possible for each participating country to apply itself more intensively to the production for which it is best suited as well as to extend the total market for the member countries.
The Netherlands is a part of the Australia Group, the Zangger Committee, the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), the Nuclear Suppliers Group (London Group), the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and the Nuclear Energy Agency. In environmental cooperation, the Netherlands is part of the Antarctic Treaty; the Basel Convention; Conventions on Biological Diversity, Whaling, and Air Pollution; Ramsar; CITES; the London Convention; International Tropical Timber Agreements; the Kyoto Protocol; the Montréal Protocol; MARPOL; the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty; and the UN Conventions on the Law of the Sea, Climate Change and Desertification.
ECONOMY
The Netherlands has an advanced economy, which combines high per capita income with a fairly even income distribution. An industrial nation with limited natural resources, the Netherlands bases its economy on the importation of raw materials for processing into finished products for export. Food processing, metallurgy, chemicals, manufacturing, and oil refining are the principal industries. Agriculture is particularly important to the economy, as about 60% of total agricultural production is exported.
Because of its geographic position on the sea, outstanding harbor facilities, and numerous internal waterways, the Netherlands became a trading, transporting, and brokerage nation. A major role in the economy has always been played by the service industries, such as banks, trading companies, shipping enterprises, and brokerage and supply firms. The economy, being involved in international trade, is sharply affected by economic developments abroad—including fluctuations in prices of primary goods—over which the Netherlands has little or no control.
Growth in GDP averaged just under 3% per year during 1988–95 with exceptionally strong growth occurring in 1989 (4.8%) and particularly slow growth in 1993 (1.8%). Inflation was low, averaging about 2% a year between 1986 and 1998. The unemployment rate fell from 10.5% in 1985 to 8.4% in 1995, and has continued to fall steadily, reaching an estimated 6% in 2004. For the four years 1997 to 2000, real GDP growth averaged 4%, well ahead of most of Europe. Growth slowed due to the global economic slowdown of 2001 to 2.8% and was brought close to a standstill in 2002, with estimated growth of 0.3%. Real GDP growth averaged 1.2% over the 2000–04 period. GDP growth was estimated at 0.5% in 2005, but was forecast to pick up to 2% in 2006 and to 2.7% in 2007. Inflation jumped from 2.2% in 1999 and 2.6% in 2000 to a yearly average of 4.5% in 2001 due mainly to a hike in the VAT rate, and increases in gasoline and food prices. The inflation rate averaged 2.7% over the 2000–04 period. The inflation rate in 2005 was estimated at 1.6%; it was forecast to remain at that rate in 2006.
INCOME
The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports that in 2005 the Netherlands's gross domestic product (GDP) was estimated at $500.0 billion. The CIA defines GDP as the value of all final goods and services produced within a nation in a given year and computed on the basis of purchasing power parity (PPP) rather than value as measured on the basis of the rate of exchange based on current dollars. The per capita GDP was estimated at $30,500. The annual growth rate of GDP was estimated at 0.6%. The average inflation rate in 2005 was 1.6%. It was estimated that agriculture accounted for 2.1% of GDP, industry 24.4%, and services 73.5%.
According to the World Bank, in 2003 remittances from citizens working abroad totaled $767 million or about $47 per capita and accounted for approximately 0.1% of GDP.
The World Bank reports that in 2003 household consumption in Netherlands totaled $208.63 billion or about $12,878 per capita based on a GDP of $511.5 billion, measured in current dollars rather than PPP. Household consumption includes expenditures of individuals, households, and nongovernmental organizations on goods and services, excluding purchases of dwellings. It was estimated that for the period 1990 to 2003 household consumption grew at an average annual rate of 2.8%. In 2001 it was estimated that approximately 17% of household consumption was spent on food, 7% on fuel, 2% on health care, and 13% on education.
LABOR
As of 2005, the Netherlands' labor force numbered an estimated 7.53 million. In 2002 (the latest year for which data was available), 74.1% were employed in services, 20.3% in manufacturing, 4% in agriculture, and the remainder in undefined occupations. The unemployed represented about 6.7% of the workforce in 2005, compared with 1.2% in 1970, and 13% in 1985.
As of 2005, workers in the Netherlands were allowed to organize and join unions, engage in collective bargaining and to exercise the right to strike. However, strikes are rare. Labor unions in 2005 accounted for about 25% of the country's workforce. However, collective bargaining agreements cover about 86% of the labor force. Antiunion discrimination is prohibited.
The law stipulates a 40-hour workweek, but in 2005 the average workweek was 30.6 hours (20 hours for part-time employees and 38.7 hours for full-time employees). The five-day workweek has been generally adopted. Workers receive workers' compensation, unemployment insurance, sick pay, payment for legal holidays, and paid vacations. The employment of women and adolescents for night work is forbidden. The minimum wage for adults in 2005 was $1,517 per month, and was capable of providing a worker and family with a decent living standard. However, most workers earn more. There is a reduced minimum wage for workers under 23, which uses a sliding scale ranging from 35% of the adult minimum wage for a 16-year-old to 85% for those 22 years of age. The minimum age for employment is 16 years. These laws are effectively enforced.
AGRICULTURE
More than 27% of the total land area of the Netherlands is under seasonal or permanent crop production. Grasslands account for about 54% of all agricultural lands. Most farms are effectively managed and worked intensively with mechanical equipment. The many cooperatives have added to the efficiency of production and distribution.
Although agricultural production has decreased in recent years, labor productivity in Dutch agricultural and horticultural industries has risen sharply. The number of holdings declined by over 17% from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s; in 2002 there were 89,580 agricultural holdings, of which 45% were smaller than 10 hectares (25 acres). In 2003 there were 108,230 full-time and 153,250 part-time workers in the agricultural labor force. The crop output in 2003 was valued at almost €10.6 billion, fifth highest in the EU after France, Italy, Spain, and Germany.
Much of the soil in the east and southeast is poor. Moreover, large regions are so moist because of their low altitude that only grass can be grown profitably, a condition that has led to the enormous development of the dairy industry. The best land is found in reclaimed polders. Principal crops and output in 2004 (in thousands of tons) were sugar beets, 6,292; potatoes, 7,488; wheat, 1,224; barley, 288; rye, 17; and triticale, 19.
The Netherlands is famous for its bulbs grown for export, principally tulip, hyacinth, daffodil, narcissus, and crocus. Flower growing is centered at Aalsmeer (near Amsterdam), and nurseries are situated mainly at Boskoop. Bulb growing, done principally at Lisse and Hillegom, between Haarlem and Leiden, has been extended in recent years to areas of North Holland. In 2002, there were 11,793 horticultural holdings and land area for growing bulbs totaled 17,139 hectares (42,350 acres).
Since the beginning of the 20th century, the government has been helping the agrarian sector through extension services, the promotion of scientific research, and the creation of specific types of agricultural education. In the 1930s, an extensive system of governmental controls of agricultural production was introduced, and after World War II (1939–45), an even more active policy was initiated, which evolved into integrated planning covering practically every aspect of rural life. In recent years, the government has actively encouraged the consolidation of small landholdings into larger, more efficient units.
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
World-renowned Dutch dairy products outrank all other agricultural produce, and livestock provides two-thirds of total agricultural value. In 2005 there were 3.86 million head of cattle, 11.1 million pigs, 1.2 million sheep, and 86 million chickens. Milk production in 2005 totaled 10.5 million tons. Meat production in 2005 was 2.35 million tons (including pork, 1,299,000; beef and veal, 388,000; and poultry, 646,000). Butter production was 102,000 tons; cheese, 671,000 tons.
Friesland is the most important region for the production of milk and butter. Excellent grazing lands and a long growing season have greatly helped the Frisian dairy industry, whose main support is the famed Frisian strain of cows. The making of cheese is connected with such famous brands as those named for Edam and Gouda, towns in the province of South Holland, and Alkmaar in North Holland.
In 2003, the value of animal products was €7.61 billion. The output of animal products has gradually been falling since 1996, when production was valued at €9.37 billion. The Netherlands regularly imports calves from the United Kingdom. In 1995, the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, in response to the possible connection of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in cattle to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans, responded with a program to destroy all imported UK veal calves. The total slaughter amounted to 64,000 calves and led to losses of approximately $32 million to the livestock industry.
FISHING
Although no longer as important as it was in the 16th and 17th centuries, fishing still contributes substantially to the food supply. Annual fish consumption in the Netherlands is 21.9 kg (32.2 lb) per person. In 2003 the Dutch fishing fleet had 393 cutters, 17 trawlers, and 69 mussel dredgers; the total capacity of the fishing fleet that year was 195,307 gross tons. About half of the fish catch is landed at the ports of Scheveningen and Ijmuiden. The Dutch fishing industry faces declining fish stocks and quota cuts from the EU that make profitability difficult because of excess capacity. In 2003, Dutch imports of fish products totaled $1.7 billion and exports exceeded $2.18 billion.
The total catch in 2003 was 593,305 tons, consisting primarily of mackerel, mussels, sardines, herring, plaice, and whiting. Shrimp, oysters, sole, and other saltwater fish were also caught.
FORESTRY
One of the least forested countries in Europe, the Netherlands produces only about 8% of its wood requirements. Woodland, chiefly pine, covers about 375,000 hectares (927,000 acres), or only 11.1% of the total land area, of which state forest areas comprise some 37%; private owners, 31%; provincial and local governments, 14%; and nature conservation organizations, 18%. Productive woodlands total about 230,000 hectares (580,000 acres); output of timber was approximately 1,026,000 cu m (36.2 million cu ft) in 2004. The Netherlands imports about 95% of its softwood lumber needs, mostly from Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Domestic sources of temperate hardwood lumber usually meet 20–30% of annual demand; production totaled 80,000 cu m (2.8 million cu ft) in 2004.
The Dutch wood industry is focused on the furniture, construction, packing, and pulp and paper sectors. The total turnover of the Dutch furniture sector in 2004 was almost €2 billion; the turnover in the Dutch pulp and paper industry was also around €2 billion. The Netherlands is the ninth biggest European producer of pulp and paper, annually producing 3.3 million tons of paper and paperboard at 27 sites, with over 70% exported to neighboring countries.
Afforestation has not kept pace with increasing consumption. The Dutch government would like to become at least 25% self-sufficient in wood fiber by 2025. In order to meet this goal, some 3.9 million cu m (137.7 million cu ft) of fiber would need to be produced annually (assuming current consumption trends). Currently, Dutch wood fiber production is only 1.2 million cu m (42 million cu ft). During 1990–2000, only 1,000 hectares (2,500 acres) of forest were planted. The government established a goal in 1994 of increasing forested land by 3,000 hectares (7,400 acres) annually until 2020.
MINING
The Netherlands was an important regional producer of natural gas and petroleum and played a major role as a transshipment center for mineral materials entering and leaving Europe—Rotterdam was the world's largest container port. The only other mineral of commercial importance was salt, and the only other mining operations left in the country were involved in the extraction of limestone, peat, and sand and gravel. The production of salt from the mines at Hengelo and Delfzijl was one of the oldest industries in the country; an estimated 5.0 million tons was produced in 2003 (various types), unchanged since 1999. Akzo Nobel Salt BV was the leading producer of salt. Magnesium chloride and oxide were produced in a plant at Veendam from extracted salt brines. Also produced in 2003 were hydraulic cement, nitrogen, industrial sand, sodium compounds, and sulfur. No metals were mined, but an estimated 3 million tons of iron ore was sintered from imported ore in 2003, unchanged from 2000. Coal was mined in Limburg until 1974. Among the country's leading industries in 2003 were metal products, chemicals, petroleum, and construction, and chemicals and fuels were top export commodities.
ENERGY AND POWER
The Netherlands, which has little waterpower, depends mostly on natural gas and petroleum as energy sources.
Natural gas is The Netherlands' most abundant fossil fuel, with major fields located in the North Sea. As of August 2005, the North Sea region contained 169.8 trillion cu ft of natural gas, of which Norway and the Netherlands account for more than 75%. As of 1 January 2002, the Netherlands had proven natural gas reserves of 1.693 trillion cu m. In 2003, production of natural gas totaled 2.6 trillion cu ft. However, natural gas output has fallen as a result of government policy. The country's Natural Gas Law caps production at 2.68 trillion cu ft annually, between 2003 and 2007. From 2008 through 2013, production will be further limited to 2.47 trillion cu ft per year. This policy was instituted so that the country's natural gas reserves will be maintained for future use. In 2002, domestic consumption of natural gas totaled 1.764 trillion cu ft.
The Netherlands' second principal energy source is oil. As of 1 January 2002, the country's proven reserves of oil totaled 88.06 million barrels. In 2002, total oil production included 46,330 barrels per day of crude oil. Although oil output was up from 2000 at 89,000 barrels per day, the nation was still dependent on imported petroleum. In 2002, imports of crude and refined oil products averaged 2,266,990 barrels per day. Consumption of refined petroleum products in that year averaged 899,170 barrels per day. Exports of all petroleum products that year averaged 1,421,620 barrels per day. The Netherlands also re-exports two-thirds of all its imported petroleum in the form of refined oil products. Refinery output in 2002 averaged 1,723,250 barrels per day.
The Netherlands's demand for coal came to 14,803,000 short tons in 2002, all of it imported. Imports that year totaled 24,586,000 short tons; 10,210,000 short tons were re-exported.
Production of electric power in 2002 totaled 91.117 billion kWh, of which thermal power plants using oil and coal as fuel supplied 90% of the power generated. Nuclear power plants accounted for 4%, and other alternative sources 5.4%. Hydropower accounted for less than 1%. Nuclear generating capacity is provided chiefly by a 450 MW station in Borssele, Zeeland. As of 2002, the Netherlands was one of five European Union (EU) countries that had declared a moratorium on building new nuclear facilities. Consumption of electricity in 2002 was 101.138 billion kWh. Installed capacity in 2002 was 20.378 million kW.
INDUSTRY
Because of World War II and its consequences (the high rate of population increase and the severing of economic ties with Indonesia), drastic structural changes took place in the Dutch economy, and the further development of industry became important. Industry increased to such an extent that it produced 32% of GDP in 1990. Since then, however, industrial production has declined, accounting for 24.5% of GDP in 2004.
Since World War II, the metallurgical industry in particular has made tremendous progress. Philips, the Dutch electronics giant, has become the greatest electrical products firm in Europe as well as one of the world's major exporters of electric bulbs and appliances. Unilever, the British-Dutch consumer products company, has grown to become one of the world's largest corporations. The Heineken brewing company is one of the world's largest brewing companies in terms of sales volume and profitability. More phenomenal has been the success of Royal Dutch/Shell, which began as a small concern in 1890 and grew to become one of the world's largest income producers. Rotterdam's suburb of Pernis has the largest oil refinery in Europe. Akzo Nobel produces healthcare products, coatings, and chemicals. DSM produces nutritional and pharma ingredients, performance materials, and industrial chemicals.
Pig iron is exported, produced from imported ore at the Velsen-Ijmuiden plant, situated where the canal from Amsterdam reaches the North Sea. The chemical industry has grown increasingly important, but the once prosperous textile industry in Enschede has declined because of foreign competition.
Industrial products include petroleum, metal and engineering products, and pharmaceutical products. The Netherlands produces electrical machinery and equipment (including computers and computer parts), and microelectronics. Agroindustries are important: the Netherlands is one of the world's three largest exporters of agricultural produce. Dairy farming and market gardening are the major agricultural industries. The Netherlands also produces cigarettes, beer, canned fish, cocoa and cocoa products, coffee, tea, sugar, candies, biscuits, and potato flour.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Advanced scientific research and development (R&D) has provided the technological impetus for the Netherlands' economic recovery since World War II. Dutch universities have traditionally carried out fundamental scientific research, and the government has promoted research activities through the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research, established in 1988, and the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research, established in 1930. It also has supported scientific organizations such as the Energy Development Corp. and Energy Research Foundation, Aerospace Development Agency, National Aerospace Laboratory, and Netherlands Maritime Institute.
The highly developed electrotechnical industry produces computers, telecommunications systems, electronic measurement and control equipment, electric switching gear and transformers, and medical and scientific instruments. Dutch firms designed and constructed the Netherlands' astronomical satellites and play a major role in the European Space Agency. The important aerospace industry is led by the world-famous firm of Fokker, which produced Europe's bestselling passenger jet aircraft, the F-27 Friendship, and has been active in the consortium that developed the European Airbus. In 2002, high-tech exports were valued at $33.667 billion and accounted for 28% of manufactured exports.
Expenditures on scientific R&D in 2001 totaled $8.6 trillion, or 1.89% of GDP. Of that amount, 51.8% came from the business sector, followed by government sources at 36.2%. Foreign sources accounted for 11%, with higher education at 1.1%. In that same year, there were 2,826 scientists and engineers and 1,424 technicians per million people that were engaged in R&D.
Among the Netherlands' 39 scientific and technical learned societies, the most prominent is the Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences, founded in 1808. The country also has 37 scientific and technical research institutes. In Leiden are located the National Museum of Natural History and the National Museum of History of Science and Medicine. The Netherlands has 16 universities offering courses in basic and applied sciences. In 1987–97, science and engineering students accounted for 39% of university enrollment. In 2002, of all bachelor's degrees awarded, 16.4% were in the sciences (natural, mathematics and computers, engineering).
DOMESTIC TRADE
A considerable but declining part of Dutch retail business is still conducted by small enterprises, which are usually owner operated. Some of the larger department stores in the cities have branches in small towns, and there are several nationwide supermarket chains. Cooperatives and associations are important in both purchasing and producing.
Amsterdam is the chief center for commerce and trade, with Rotterdam and The Hague next. Many companies use the Netherlands as a distribution center for European markets. Terms of sale usually call for payment within 90 days. A value-added tax of 19% applies to most goods.
Business offices are generally open from 9 am to 5 pm on weekdays and are closed Saturdays. Retail stores usually open between 8 and 9 am and close between 6 and 7 pm Tuesday through Friday. On Mondays, many shops are closed in the mornings. Most cities have late-night shopping (until 9 pm) on Thursdays or Fridays. In the main cities, many shops are open on Sunday from 12 to 5 pm.
The country's most important trade fair is held at Utrecht, twice each year, in the spring and fall.
FOREIGN TRADE
The Dutch have traditionally been a powerful force in international trade. The Netherlands is the world's eighth-largest exporting nation. As exports and imports of goods and services both account
CountryExportsImportsBalanceWorld227,344.0208,995.318,348.7Germany51,891.738,186.213,705.5Belgium24,153.421,667.02,486.4United Kingdom23,243.614,453.58,790.1France-Monaco22,220.010,993.011,227.0Italy-San Marino-Holy See13,256.74,977.98,278.8United States12,082.017,743.6-5,661.6Spain8,591.84,180.44,411.4Sweden4,356.74,105.3251.4Switzerland-Liechtenstein3,912.32,823.71,088.6Austria3,410.5…3,410.5(…) data not available or not significant.
for well over 60% of GDP, the backbone of Dutch prosperity is foreign trade. Rotterdam is Europe's largest port (and third in the world in 2005, after Shanghai and Singapore), handling twice as much cargo as its nearest European rival, Antwerp. The Netherlands' geographical position as a key hub of Europe's transportation system and the small size of its domestic market have made the Dutch economy one of the most open and outward-looking in the world.
Principal Dutch exports in the early 2000s were manufactured goods, machines, electronics, chemicals, petroleum products, natural gas, and foods. Chief imports are manufactured products, machines, crude petroleum, chemicals, and clothing. From 1981 through 2005, the Netherlands experienced trade surpluses each year.
BALANCE OF PAYMENTS
Dutch merchandise and services exports have grown to represent more than 60% of GDP, making the Dutch economy one of the most internationally oriented in the world. Economic expansion of the Netherlands in the period immediately after World War II paralleled a generally favorable balance of payments. After occasional and minor deficits on current accounts during the mid-1960s, a major deficit occurred in 1970. Since then, the current-accounts balance has generally registered a surplus, despite increased costs of oil imports during the 1970s and beginning in 2005. The Netherlands' reliance upon exports that are resistant to recessions (such as some food and agricultural products, and semifinished products such as chemicals) has protected the Dutch economy from weaker demand from Germany and other EU countries during recessions. In 2004, exports totaled $311.2 billion and imports $280.5 billion, resulting in a trade surplus of $30.7 billion. The current account surplus was $13.5 billion.
BANKING AND SECURITIES
The Netherlands Bank, nationalized in 1948, is the central bank. It issues the currency and supervises the privately owned banks. Since the 1950s, the Netherlands Bank had used reserve regulations and the central bank discount rate as instruments of monetary policy, but with the introduction of the European Central Bank, those responsibilities are now more centralized for all of the EU. The Dutch financial services industry has a long and distinguished history and has introduced many banking innovations to the world. Since the late 1980s, the sector has undergone a revolution. A common strategic desire to expand and to gain more financial strength, combined with deregulation of the financial market, prompted several bank mergers and the formation of financial conglomerates of banks and insurance groups. As a result, the number of dominant participants in the market has diminished to a handful, each providing the full range of financial services. The Netherlands Middenstands-bank (NMB) and the state-owned Postbank merged to form the NMB Postbank in 1989, which in turn merged again with the Nationale Nederlanden insurance group to form the International Nederlanden Groep (ING) in 1991. The large ABN and Amro commercial banking groups joined up to form ABN-Amro in 1990. VSB-bank, a conglomerate of savings banks, teamed up with the Ameu insurance group and Belgium's AG insurance group in 1990 to form the DutchBelgian Fortis group. Rabobank, a large cooperative group which
Current Account16,405.0 Balance on goods26,648.0 Imports-225,733.0 Exports252,380.0 Balance on services-1,186.0 Balance on income-1,244.0 Current transfers-7,813.0Capital Account-2,028.0Financial Account-23,088.0 Direct investment abroad-35,204.0 Direct investment in Netherlands15,695.0 Portfolio investment assets-57,001.0 Portfolio investment liabilities82,000.0 Financial derivatives-468.0 Other investment assets-63,605.0 Other investment liabilities35,494.0Net Errors and Omissions7,791.0Reserves and Related Items920.0(…) data not available or not significant.
specializes in the provision of agricultural credits and mortgage facilities but has been rapidly expanding its product portfolio in recent years, took a 50% share in the Robeco investment group in 1996. The robust nature of the Dutch banking industry came to the fore once again in December 1999. Although it ultimately failed, ING made headlines through its attempted takeover of the French Crédit Commercial de France (CCF). Had ING's bid succeeded, it would have been the first successful merger of a French bank with another European financial institution.
The International Monetary Fund reports that in 2001, currency and demand deposits—an aggregate commonly known as M1—were equal to $145.3 billion. In that same year, M2—an aggregate equal to M1 plus savings deposits, small time deposits, and money market mutual funds—was $409.3 billion.
The Netherlands has the oldest stock exchange in the world, the Amsterdam Stock Exchange (ASE); founded in the early 17th century, it is now one of the largest stock exchanges in operation. The issuance of new securities on the exchange is supervised by the Netherlands Bank, acting in cooperation with the commercial banks and stockbrokers.
The comparatively large share of foreign security listings and capital supply gives the ASE an international importance disproportionate to its size. Its strong international orientation is also reflected in the fact that its share of Europe's total market capitalization far outweighs the relative importance of the Dutch economy. The multinational nature of the major Dutch companies, which has led to their shares being quoted on a number of international stock markets, means that stock price levels on the ASE are heavily influenced by developments elsewhere. The three largest companies, Royal Dutch Shell, Unilever, and ING, account for around 50% of total stock market capitalization.
In order to enhance the international competitiveness of the ASE, many reform measures have been taken in the past few years, with varying degrees of success. These include the introduction of a new electronic trading system open to foreign-based brokers, a division of the market into a wholesale and a retail segment, and a revamp of the exchange's organizational structure. Moreover, in early 1996, under pressure from the government, the stock exchange introduced an arrangement that aims to reduce the influence of the wide range of anti-takeover devices quoted corporations are permitted, which has long been considered as one of the exchange's most important shortcomings. Under the new arrangement, a prospective buyer who has gained 70% of a company's shares can turn to the Amsterdam Court of Justice after a period of 12 months.
On 1 January 1997, the Amsterdam Exchanges (AEX) was formed by the merger of the Amsterdam Stock Exchange (ASE) and the city's European Options Exchange (EDE). From approximately 680 at the end of January, the AEX index of 25 leading shares rose to 700 on 11 February 1997 and sped on to almost 775 by mid-March before suffering a correction prompted by the release of disappointing financial results by a brewing company, Grolsch, and fears of interest rate increases in the United States. In 1998 the world capitalization rankings placed the equity market eighth in the world, while the volume of options contracts at the options market ranked fourth. By early 2003, however, the AEX index had dropped to 303.21, down 39% from the previous year. As of 2004, a total of 177 companies were listed on the EURONEXT Amsterdam exchange, which had a market capitalization of $622.284 billion. In 2004, the AEX rose 3.1% from the previous year to 348.1.
INSURANCE
There are two sectors of the insurance industry in the Netherlands: the companies operating under control laws set down by the EC and supervised by the government, and the companies (mutuals, reinsurance, marine and aviation) not under official supervision. Compulsory third-party motor insurance has been in effect since 1935. In addition, insurance for workers, hunters, nuclear facilities, and pensions are compulsory. In 2003, the value of all direct insurance premiums written totaled $50.266 billion, of which life insurance premiums accounted for $25.371 billion. In 2002, the top nonlife insurer was Achmea Zorg, which had gross written nonlife premiums of $1,196.1 million, while the leading life insurer that same year was Nationale Nederlanden Leven, with gross written life insurance premiums of $4,236.9 million.
PUBLIC FINANCE
The government has gradually cut the deficit from 10% of GDP in 1983 to 2.75% in 1996, slightly below the 3% Maastricht criteria for European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) in 1999. The deficit is largely financed by government bonds. Financing is also covered by issuing Dutch Treasury Certificates, which replaced a standing credit facility for short-term deficit financing with the Netherlands Central Bank. Under the Maastricht Treaty, the Netherlands Central Bank was abolished in 1994. Although the private sector is the cornerstone of the economy, the government plays a vital role in the Netherlands' economy. It decides microeconomic policy and tax laws, as well as working toward structural and regulatory
Revenue and Grants184,341100.0% Tax revenue103,12855.9% Social contributions67,91836.8% Grants4120.2% Other revenue12,8837.0%Expenditures197,864100.0% General public services43,78022.1% Defense7,1823.6% Public order and safety7,3343.7% Economic affairs11,8106.0% Environmental protection7390.4% Housing and community amenities1,0820.5% Health20,56210.4% Recreational, culture, and religion1,7450.9% Education21,44310.8% Social protection82,18741.5%(…) data not available or not significant.
reforms. Public spending, however, had dropped to 46% of GDP as of 2000 as privatization and deregulation continued.
The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) estimated that in 2005 the Netherlands's central government took in revenues of approximately $291.8 billion and had expenditures of $303.7 billion. Revenues minus expenditures totaled approximately -$11.9 billion. Public debt in 2005 amounted to 56.2% of GDP. Total external debt was $1.645 trillion.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) reported that in 2003, the most recent year for which it had data, central government revenues were €184,341 million and expenditures were €197,864 million. The value of revenues was us$208,060 million and expenditures us$222,489 million, based on a market exchange rate for 2003 of us$1 = €.8860 as reported by the IMF. Government outlays by function were as follows: general public services, 22.1%; defense, 3.6%; public order and safety, 3.7%; economic affairs, 6.0%; environmental protection, 0.4%; housing and community amenities, 0.5%; health, 10.4%; recreation, culture, and religion, 0.9%; education, 10.8%; and social protection, 41.5%.
TAXATION
Principal taxes raised by the central government are income and profits taxes levied on individuals and companies, a value-added tax (VAT) on goods and services, and a tax on enterprises of public bodies (except agricultural enterprises). There is a wealth tax of 0.7% also levied on nonexempt taxable capital of individuals. Provinces and municipalities are not authorized to impose income taxes, and may impose other taxes only to a limited extent. The most important tax levied by municipalities is a real estate tax paid partly by owners and partly by occupants. Residents are taxed on both their local and foreign incomes, but nonresidents pay taxes only on income earned in the Netherlands.
The tax on the net profits of corporations in 2005 was 27% for annual profits up to €22,689 and 31.5% on the increment of profits above that. Depreciation and other business deductions are permitted. Capital gains were taxed at the same rates, although some capital gains were tax-exempt. Withholding taxes up to a maximum of 25% were applied to dividends, although there is no withholding if the dividends are being paid by a subsidiary to a nonresident parent company, owning more than 25% of the payer. Companies can qualify for tax exemptions and tax reductions under investment incentive regimes. Branches of foreign companies are treated the same as Dutch companies in accordance with the fiscal regime under which they qualify.
Incomes are taxed on a graduated scale, with a top rate of 52%. There are also liberal deductions for dependents. Taxes are withheld by the state on the incomes of wage earners. In the tax reforms of 2001 marginal income tax rates were set in a course of increases in the lower rates, and decreases in the higher ones. The progressive schedule consists of four brackets, not counting a tax-exempt base for each individual taxpayer. Gift and inheritance taxes range from 5–68% depending on the family relationship of the donor or deceased.
The Netherlands' main indirect tax is its VAT introduced 1 January 1969 with a standard rate of 12% and a reduced rate of 4% on basics. Effective 1 January 2001, the standard rate was increased from 17.5% to 19% with a reduced rate of 6%, the latter applied to basic foodstuffs, books, newspapers and periodicals, public ground and sea transport, water supplies, sports centers, and pharmaceuticals. Exempted from VAT are exported goods, medical, cultural, and educational services, and credit and insurance transactions. Other taxes include excise taxes, energy taxes and taxes on legal transactions and on motor vehicles.
CUSTOMS AND DUTIES
The Dutch government has a traditionally liberal policy on tariffs and its membership in the Benelux Economic Union, the European Union, and other international trade organizations has resulted in comparatively low import duties. Tariffs on imports from the dollar area have also been liberalized and about 90% of imports from the United States are unrestricted quantitatively. Manufactured goods from the United States are generally subject to a duty ranging from 5–8% based on the cost, insurance and freight (CIF) value of the goods. Raw materials are usually not subject to import duties.
Imports are subject to EU customs regulations and tariff rates, plus VAT and other charges levied at entry through customs.
FOREIGN INVESTMENT
The Netherlands has favorable tax structures for investors, which has made the country one of the top recipients of foreign direct investment in the European Union. The Netherlands has consistently been ranked as one of the most attractive destinations for FDI in the world, ranking sixth among the ten largest foreign investors in the world, as well as the sixth-largest global recipient of FDI (2004). The government has encouraged foreign corporations to set up branch plants in the Netherlands and to establish joint ventures with Dutch companies in order to benefit from the introduction of new production techniques and improved methods of management that outside firms often bring. The government does not discriminate between foreign and domestic companies; foreign entrepreneurs have the same business privileges and obligations as Dutch businessmen and women. As a result, foreign companies operate in virtually all industries, including high-technology electronics, chemicals, metals, electrical equipment, textiles, and food processing. The labor force is largely well-educated and multilingual.
The corporation tax is 34.5%, but the corporate taxation regime is expected to be reformed in 2006–07. The Corporation Tax Act provides for a participation exemption, applicable to both foreign and domestic shareholdings, thus preventing double taxation when the profits of a subsidiary are distributed to its parent company. Although income taxes were lowered in 2001, the basic rate of the value-added tax was raised from 17.5% to 19%.
Annual foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows were $11 billion in 1997, down from $16.6 billion in 1996, but then soared to $37.6 billion in 1998. The peak was reached in 2000 and 2001, when total inflows reached $52 billion and $50 billion, respectively. However, in 2002, FDI inflow fell to an estimated $30 billion, and to $19.3 billion in 2003. By 2004, the total stock of FDI had reached $387 billion, about 75% of GDP.
Overall, the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Belgium, and France are the primary sources of and destinations for FDI with the Netherlands.
Foreign companies established in the Netherlands account for roughly one-third of industrial production and employment in industry. At the end of 2004, an estimated 31.5% of foreign establishments in the Netherlands came from the United States, 19.5% from Germany, 14% from the United Kingdom, 7% from Scandinavia, 17% from the rest of Europe, 9% from Asia, and the remaining 2% from other non-OECD and non-EU countries.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
For nearly four decades after World War II Dutch governments aimed at increased industrialization. During the 1990s, however, industrial growth slowed, while the service sector continued to expand. In this regard, the Netherlands has made the transition to a more liberalized high technology economy quite successfully.
In an effort to encourage industrialization after the Second World War, the maintenance of internal monetary equilibrium was vitally important, and the government has largely succeeded in this task. Successive governments pursued a policy of easy credits and a "soft" currency, but after the Netherlands had fully recovered from the war by the mid-1950s, a harder currency and credit policy came into effect. In the social sphere, stable relationships were maintained by a deliberate governmental social policy seeking to bridge major differences between management and labor. The organized collaboration of workers and employers in the Labor Foundation has contributed in no small measure to the success of this policy, and as a result, strikes are rare.
Successive wage increases helped bring the overall wage level in the Netherlands up to that of other EC countries by 1968. The Dutch government's policy, meanwhile, was directed toward controlling inflation while seeking to maintain high employment. In 1966, the government raised indirect taxes to help finance rising expenditures, particularly in the fields of education, public transportation, and public health. Further attempts to cope with inflation and other economic problems involved increased government control over the economy. Wage and price controls were imposed in 1970–71, and the States-General approved a measure granting the government power to control wages, rents, dividends, health and insurance costs, and job layoffs during 1974.
During the mid-1980s, the nation experienced modest recovery from recession; the government's goal was to expand recovery and reduce high unemployment, while cutting down the size of the annual budget deficit. The government generally sought to foster a climate favorable to private industrial investment through such measures as preparing industrial sites, subsidizing or permitting allowances for industrial construction and equipment, assisting in the creation of new markets, granting subsidies for establishing industries in distressed areas, and establishing schools for adult training. In 1978, the government began, by means of a selective investment levy, to discourage investment in the western region (Randstad), while encouraging industrial development in the southern province of Limburg and the northern provinces of Drenthe, Friesland, and Groningen.
The Netherlands' largest economic development projects have involved the reclamation of land from the sea by construction of dikes and dams and by the drainage of lakes to create polders for additional agricultural land. The Zuider Zee project closed off the sea and created the freshwater Ijsselmeer by means of a 30 km (19 mi) barrier dam in 1932, and subsequently drained four polders enclosing about 165,000 hectares (408,000 acres). After a storm washed away dikes on islands in Zeeland and South Holland in 1953, killing some 1,800 people, the Delta project was begun. Th is project, designed to close estuaries between the islands with massive dams, was officially inaugurated in 1986; the cost was $2.4 billion. The Delta works include a storm-surge barrier with 62 steel gates, each weighing 500 tons that are usually left open to allow normal tidal flow in order to protect the natural environment. Another major engineering project was construction of a bridge and tunnel across the Western Schelde estuary in the south to connect Zeeland Flanders more directly with the rest of the country.
Beginning in the 1980s, Dutch governments began stressing fiscal discipline by reversing the growth of the welfare state and ending a policy of inflation-based wage indexing. The latter policy represented a spirit of consensus among labor and management. At a time when other labor unions fought losing battles with management, Dutch unions agreed to a compromise on this cherished issue in return for a business promise to emphasize job creation. By the late 1990s, these reforms had paid off as Dutch unemployment plummeted to below 5%. As of the early 2000s, the Netherlands had among the lowest unemployment rates in the industrialized world. As of 2005, the Dutch economy was being heralded around the world for its combination of strong employment growth, low inflation, falling public budget deficits, low inequality, and strong social welfare policies.
In January 2004, the government launched its Innovation Partnerships Grant Program, to promote cooperation in research and development. The program encourages businesses and public-sector knowledge institutes to study and launch national and international partnerships. Some 5,000 Dutch companies are conducting research to develop new products and to boost quality and efficiency. The country's five largest multinationals—Philips, Shell, Akzo Nobel, DSM, and Unilever—are at the forefront of industrial research and development.
The Netherlands' commitment to the project of further European integration, however, was stalled in 2005, when on 1 June Dutch voters rejected the EU constitution by a wide margin (62% to 38%). This vote followed directly upon the heels of the French rejection of the constitution. Many Dutch "no" voters, however, said they were pro-European, but feared that small countries were losing influence in an EU dominated by larger ones. The Dutch treasure their sound money and liberal social policies, and do not want to see these eroded.
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
A widespread system of social insurance and assistance is in effect. The first laws were implemented in 1901. All residents are provided with old-age and survivorship benefits. Disability pensions are available to all employees, self-employed workers, students, and those disabled since childhood. Unemployment, accidents, illness, and disability are covered by insurance, which is compulsory for most employees and voluntary for self-employed persons. Maternity grants and full insurance for the worker's family are also provided, as are family allowances for children. The government covers the total cost for family allowances. Women receive one month of maternity leave with full pay. Exceptional medical expenses are covered for all residents.
Legislation mandates equal pay for equal work and prohibits dismissal due to marriage, pregnancy, or motherhood. However, cultural factors and lack of day care discourages women from employment. Many women work in part-time positions and are underemployed, and on average women earn less than men. Sexual harassment in the workplace is an issue, and in 2004, the government funded an awareness campaign to combat the problem. Domestic violence is an issue, especially among ethnic minorities. The government provides programs to reduce and prevent violence against women.
Human rights are fully respected in the Netherlands. There were incidents of discrimination against religious minorities and some immigrant groups.
HEALTH
The Netherlands has a social insurance system similar to Germany's. About two-thirds of workers are covered by the social insurance program; the remainder are covered by private insurance. Under the Health Insurance Act, everyone with earned income of less than 50,900 guilders per year pays a monthly contribution in return for which they receive medical, pharmaceutical, and dental treatment and hospitalization. People who earn more than this have to take out private medical insurance. The state also pays for preventive medicine including vaccinations for children, school dental services, medical research, and the training of health workers. Preventive care emphasizes education, a clean environment, and regular exams and screenings. As of 2004, there were an estimated 329 physicians, 1,334 nurses, 47 dentists and 20 pharmacists per 100,000 people.
The general health situation has been excellent over a long period, as is shown by an estimated general mortality rate of 8.7 per 1,000 as of 2002 and an infant mortality of only 5.04 per 1,000 live births in 2005, down markedly from the 12.7 rate in 1970. The maternal mortality rate was 7 per 100,000 live births. These low rates are attributed to a rise in the standard of living; improvements in nutrition, hygiene, housing, and working conditions; and the expansion of public health measures. In 2005, average life expectancy was 78.81 years.
Most doctors and hospitals operate privately. A system of hospital budgeting, which was introduced in 1983, has helped contain costs. In 1990, a proposal to increase competition among insurers, eliminating the distinction between public and private insurers, was developed. A reference price system—to control pharmaceuticals especially—was introduced in 1991. Total health care expenditure was estimated at 8.7% of GDP.
The Ministry of Public Health and Environment is entrusted with matters relating to health care, but health services are not centrally organized. There are numerous local and regional health centers and hospitals, many of which are maintained by religious groups.
In 2002, the estimated birth rate was 11.6 per 1,000 people; 75% of married women (ages 15 to 49) used contraception. The total fertility rate was 1.7 children for each woman living throughout childbearing years. Immunization rates for children up to one year old were as follows: diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus, 95%; polio, 97%; and measles, 96%.
Major causes of death were attributed to cardiovascular problems and cancer. The HIV/AIDS prevalence was 0.20 per 100 adults in 2003. As of 2004, there were approximately 19,000 people living with HIV/AIDS in the country. There were an estimated 100 deaths from AIDS in 2003.
HOUSING
During World War II, more than 25% of the nation's two million dwellings were damaged: 95,000 dwellings were completely destroyed, 55,000 were seriously damaged, and 520,000 were slightly damaged. The housing shortage remained acute until 1950, when an accelerated program of housing construction began, and in 1953 the government decided to increase the house-building program to a level of 65,000 dwellings a year. Since then, the production rate has far exceeded both the prewar rate and yearly forecasts. From 1945 to 1985, nearly four million dwellings were built. In 1985 alone, 98,131 dwellings were built, bringing the total housing stock to 5,384,100 units by the end of the year. Most of the new units were subsidized by the national government. Subsidies are granted to municipalities, building societies, and housing associations, which generally build low-income multiple dwellings. Government regulations, which are considerable, are laid down in the Housing Act of 1965 and the Rental Act of 1979.
The government determines on an annual basis the scope of the construction program. On the basis of national estimates, each municipality is allocated a permissible volume of construction. Within this allocation, the municipalities must follow certain guidelines; central government approval is required for all construction projects exceeding a specific cost. All construction must conform to technical and aesthetic requirements, as established by the government.
In 2005, the number of dwellings was at about 6,861, with an average of 2.3 residents per dwelling. The number of residents per dwelling has nearly halved since WWII. Approximately 71,609 new dwellings were constructed in 2004. About 76% of the dwellings built in 2004 were owner occupied.
EDUCATION
The present Dutch education system has its origins in the Batavian Republic which was constituted after the French Revolution. The role of education gained importance in the Civil and Constitutional Regulations of 1789, and the first legislation on education was passed in 1801. After 1848, the municipalities, supported by state funds, were responsible for managing the schools. Private schools were not originally supported by the government. However, after 1917, private and state schools received equal state funding.
School attendance between the ages of 5 and 18 is compulsory. Apart from play groups and crèches (which do not come under the Ministry of Education), there are no schools for children below the age of four. Children may, however, attend primary school from the age of four. Primary school covers eight years of study. Secondary school is comprised of three types: (1) general secondary school, with two options, the four-year junior general secondary school (MAVO) and the five-year senior general secondary school (HAVO); (2) preuniversity—the athenaeum or the gymnasium—both lasting for six years in preparation for university education; and (3) vocational secondary schools with four-year programs. Special education is provided to children with physical, mental, or social disabilities at special primary and secondary schools. Whenever possible, these children are later transferred into mainstream schools for continued education. The academic year runs from September to June.
Primary school enrollment in 2003 was estimated at about 99% of age-eligible students. The same year, secondary school enrollment was about 89% of age-eligible students. It is estimated that about 98.4% of all students complete their primary education. In 2003, private schools accounted for about 68.7% of primary school enrollment and 83.3% of secondary enrollment.
Facilities have been opened in various municipalities for adult education. Open schools and open universities have also been introduced. Vocational and university education is provided at the eight universities and five institutes (Hogescholen), which are equivalent to universities. These are funded entirely by the government. There are also seven theological colleges. In 2003, about 58% of the tertiary age population were enrolled in some type of higher education program. The adult literacy rate for 2000 was estimated at about 99%.
As of 2003, public expenditure on education was estimated at 5.1% of GDP, or 10.7% of total government expenditures.
LIBRARIES AND MUSEUMS
The largest public library is the Royal Library at The Hague, which has about 2.2 million volumes; this also serves as the national library. Outstanding libraries are found in the universities: Amsterdam, with over 2.6 million volumes; Leiden, 2.7 million volumes; Utrecht, two million volumes; Groningen, 2.7 million volumes; and Erasmus of Rotterdam, 800,000 volumes. The technical universities at Delft, Wageningen, and Tilburg also have excellent collections. Libraries of importance are found in some provincial capitals, such as Hertogenbosch, Leeuwarden, Middelburg, and Maastricht. Also noteworthy are the International Institute of Social History at Amsterdam, which houses important collections of historical letters and documents, such as the Marx-Engels Archives; and the Institute of the Netherlands Economic-Historical Archive, which has its library in Amsterdam and its collection of old trade archives at the Hague. There are about 500 public libraries across the country. The Netherlands Public Library Association was founded in 1972.
Among Amsterdam's many museums, particularly outstanding are the Rijksmuseum (1800), the Stedelijk Museum (1895) with special collections of modern art, the Van Gogh Museum (1979), the Museum of the Royal Tropical Institute (1910), and the Jewish Historical Museum (1932). Among Amsterdam's newest museums are the Huis Marseille (1999), which has historic and modern photography exhibits, the hands-on New Metropolis Interactive Science and Technology Museum (1997), and the Tattso Museum (1996). The Boymans–Van Beuningen Museum in Rotterdam has older paintings as well as modern works and a fine collection of minor arts. The Hague's Mauritshuis and the Frans Hals Museum at Haarlem have world-renowned collections of old masters. Other collections of national interest are in the Central Museum in Utrecht, the National Museum of Natural History in Leiden, Teyler's Museum in Haarlem, and the Folklore Museum in Arnhem. In the past, the most important art museums were found mainly in the large population centers of western Holland, but there are now museums of interest in such provincial capitals as Groningen, Leeuwarden, Arnhem, and Maastricht. The government stimulates the spread of artistic culture by providing art objects on loan and by granting subsidies to a number of privately owned museums. There are dozens of museums dedicated to the work of individual Dutch artists.
MEDIA
The post office, telegraph, and telephone systems are operated by the government. The state's monopoly on postal services is confined to delivery of letters and postcards; about half of other deliveries are handled by private firms. Significant improvements in the phone systems began in 2001 through the introduction of the third generation of the Global System for Mobile Communications. In 2003, there were an estimated 614 mainline telephones for every 1,000 people. The same year, there were approximately 768 mobile phones in use for every 1,000 people.
There are several radio networks. The Netherlands Broadcasting Foundation, a joint foundation, maintains and makes available all studios, technical equipment, record and music libraries, orchestras, and other facilities. Broadcas
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 66
|
https://www.stratcom.mil/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/2121209/first-ever-bomber-task-force-20-2-integrates-with-a-royal-netherlands-air-force/
|
en
|
First ever: Bomber Task Force 20-2 integrates with a Royal Netherlands Air Force F-35
|
[
"https://www.stratcom.mil/Portals/8/usstratcom_seal32.png?ver=gglk15yMG4giWAZEKdaZ7Q%3d%3d",
"https://media.defense.gov/2020/Mar/20/2002268080/1920/1080/0/200318-F-QP712-0057.JPG",
"https://media.defense.gov/2020/Mar/20/2002268081/1920/1080/0/200318-F-QP712-0612.JPG",
"https://media.defense.gov/2020/Mar/20/2002268082/1920/1080/0/200318-F-QP712-0336.JPG",
"https://www.stratcom.mil/DesktopModules/SharedLibrary/Images/VCL 988_Hoz_CMYK.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2020-03-20T00:00:00
|
Two U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bomber aircraft from the 509th Bomb Wing, Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, and the 131st Bomb Wing, Missouri Air National Guard, operating out of RAF Fairford,
|
en
|
/Portals/8/favicon.ico?ver=w74b6cEwT9IC7fV-jO-v4A%3d%3d
|
U.S. Strategic Command
|
https://www.stratcom.mil/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stratcom.mil%2FMedia%2FNews%2FNews-Article-View%2FArticle%2F2121209%2Ffirst-ever-bomber-task-force-20-2-integrates-with-a-royal-netherlands-air-force%2F
|
Two U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bomber aircraft from the 509th Bomb Wing, Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, and the 131st Bomb Wing, Missouri Air National Guard, operating out of RAF Fairford, U.K., conducted a fifth generation integration familiarization flight with a Royal Netherlands Air Force F-35A Lightning II March 18, 2020, over the North Sea.
“Conducting interoperability missions between the B-2 and fifth generation platforms are crucial to enhancing partnership capacity and capability,” said Gen. Jeff Harrigian, U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces Africa commander. “It demonstrates our ability to deliver decisive, agile and lethal combat power, alongside our NATO Allies to any adversary, anytime, across the globe.”
Previously, the aircraft also conducted tactical integration training with Royal Air Force F-35s and Norwegian F-35s. This is the first time that B-2s have integrated with Norwegian and Dutch F-35s.
Airmen from the 509th BW and the 131st BW are deployed to RAF Fairford, to conduct training in a joint environment with partners and allies during this BTF rotation which began on March 9, 2020.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 8
|
https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/organisations/royal-netherland-air-force-rnaf
|
en
|
Royal Netherland Air Force [RNLAF] :: Rochester Avionic Archives
|
[
"https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/raa-logo.png",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force.png?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0718_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0719_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0720_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0721_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0722_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0723_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-the-collection.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-media-archive.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-document-archive.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-picture-archive.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/img/favicon.png
| null | |||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 92
|
https://theaviationist.com/2018/11/18/dutch-f-35a-with-special-tail-markings-unveiled-at-edwards-afb/
|
en
|
Dutch F-35A With Special Tail Markings Unveiled At Edwards AFB
|
[
"https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/viewthroughconversion/935912128/?value=0&guid=ON&script=0",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=427305193390107&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=809476641126074&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/header-the-aviationist-2021.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/323-TES-Special.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/323-TES-Special-tail-706x471.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/323-TES-Special-group-photo-706x476.jpg",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/f5260c1a4f5417527329915544c2932f?s=125&d=mm&r=g",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/China-Lake-composite-top.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/NAS-Fallon-F-22-mishap.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/McGrath_PhanCon_2024_Andravida_1-326x245.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/F22-Indonesia-3-e1723493664570-326x245.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/JSX_1-326x245.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Banner-FIA2024_ADV-The-Aviationist_300x250.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/McGrath_PhanCon_2024_Andravida_1-80x60.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/F22-Indonesia-3-e1723493664570-80x60.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/FLRAA_Milestone_B_V-280_Valor_1-80x60.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Patch_TA.jpg",
"https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/yt-home-e1625060502511.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"David Cenciotti",
"www.facebook.com",
"david.cenciotti"
] |
2018-11-18T00:00:00
|
The 323 TES (Test and Evaluation Squadron) "Diana" celebrates its 70th anniversary with F-35 F-002 in special tail markings at Edwards Air Force Base,
|
en
|
The Aviationist
|
https://theaviationist.com/2018/11/18/dutch-f-35a-with-special-tail-markings-unveiled-at-edwards-afb/
|
The 323 TES (Test and Evaluation Squadron) “Diana” celebrates its 70th anniversary with F-35 F-002 in special tail markings at Edwards Air Force Base, California.
“Three two three”, Royal Netherlands Air Force’s first F-35 squadron, operates two Lightning II aircraft, examples AN-1 (F-001) and AN-2 (F-002), at Edwards AFB, California. The Squadron, is responsible for the Operational Test and Evaluation Phase (OT&E) as part of the Joint Operational Test Team, which lays the foundation for the RNLAF’s commissioning of the F-35.
On Nov. 15, 2018, the squadron, that was established in 1948 and has changed designation (including Fighter Weapons School, Tactical Training, Evaluation and Standardization Squadron, etc.) several times through the years, celebrated its 70th anniversary, an achievement commemorated by applying special markings to the tail of one of the two Dutch F-35s: aircraft F-002 was given a Diana “Godness of the Hunt” (symbol of the squadron) artwork along with the silhouettes of all the aircraft that the unit has flown in the last seven decades and the text “70 years”.
It looks like the markings are applied on panels attached to the rudder and fin; however, according to the artist, this was just for the photo shoot as the aircraft should be painted later.
The first eight F-35A are being assembled at Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth facility in the U.S. with the two F-35s already used for testing at Edwards AFB, California, and the rest heading to Luke Air Force Base for pilot training beginning in January 2019.
AN-9, the ninth of the Netherlands’ 37 F-35A CTOL (Conventional Take Off and Landing) stealth jets on order, will be build at Cameri FACO, in Italy and will be the first F-35 to be delivered in the Netherlands: the aircraft is expected to roll off the production line in February 2019. It will undertake test and acceptance flights in Italy before moving to Leeuwarden in October 2019. It will be taken on charge by the first operational squadron based in the Netherlands, 322 (RF) Squadron.
This is not the first time an F-35A is given a special tail: in June 2017, Italian Air Force F-35A belonging to the 13th Gruppo (Squadron) sported celebratory 100th anniversary markings on the left tail.
Image credit: 323TES and Christy Tortland
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 27
|
https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/organisations/royal-netherland-air-force-rnaf
|
en
|
Royal Netherland Air Force [RNLAF] :: Rochester Avionic Archives
|
[
"https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/raa-logo.png",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force.png?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0718_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0719_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0720_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0721_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0722_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0723_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-the-collection.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-media-archive.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-document-archive.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-picture-archive.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/img/favicon.png
| null | |||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 71
|
https://www.defencetalk.com/military/forums/t/koninklijke-luchtmacht-royal-netherlands-air-force.15077/page-2
|
en
|
Koninklijke Luchtmacht/Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/styles/default/xenforo/defense military logo.png",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/styles/default/xenforo/defense military logo.png",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/20/20405.jpg?1596813966",
"https://aviacionline.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/FAB2855-Embraer-KC-390-Fuerza-Aerea-de-Brasil-1-6-scaled.jpg",
"https://aviacionline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/cropped-unnamed-150x150.jpg",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://aviacionline.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/FAB2855-Embraer-KC-390-Fuerza-Aerea-de-Brasil-1-6-scaled.jpg",
"https://aviacionline.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/cropped-unnamed-150x150.jpg",
"https://embraer.com/favicon.ico",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/20/20405.jpg?1596813966",
"https://embraer.com/favicon.ico",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/38/38839.jpg?1514293333",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/25/25714.jpg?1573444948",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://www.scramble.nl/images/news/2022/july/NL_G650_KLu_640.jpg",
"https://www.scramble.nl/favicon.ico",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://www.dsca.mil/sites/default/files/sealResize4.png",
"https://www.defensenews.com/resizer/kAIrM2Pivr35yZuKgWz6Rj9QFVg=/1024x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/GCBDTGXRT5D67PH2KVOAUW4CDY.jpg",
"https://www.defensenews.com/pf/resources/img/favicons/def/apple-touch-icon.png?d=124",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://www.scramble.nl/images/news/2023/march/NL_V-117-G650-Greyhound-intel-large_640.jpg",
"https://www.scramble.nl/favicon.ico",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://scramble.nl/images/news/2023/august/NL_MQ-9A_M-002_credit_KLu_640.jpg",
"https://scramble.nl/favicon.ico",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512",
"https://www.dsca.mil/sites/default/files/sealResize4.png",
"https://www.dsca.mil/sites/default/files/sealResize4.png",
"https://www.defencetalk.com/military/data/avatars/m/12/12580.jpg?1520478512"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2020-07-04T08:41:58-04:00
|
The white paper also notes that “the entire F-35 fleet will be expanded with modern long-range and precision weapons” and that the future use of unmanned...
|
en
|
Defence Forum & Military Photos - DefenceTalk
|
https://www.defencetalk.com/military/forums/t/koninklijke-luchtmacht-royal-netherlands-air-force.15077/page-2
|
Embraer C-390 beats C-130J in the Netherlands and it will become its new tactical transport
The Ministry of Defense of the Netherlands has chosen the C-390M from Brazilian manufacturer Embraer as the successor and replacement for its C-130H Hercules. T
Interesting choice and badly needed breakthrough for Embrear on Euro Market asside ecisting order from Portugal. I do see attraction for C390 over C130J. However for an Airforce that only used small fleet of tactical airlift, still a daring choice.
It is an understandable but still remarkable choice for the Netherlands, to order the KC-390 instead of the C-130J.
Not only the KLu has already 4 C-130s in its fleet, but the Netherlands normally buy american stuff because of political reasons.
According to the staatssecretaris the 4 C-130s operated by the KLu have reached the end of their service life. I wonder if they are totally worn out or are still usable for air forces looking for second hand Herculeses.
Btw, the Netherlands will be the third European country after Portugal (5) and Hungary (2) ordered the KC-390.
I do hope more C390 breakthrough, but so far not as much as market expected before. In paper this arcraft should offer much efficiency as using commercial engine, shares many systems with E Series and basically provide brand new design against competitor.
Still even this is small order, but come from an Air Force that as you say, ussually bought American. Perhaps because Dutch Air Force only use 4 C130 so far, it is small fleet that they can afford to change from C130 altogether. Those with larger C130 fleet perhaps has to think more consideration on changing to C390.
The problem at present is there are no bigger Air Forces currently looking for a major procurement of Aircraft in this category. The big Euros are concentrating on the A400, the Japanese have the C-2, ROK is looking at developing its own Aircraft. There are medium term possibilities like Australia, maybe Israel and some ME Countries for orders up to 20+ Aircraft.
It is an understandable but still remarkable choice for the Netherlands, to order the KC-390 instead of the C-130J.
Not only the KLu has already 4 C-130s in its fleet, but the Netherlands normally buy american stuff because of political reasons.
According to the staatssecretaris the 4 C-130s operated by the KLu have reached the end of their service life. I wonder if they are totally worn out or are still usable for air forces looking for second hand Herculeses.
Btw, the Netherlands will be the third European country after Portugal (5) and Hungary (2) ordered the KC-390.
Wow yeah... as far as I can see only real insiders (unlike people like me) have seen this coming. It seems that Brazil has been working hard on this behind the scenes. And it's nice to see an expansion of the transport fleet, which was on the small side for what was being asked of them to be honest.
As for resale potential? I don't know how much value is still left in those frames, they accelerated their replacement for a reason. That is not to say that they are completely run down, the Luchtmacht puts a lot of effort into keeping them in good shape. And initially they where supposed to soldier on until the 2030 timeframe, but normal maintenance procedures and schedules weren't keeping up with the operational tempo. Which is also why they are expanding the fleet, to better keep up with the demands being placed on them.
So as far as their condition? I think they might be in better shape than some air frames that still might get overhauled, and the two C-130H30's where bought new in the mid 90's. But the other two where bought second hand in the 2000's and upgraded to C-130H standard, and I remember reading somewhere that they used a lot of bespoke (or at least non standard) equipment in the cockpits. So they don't look like a very attractive purchase to me, not to mention that they've been flown hard and the oldest frame was built in 1978!
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 24
|
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/1000korea/
|
en
|
Air War Korea, 1950-53
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"A. Timothy Warnock"
] |
2008-07-07T00:00:00+00:00
|
This extensive chronology recalls key events in the first war fought by the independent US Air Force.
|
en
|
Air & Space Forces Magazine
|
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/1000korea/
|
To commemorate the Korean War, the US Air Force Historian commissioned Air Force Historical Research Agency to compile a chronology of significant events in USAF’s operations. The result was “The US Air Force’s First War: Korea 1950-1953,” edited by A. Timothy Warnock. What follows is a condensed version.
Note: Each entry uses the local date, which, in theater, was one day later than in the US. Dates separated by a hyphen indicate that an entry covers events from one date through a second date. Two dates separated by a slash indicate events occurred at night.
1950
June 25: North Korea invaded South Korea. Simultaneously, North Korean troops made an amphibious landing at Kangnung on the east coast just south of the 38th parallel. North Korean fighter aircraft attacked airfields at Kimpo and Seoul, the South Korean capital, destroying one USAF C-54 on the ground at Kimpo.
John J. Muccio, US ambassador to South Korea, relayed to President Harry S. Truman a South Korean request for US air assistance and ammunition. The UN Security Council unanimously called for a cease-fire and withdrawal of the North Korean Army to north of the 38th parallel. The resolution asked all UN members to support the withdrawal of the NKA and to render no assistance to North Korea.
Maj. Gen. Earle E. Partridge, who was commander, 5th Air Force, but serving as acting commander of Far East Air Forces (FEAF), ordered wing commanders to prepare for air evacuation of US citizens from South Korea. He increased aerial surveillance of Tsushima Strait between Korea and Japan. The 20th Air Force placed two squadrons of the 51st Fighter-Interceptor Wing (FIW) on air defense alert in Japan.
June 26: North Koreans captured Chunchon, Pochon, and Tongduchon, South Korea. The US Seventh Fleet sailed north from the Philippines. South Korea requested 10 F-51s from the US Air Force to supplement the South Korean air force’s AT-6s and liaison-type airplanes. In continued preparation for air evacuation of US citizens from Korea, FEAF traded C-54s for C-47s from all over the Far East, because the latter could land on smaller airfields.
USAF SB-17 aircraft provided rescue cover for the initial evacuation by sea of US citizens from Seoul. Beginning in the early morning, 682 people boarded the Norwegian merchant ship Reinholte, which finally left Inchon Harbor at 4:30 p.m., bound for Sasebo, Japan.
F-82G Twin Mustang fighters of the 68th Fighter All-Weather Squadron (FAWS) provided air cover for freighters, including the Reinholte. Fifth Air Force also flew escort and surveillance sorties, some over the straits between Japan and Korea and some over the Seoul area.
June 27: The UN Security Council called on all UN members to aid South Korea. President Truman directed US air and sea forces to assist South Korea, and Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Commander in Chief, Far East Command, ordered FEAF to attack North Korean units south of the 38th parallel. Lt. Gen. George E. Stratemeyer, commander, FEAF, who was in the United States when the war broke out, returned to Japan. (Partridge then served as acting FEAF vice commander until July 7.) FEAF used Kimpo airfield, near Seoul, and Suwon airfield, some 20 miles south of Seoul, for emergency air evacuation of 748 persons to Japan on C-54s, C-47s, and C-46s. Cargo aircraft assigned to the 374th Troop Carrier Wing (TCW) and FEAF headquarters accomplished the airlift, escorted by F-82s, F-80 jet fighters, and B-26 light bombers.
Fifth Air Force embarked on a mission to establish air superiority over South Korea, partially to prevent the North Korean air force from attacking South Korean forces and to protect evacuation forces. When North Korean aircraft appeared over Kimpo and Suwon airfields, the USAF aircraft flying air cover engaged the enemy in the first air battle of the war. Maj. James W. Little, commander, 339th FAWS, fired the first shot. Lt. William G. Hudson, 68th FAWS, flying an F-82, with Lt. Carl Fraser as his radar observer, scored the first aerial victory. In all, six USAF pilots shot down over Kimpo seven North Korean propeller-driven fighters, the highest number of USAF aerial victories in one day for all of 1950.
Fifth Air Force B-26s, flying from Ashiya AB, Japan, attacked enemy targets in South Korea in the evening, but bad weather made the raids ineffective. Fifth Air Force established an advance echelon at Itazuke AB, Japan, and moved B-26s to Ashiya and RF-80s to Itazuke for missions in Korea. The 8th Fighter-Bomber Wing (FBW) organized a composite unit of USAF and South Korean airmen at Taegu airfield, South Korea, to fly F-51D Mustangs.
June 28: North Koreans captured Seoul, forcing the South Korean government to move to Taejon. Enemy forces also occupied nearby Kimpo airfield and, on the east coast, Mukho naval base below Kangnung. North Korean Yaks strafed Suwon airfield, destroying one B-26 and one F-82.
In the first USAF airstrikes of the Korean War, more than 20 B-26s of the 3rd Bombardment Group (BG) attacked Munsan railroad yards near the 38th parallel and rail and road traffic between Seoul and the North Korean border. One, heavily damaged by enemy anti-aircraft fire, crashed on its return to Ashiya, killing all aboard. Flying from Kadena AB, Okinawa, the 19th BG, in the first B-29 medium bomber strikes of the Korean War, attacked a railroad bridge and targets of opportunity such as tanks, trucks, and supply columns along North Korean invasion routes.
Bad weather over Japan limited 5th Air Force sorties, but 18 fighters flew close air support and interdiction missions. More than 30 F-80s from Itazuke escorted C-54s and B-26s flying between Japan and Suwon. First Lt. Bryce Poe II, in an RF-80A, flew USAF’s first jet combat reconnaissance mission, photographing the NKA advance elements and reporting clearing weather over the front in Korea. C-54s and C-47s flew out the last of 851 US citizens evacuated by air from South Korea. FEAF transports airlifted 150 tons of ammunition from Tachikawa AB, Japan, to Suwon.
June 29: North Korean forces captured Kapyong and massed on the north shore of the Han River. Heavy fighting raged in the Kimpo area. North Korean aircraft bombed and strafed Suwon airfield, destroying a C-54 on the ground. The 21st Troop Carrier Squadron (TCS) moved from Clark AB in the Philippines to Tachikawa AB.
MacArthur directed Stratemeyer to concentrate air attacks on the Han River bridges and North Korean troops massing north of the river. B-26s attacked the bridges, and 5th Air Force F-80s patrolled the Han River area. F-82s from the 86th FAWS, using jettisonable fuel tanks, attacked with napalm for the first time in the war. Pilots of the 35th and 80th Fighter-Bomber Squadrons (FBS) shot down five North Korean airplanes that were attacking Suwon airfield. Eight B-29s of the 19th BG attacked enemy-held Kimpo airfield and the Seoul railroad station, reportedly killing a large number of enemy troops. As the medium bombers turned toward Kadena, enemy aircraft attacked the formation, enabling B-29 gunners to shoot down, for the first time in the war, one of the opponent’s airplanes.
MacArthur authorized FEAF attacks on airfields in North Korea. In the first USAF attack on North Korea, 18 B-26s of the 3rd BG attacked Heijo airfield near Pyongyang, the North Korean capital, claiming up to 25 enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground. The 8th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron (TRS) began photographic reconnaissance of North Korean airfields. Using RB-29 aircraft, the 31st Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron (SRS) (Photographic) also started operations over Korea from Yokota AB, Japan.
June 30: President Truman ordered the use of US ground troops in Korea and a naval blockade of North Korea. The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) No. 77 Squadron arrived in Korea to support 5th Air Force, to which it was subsequently attached. North Korean forces reached Samchock on the east coast and in the west crossed the Han River, threatening Suwon airfield. FEAF began evacuation of the airfield and authorized improvement of Kumhae airfield, 11 miles northwest of Pusan, to compensate for the presumed loss of Kimpo and Suwon. The first 5th Air Force Tactical Air Control Parties (TACPs) arrived at Suwon. B-26s from the 3rd BG strafed, bombed, and rocketed enemy troops and traffic in the Seoul area. One flight hit a stalled enemy column. Fifteen B-29s attacked railroad bridges, tanks, trucks, and troop concentrations on the north bank of the Han River in the Seoul area.
July 1: North Korean forces occupied Suwon, denying FEAF use of its airstrip. The 374th TCW began airlifting the US Army 24th Infantry Division, the first US troops to enter Korea since the war began, from Itazuke to Pusan. Fifth Air Force gained operational control of the RAAF No. 77 Squadron.
July 3: FEAF continued to airlift US Army troops to Korea but substituted smaller C-46s and C-47s for C-54s, which damaged the Pusan runways. Pilots of four F-80s on the first mission with external rockets reported excessive drag that shortened their range.
July 5: A Joint Operations Center opened at Taejon to provide better close air support for US ground forces, which, near Osan, battled, for the first time, North Korean troops.
July 6: In the first strategic air attacks of the war, nine B-29s bombed the Rising Sun oil refinery at Wonsan and a chemical plant at Hungnam in North Korea. B-26s hitting advancing enemy armored columns reported six to 10 tanks destroyed.
July 7: Partridge resumed active command of 5th Air Force. The UN Security Council established the UN Command, designated the United States as executive agent for prosecuting the Korean War, and requested that the US President appoint a UN Commander. The RAAF No. 77 Squadron, representing Australia’s contribution to airpower in the theater, was attached to FEAF.
July 8: President Truman designated MacArthur as Commander in Chief of UN forces in the Korean Theater. FEAF organized Bomber Command (Provisional) at Yokota, with Maj. Gen. Emmett O’Donnell Jr. as commander. Lt. Oliver Duerksen and Lt. Frank Chermak provided from radio-equipped jeeps the first forward air control to direct air-to-ground attacks in the Korean War.
July 9: Forward air controllers began using L-5G and L-17 liaison airplanes to direct F-80 airstrikes in support of ground forces.
July 10: Carefully timing airstrikes to coincide with the departure of USAF counterair patrols for refueling, four enemy Yaks bombed and strafed the USA 19th Infantry Regiment at Chongju. The 5th Air Force began using T-6 trainer aircraft for forward air control missions, because liaison airplanes were not fast enough to elude enemy fire. F-80s caught an enemy convoy stopped at a bombed-out bridge near Pyongtaek. Along with B-26s and F-82s, they attacked the convoy and claimed destruction of 117 trucks, 38 tanks, and seven half-tracks.
July 12: Four Military Air Transport Service airplanes arrived in Japan from the United States carrying 58 large 3.5-inch rocket launchers (bazookas) and shaped charges desperately needed to destroy North Korean tanks. Enemy fighters shot down one B-29, one B-26, and one L-4, the first North Korean aerial victories. In its first mission, the 92nd BG, flying from its base at Yokota, bombed the Seoul marshaling yards.
July 13: Forty-nine FEAF Bomber Command B-29s from the 22nd BG and the 92nd BG bombed marshaling yards and an oil refinery at Wonsan, North Korea. The 3rd Air Rescue Squadron (ARS) began flying SB-17 aircraft off the Korean coast to drop rescue boats to downed B-29 crews. Advancing enemy troops forced the airborne control function to move southeastward from Taejon to Taegu. Lt. Gen. Walton H. Walker, commander, Eighth Army in Korea, assumed command of all US ground forces in Korea.
July 14: The 35th Fighter-Interceptor Group (FIG), moving from Japan to a new airfield at Pohang, became the first USAF fighter group to be based in South Korea during the war. The 6132nd Tactical Air Control Group (Provisional), the first tactical air control unit in the war, activated at Taegu under Col. Joseph D. Lee. It provided forward, ground-based air control for aircraft providing close air support of UN forces. A 5th Air Force-Eighth Army Joint Operations Center began to function at Taegu, and 5th Air Force activated its advance headquarters at Itazuke.
July 15: Carrier aircraft on missions over Korea began to report to the Joint Operations Center at Taegu. The 51st Fighter Squadron (FS) (Provisional) at Taegu flew the first F-51 Mustang combat missions in Korea. A 5th Air Force operation order assigned “Mosquito” call signs to airborne controllers in T-6 airplanes, and the name became the identifier for the aircraft.
July 17: Three B-29s accidentally bombed friendly civilians in Andong, South Korea, illustrating the dangers of using B-29s on close air support missions.
July 18: The 19th BG modified some B-29s for the use of radio-guided bombs (razon) to enable them to bomb bridges more accurately.
July 19: In a dogfight near Taejon, 5th Air Force F-80s shot down three enemy Yaks, the highest daily number of aerial victories this month. In the campaign to establish air superiority in the theater, seven F-80s of the 8th Fighter-Bomber Group (FBG), led by Lt. Col. William T. Samways, destroyed 15 enemy airplanes on the ground near Pyongyang.
July 20: Despite FEAF close air support, the NKA took Taejon, forcing the remnants of the USA 24th Infantry Division to withdraw to the southeast. US ground forces defending Taejon had suffered, in seven days, almost 30 percent casualties. Maj. Gen. Otto P. Weyland arrived in the Far East to assume the position of FEAF vice commander for operations. Fifth Air Force pilots in F-80s shot down two more enemy aircraft, the last aerial victories until November. Enemy air opposition by this time had virtually disappeared, a sign of UN air superiority.
July 22: The US Navy aircraft carrier USS Boxer arrived in Japan with 145 USAF F-51s aboard. The 3rd ARS deployed the first H-5 helicopter in Korea to Taegu.
July 23: The 6132nd Tactical Air Control Group (Provisional) established a Tactical Air Control Center adjacent to the Joint Operations Center at Taegu.
July 24: Fifth Air Force moved its advance headquarters from Japan to Taegu, locating it next to Eighth Army headquarters in Korea for ease of communication and coordination. FEAF established the advance headquarters as 5th Air Force in Korea. The UN Command was formally established in Tokyo, commanded by MacArthur, who assigned responsibility for ground action in Korea to Eighth Army commander Walker; naval action to Vice Adm. C. Turner Joy, commander, Naval Forces, Far East; and air action to Stratemeyer, commander, FEAF.
July 28: The first amphibious SA-16 Albatross aircraft arrived in Japan for air rescue service off the Korean coast.
July 30: Forty-seven B-29s bombed the Chosen nitrogen explosives factory at Hungnam on the east coast of North Korea.
July 31: As North Korean troops continued to advance, Walker ordered UN forces to withdraw to a new defensive line along the Naktong River.
Aug. 1: The 6147th Tactical Control Squadron (Airborne) was established at Taegu for forward air control operations with T-6 aircraft. Forty-six B-29s of the 22nd and 92nd BGs bombed the Chosen nitrogen fertilizer factory at Hungnam, the largest chemical plant in the Far East.
Aug. 2-3: In response to an Eighth Army request, the 374th Troop Carrier Group (TCG) airlifted 300,000 pounds of equipment and supplies from Ashiya to Korea in 24 hours, a new airlift record for the war.
Aug. 3: The 18th FBG headquarters moved from Japan to Taegu for expanded F-51 operations. SA-16 amphibious rescue aircraft began flying sorties along the Korean coast to retrieve US pilots forced down during operations.
Aug. 4: B-29 attacks against key bridges north of the 38th parallel initiated FEAF Interdiction Campaign No. 1.
Aug. 5: Maj. Louis J. Sebille, commander, 67th FBS, dived his damaged F-51 into an enemy position. For this action he posthumously received the first Medal of Honor awarded to a USAF member in Korea. In the first SA-16 rescue operation of the war, Capt. Charles E. Shroder led a crew in saving a Navy pilot who had crashed into the sea off the Korean coast.
Aug. 6: FEAF began nightly visual reconnaissance of enemy supply routes.
Aug. 7: The 98th BG flew its first mission in the Korean War shortly after 20 of its B-29s landed at Yokota. The 822nd Engineer Aviation Battalion completed the first phase of new runway construction, which allowed expanded USAF operations at Taegu.
Aug. 8: The enemy threat to Taegu forced the 18th FBG to evacuate to Ashiya. The 307th BG, newly based in Okinawa, flew its first mission.
Aug. 10: The US Air Force called up two Reserve units, the 437th TCW and the 452nd Bombardment Wing (BW), for Korean War service. Forty-six B-29s of the 22nd, 92nd, and 98th BGs hit an oil refinery and railroad shops at Wonsan, North Korea.
Aug. 11: C-119 Flying Boxcars began airlifting trucks from Tachikawa AB in Japan to Taegu.
Aug. 12: USN Task Force 77 stopped close air support and interdiction strikes in South Korea and moved up Korea’s west coast to attack interdiction targets in North Korea, leaving all air attacks in South Korea to FEAF. More than 40 B-29s attacked the port of Rashin in northeastern Korea, near the border of the Soviet Union.
Aug. 13: Endangered by the NKA advance to Pohang, two squadrons of F-51s in the 35th FIG moved from nearby Yonil airfield in South Korea to Tsuiki AB, Japan.
Aug. 16: Because of the enemy threat to Taegu, the advance 5th Air Force headquarters moved to Pusan. Ninety-eight B-29s carpet-bombed suspected enemy troop concentrations in a 27-square-mile area near Waegwan northwest of Taegu. The Superfortresses dropped more than 800 tons of 500-pound bombs in the largest employment of airpower in direct support of ground forces since the Normandy invasion of World War II. Subsequent reconnaissance showed little destruction of enemy troops or equipment, because they had already left the area.
Aug. 19: US troops, aided by airstrikes, drove North Korean forces in the Yongsan bridgehead back across the Naktong River, ending the Battle of the Naktong Bulge. Sixty-three B-29s attacked the industrial and port area of Chongjin in northeastern Korea. Nine Superfortresses of the 19th BG dropped 54 tons of 1,000-pound bombs on the west railway bridge at Seoul, called the “elastic bridge” because repeated air attacks had failed to bring it down. Thirty-seven USN dive bombers from two aircraft carriers followed up the USAF attack. Aerial reconnaissance the next day revealed that two spans had collapsed.
Aug. 19-20: Partridge moved the Joint Operations Center from Taegu to Pusan because of enemy advances.
Aug. 22: Anti-aircraft gunners fired from across the Yalu River at RB-29s reconnoitering the border, the first hostile Chinese action against UN aircraft.
Aug. 23: MacArthur set Sept. 15 as the date to invade Inchon. The 19th BG flew the first razon mission, but with the exception of one bomb that hit the railroad bridge west of Pyongyang, the World War II-era control equipment failed to guide the bombs to the target.
Aug. 25: FEAF directed 5th Air Force to maintain constant armed surveillance of enemy airfields to prevent enemy buildup of air strength before the Inchon invasion.
Aug. 26: Fifth Air Force organized the 47th and 48th TCSs (Provisional) at Tachikawa with C-46s from all over the Far East theater to augment FEAF airlift resources for UN offensives planned for September. At Ashiya, FEAF organized the 1st Troop Carrier Task Force (Provisional) as the nucleus of the new Combat Cargo Command (Provisional). Maj. Gen. William H. Tunner, architect of the Hump airlift of World War II and the Berlin airlift, 1948-49, assumed command of Combat Cargo Command.
Aug. 27: Two USAF Mustang pilots accidentally strayed into China and strafed an airstrip near Antung, mistaking it for a North Korean airstrip at Sinuiju. The Chinese exploited the incident to the fullest for propaganda and diplomatic purposes. The 92nd BG sent 24 B-29s to Kyomipo to bomb the largest iron and steel plant in Korea. FEAF experimented with delayed action bombs to discourage enemy repairs on bridges.
Aug. 30: Before dawn an experimental B-29 flare mission illuminated the Han River in the Seoul area for a B-26 strike on an elusive enemy pontoon bridge, but it could not be found. B-26s attacked the permanent bridge.
Aug. 31: After a 10-day lull in the ground fighting, North Korean forces launched a coordinated offensive against the entire Pusan Perimeter. Fifth Air Force provided close air support for the defending UN troops. Seventy-four B-29s bombed mining facilities, metal industries, and marshaling yards at Chinnampo in the largest strategic bombing mission of the month. Among the targets were aluminum and magnesium plants.
Sept. 1: Fifth Air Force strafed and dropped napalm and bombs on NKA troops and armored columns attacking along the Naktong River front. Carrier-based aircraft from USN Task Force 77 also provided close air support to the perimeter defenders. The 21st TCS dropped rations and ammunition to US troops temporarily cut off by the enemy thrusts. MacArthur directed Stratemeyer to use all available FEAF airpower, including B-29s, to help Eighth Army hold the Pusan Perimeter, the southeast corner of the Korean peninsula that South Korea still controlled.
Sept. 3: Task Force 77 withdrew its aircraft carriers from the Pusan area for replenishment at sea and movement north to strike communications targets, leaving all close air support responsibility with FEAF.
Sept. 4: In the first H-5 helicopter rescue of a downed US pilot from behind enemy lines in Korea, at Hanggan-dong, Lt. Paul W. Van Boven saved Capt. Robert E. Wayne. Three squadrons of C-119 Flying Boxcars arrived at Ashiya for use in the Korean War.
Sept. 6: As North Korean forces approached Taegu, Eighth Army headquarters withdrew to Pusan. Col. Aaron Tyler, airfield commander at Taegu, began moving the remaining aircraft, including the T-6 Mosquitoes of the 6147th Tactical Control Squadron, southward to Pusan.
Sept. 7: FEAF Bomber Command attacked the iron works at Chongjin in the extreme northeast of North Korea, employing 24 B-29s of the 22nd BG.
Sept. 8: The 18th FBG, which had departed Korea a month earlier, returned from Japan, settling at Pusan East (Tongnae).
Sept. 9: North Korean forces attacking southeast of Hajang reached a point only eight miles from Taegu, their farthest penetration on the western front. FEAF Bomber Command began a rail interdiction campaign north of Seoul to slow enemy reinforcements that might counter the UN Inchon landing. In this campaign, the medium bombers combined attacks on marshaling yards with raids to cut rails at multiple points along key routes.
Sept. 10: As a result of the USN Task Force 77’s unexpected withdrawal from close air support of Eighth Army on Sept. 3, Stratemeyer persuaded MacArthur to direct that all close air support requests must be routed through 5th Air Force. If 5th Air Force lacked resources to meet the requests, they were to be forwarded to FEAF headquarters for coordination with the commander, Naval Forces, Far East.
Sept. 13: Typhoon Kezia hit southern Japan, hampering FEAF operations and forcing some aircraft to move temporarily to Pusan and Taegu.
Sept. 15: US Marines invaded Wolmi-do in Inchon Harbor at dawn, occupying the island in less than an hour. The main US Army X Corps landings at Inchon occurred at high tide, in the afternoon, after a 45-minute naval and air bombardment. USN and US Marine Corps aircraft from carriers provided air cover during the amphibious assault. At the same time, FEAF air raids in South Korea prepared the way for the planned Eighth Army advance from the Pusan Perimeter.
Sept. 16: US forces secured Inchon and began moving toward Seoul. From the vicinity of Taegu, Eighth Army launched its long-awaited offensive.
Sept. 17: US Marines captured Kimpo airfield near Seoul. To support the Eighth Army offensive, 5th Air Force F-51s and F-80s flew napalm attacks, reportedly killing more than 1,200 enemy soldiers in Tabu-dong, Yongchon, and other strongholds near the Naktong River. FEAF began a week of dropping 4 million psychological warfare leaflets.
Sept. 18: Forty-two B-29s of the 92nd and 98th BGs carpet-bombed two 500-by-5,000-yard areas near Waegwan. The 1,600 bombs effectively destroyed enemy troop concentrations blocking the Eighth Army offensive.
Sept. 19: Combat Cargo Command began an airlift to Kimpo. Thirty-two C-54s landed with equipment and supplies for ground troops. Supported by 5th Air Force close air support missions, the 24th Infantry Division began crossing the Naktong River near Waegwan, and 1st Cavalry Division broke through Communist lines.
Sept. 20: Combat Cargo Command expanded its airlift into Kimpo into an around-the-clock operation by using night-lighting equipment it had transported the previous day. US Marines entered the outskirts of Seoul. To destroy enemy reinforcements, B-29s attacked three separate barracks areas in and near Pyongyang.
Sept. 21: USAF forward air controllers in T-6 Mosquitoes, equipped with air-to-ground radios, spotted about 30 enemy tanks preparing to ambush the advancing 24th Infantry Division. They called USAF aircraft and USA ground artillery, which destroyed 14 enemy tanks and forced the rest to flee. Combat Cargo Command C-54s began airlifting supplies, including 65 tons of rations and ammunition to newly captured Suwon airfield south of Seoul. C-119s initiated airdrops of food and ammunition to front-line UN troops.
Sept. 22: North Korean resistance crumbled all along the Pusan Perimeter. Lt. George W. Nelson, a USAF pilot in a Mosquito aircraft, dropped a note to 200 enemy troops northeast of Kunsan demanding their surrender. They complied, moving to a designated hill to be captured by nearby UN ground troops. B-29s dropped flares over rail lines, allowing B-26s to attack enemy trains at night.
Sept. 23: Headquarters 5th Air Force in Korea moved from Pusan to Taegu. In the first recorded special operations mission of the war, SB-17 aircraft of 3rd ARS made a classified flight in Korea.
Sept. 25: FEAF flew flare missions over Seoul all night to allow USMC night fighters to attack North Korean troops fleeing the city. Combat Cargo Command landed a battalion of 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team paratroopers at Kimpo to guard US Army X Corps’ northern flank as it moved out from Inchon.
Sept. 26: US military forces from Inchon and Pusan linked up near Osan, while South Korean troops with 5th Air Force support moved northward along the east coast toward the 38th parallel. Twenty B-29s of the 22nd BG bombed a munitions factory at Haeju, destroying the power plant and five related buildings. Other B-29s belonging to the 92nd BG raided the Pujon hydroelectric plant near Hungnam. These attacks marked the end of the first strategic bombing campaign against North Korea. Fifth Air Force organized the provisional 543rd Tactical Support Group at Taegu to manage tactical reconnaissance squadrons in Korea.
Sept. 27: US Marines drove enemy forces from Seoul and took control of the capital building. More than 100 Communist troops, each carrying a “safe conduct pass” that B-29s had dropped, surrendered to US forces near Seoul. The Joint Chiefs of Staff ordered MacArthur to destroy the NKA, a move that involved crossing the 38th parallel into North Korea. Only South Korean troops were to be allowed by the UN Command in provinces bordering China and the Soviet Union. The Joint Chiefs of Staff also canceled further strategic bombing of North Korea. Combat Cargo Command finished airlifting 187th Airborne Regimental Command Team paratroopers to Kimpo.
Sept. 28: South Korean troops advanced into North Korea for the first time. MacArthur officially restored Seoul to South Korean President Syngman Rhee. The first jet fighter squadron to operate from a base in Korea, the 7th FBS moved from Itazuke to Taegu. Three RB-45 Tornadoes, the first jet reconnaissance aircraft in the USAF inventory, arrived in the Far East.
Oct. 2: In an effort to crush NKA reinforcements, 22 Bomber Command B-29s attacked a North Korean military training area at Nanam, destroying 75 percent of the buildings. The 8th TRS moved from Itazuke to Taegu, to become the first USAF day reconnaissance squadron stationed in Korea.
Oct. 3: In a message to the Indian ambassador, China warned that it would send troops to defend North Korea if non-Korean UN troops moved north of the 38th parallel.
Oct. 4: FEAF gained operational control of all land-based aircraft in Korea, including USMC squadrons at Kimpo. Anticipating the acquisition of enemy air installations, FEAF stopped most attacks on airfields south of the 40th parallel. The South African air force No. 2 Squadron, the Union of South Africa’s contribution to UN airpower, arrived in the theater and was attached to FEAF.
Oct. 6: The US Air Force took charge of Kimpo airfield, which the US Marine Corps had commanded since its capture. Eighteen B-29s attacked an enemy arsenal at Kan-ni, North Korea. FEAF issued a new interdiction plan canceling attacks on bridges south of Pyongyang and Wonsan.
Oct. 7: The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a resolution authorizing MacArthur to move into North Korea. For the first time, US troops crossed the 38th parallel. USAF airplanes dropped food to a group of 150 former POWs who had escaped during the North Korean retreat.
Oct. 8: Two F-80s accidentally strafed a Soviet airfield near Vladivostok, USSR, on the coast northeast of the Korean border. Stratemeyer removed the group commander, reassigning him to FEAF headquarters, and instituted a court-martial of the two pilots. Razon bomb missions resumed after more reliable radio-guided bombs arrived from the US. The 162nd TRS moved from Itazuke to Taegu, becoming the first night reconnaissance squadron stationed in Korea.
Oct. 10: A 3rd ARS H-5 crew administered, for the first time while a helicopter was in flight, blood plasma to a rescued pilot. The crew members received Silver Stars for this action.
Oct. 12: Combat Cargo Command began an airlift of South Korean military supplies to Wonsan, which South Korean forces had captured two days earlier. It also began transporting 600 tons of bridge sections to Kimpo airfield.
Oct. 14: Two Communist aircraft raided Inchon Harbor and Kimpo airfield. FEAF suspected they had come from Sinuiju, North Korea, on the Chinese border. Chinese Communist Forces (CCF) troops began to enter North Korea from Manchuria.
Oct. 15: MacArthur, in a meeting with President Truman on Wake Island, predicted that the war would be over by Christmas and China would not intervene. CCF anti-aircraft artillery for the first time shot down an F-51 over the Yalu River near Sinuiju. Headquarters 5th Air Force in Korea opened in Seoul.
Oct. 17: Just one day after the capture of Sinmak, less than 50 miles southeast of Pyongyang, Combat Cargo Command began airlifting fuel and rations there to sustain a UN offensive toward the North Korean capital. The command also began aeromedical evacuations from Sinmak to Kimpo.
Oct. 18: An RB-29 reconnaissance crew spotted more than 75 fighters at Antung’s airfield in China, just across the Yalu River from North Korea, suggesting that Communist China might intervene in the war.
Oct. 19: After a battle at Hukkyori, some 10 miles south of the North Korean capital, UN forces entered Pyongyang. Fifth Air Force fighters provided crucial air support to US 1st Cavalry Division troops during this battle.
Oct. 20: Combat Cargo Command dropped the 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team 30 miles north of Pyongyang. Seventy-one C-119s and 40 C-47s participated in the operation, dropping more than 2,800 troops and 300 tons of equipment and supplies at Sukchon and Sunchon. The command also began airlifting Eighth Army supplies to Pyongyang.
Oct. 21: UN forces from Pyongyang linked up with the 187th paratroopers in the Sukchon and Sunchon areas. H-5s of 3rd ARS evacuated some 35 paratroopers in the first use of a helicopter in support of an airborne operation. H-5s also evacuated seven American POWs from the area. A C-47 equipped with loudspeakers persuaded some 500 enemy troops hiding in houses south of Kunmori to surrender. Combat Cargo Command began aeromedical evacuations from Pyongyang.
Oct. 23: The cargo command concluded its fourth consecutive day of airlift for the 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team. Flying Boxcars had air-dropped almost 4,000 troops and nearly 600 tons of materiel, including jeeps, trucks, and howitzers.
Oct. 24: MacArthur removed restrictions on how far US troops could move into North Korea, giving them permission to go all the way to the Chinese border.
Oct. 25: FEAF Bomber Command temporarily quit flying combat missions for lack of B-29 targets in Korea. FEAF removed all restrictions on close air support missions near the Yalu River, allowing fighter operations all the way to the Chinese border. Combat Cargo Command set a new daily record by airlifting 1,767 tons of equipment within Korea.
Oct. 26: South Korean forces reached the Yalu River along the Chinese border at Chosan in northwest Korea. Chinese forces severely savaged a South Korean battalion near Onjong. South Korean and UN troops captured the first CCF troops. Combat Cargo Command C-119s dropped supplies to friendly ground troops cut off in North Korea, delivering 28.5 tons of ammunition, fuel, and oil near Unsan, some 50 miles south of Chosan.
Oct. 27: Chinese soldiers moving into Korea attacked the South Korean 6th Infantry Division near the Yalu River. The 452nd BG flew its first B-26 combat mission in the Korean War, less than a month after it was called to active duty in the United States.
Oct. 29: C-47s made aeromedical flights from newly captured Sinanju, North Korea, the northernmost Korean airfield FEAF aircraft ever used. Sinanju was located at the mouth of the Chongchon River, some 40 miles north of Pyongyang.
Nov. 1: Three Yak fighters attacked USAF airplanes, including a B-26, over northwestern North Korea. The B-26 crew claimed one Yak, and two F-51 pilots shot down the other two enemy aircraft, scoring the first aerial victories since July. F-80s attacked Sinuiju airfield, destroying several Yak fighters on the ground, but anti-aircraft artillery located across the Yalu River shot down a FEAF jet. Later that day, six MiG-15 jets appeared for the first time in the war and fired on a T-6 and a flight of F-51 Mustangs in the Yalu River area. A regiment of the USA 1st Cavalry Division experienced a strong CCF attack in the first encounter of the war between US and Chinese ground forces.
Nov. 2: FEAF flew the first RB-45 Tornado jet reconnaissance mission in the war.
Nov. 3: In the face of strong CCF attacks, Walker ordered the bulk of Eighth Army to withdraw to the Chongchon River for regrouping and resupply.
Nov. 4: B-26s providing close support for Eighth Army attacked enemy troops near Chongju, killing an estimated 500 soldiers and providing hard-pressed US troops some relief.
Nov. 5: Bomber Command began incendiary bomb attacks on North Korean cities and towns. Twenty-one B-29s of the 19th BG dropped 170 tons of fire bombs on Kanggye, located less than 20 miles south of the Chinese border. The attack destroyed 65 percent of the town’s center.
Nov. 8: In the largest incendiary raid of the Korean War, 70 Superfortresses dropped some 580 tons of fire bombs on Sinuiju on the Chinese border. Other B-29s attacked bridges over the Yalu River for the first time. When MiG-15s challenged F-80s flying in the same area, Lt. Russell J. Brown, 16th FIS, shot down a MiG to score the first jet-to-jet aerial victory in history.
Nov. 9: A 91st SRS gunner, Sgt. Harry J. Levene, scored the first B-29 jet victory of the Korean War, destroying an attacking MiG-15. The damaged RB-29 limped back to Japan, but five crewmen died in the crash landing.
Nov. 10: MiG-15s near the Yalu River shot down a B-29 for the first time. The crew, assigned to the 307th BG, parachuted behind enemy lines and became POWs. Less than 36 hours after its arrival in Japan, the 437th TCW began airlifting cargo on C-46s to Korea.
Nov. 13: UN forces of X Corps, based in Hungnam, North Korea, began moving northward, with a regiment of the US 1st Marine Division advancing into the Changjin Reservoir area.
Nov. 14: Fifteen MiG-15s attacked 18 B-29s bombing the bridges at Sinuiju and damaged two.
Nov. 18: For the first time, a USAF fighter group moved to North Korea. The 35th FIG, which had also been the first fighter group based in South Korea, settled at Yonpo airfield, near Hungnam.
Nov. 19: In the first massed light bomber attack of the Korean War, 50 B-26s from Japan dropped incendiary bombs on Musan, North Korea, on the Tumen River border with China. The attack destroyed 75 percent of the town’s barracks area.
Nov. 20: Combat Cargo Command air-dropped rations and gasoline at Kapsan, some 20 miles south of the Yalu River, to supply the 7th Infantry Division, the US ground unit advancing the farthest north during the war.
Nov. 24: To support the UN offensive beginning this day, B-29s attacked North Korean communications and supply centers and Yalu River bridges, while 5th Air Force fighters intensified close air support missions, and Combat Cargo Command air-dropped ammunition to front-line troops.
Nov. 25: Chinese Communist Forces launched a major offensive and, with almost double the number of MacArthur’s US troops, stopped the UN offensive completely. The Royal Hellenic air force detachment, a C-47 transport unit representing Greece’s airpower contribution to the war, arrived in the Far East and was attached to FEAF.
Nov. 26: USAF B-26s flew their first close air support night missions under TACP direction. The 3rd BG flew 67 B-26 missions along Eighth Army’s bomb line in a five-hour period. Still, the enemy drove Eighth Army in northwest Korea and X Corps in northeast Korea southward.
Nov. 28: Combat Cargo Command began a two-week airlift of supplies to US troops, whom the Chinese had surrounded in the Changjin Reservoir area. From Yonpo, North Korea, the 35th FIG flew intense close air support missions for the encircled forces. For the first time, B-26s, using a more accurate radar than previously, bombed within 1,000 yards of the front line. A small Communist aircraft bombed US-held Pyongyang airfield, badly damaging 11 P-51 Mustangs on the ground. MacArthur informed Washington that he faced “an entirely new war.”
Dec. 1: USS Cape Esperance arrived in Japan with F-86 fighters of the 4th FIW. Fifth Air Force headquarters moved from Nagoya, Japan, to Seoul, and its newly activated 314th Air Division assumed responsibility for the air defense of Japan. In the first prolonged MiG attack of the war, six MiG-15s engaged three B-29s for six minutes, damaging them considerably despite the F-80 escorts. Combat Cargo Command evacuated about 1,500 UN casualties from the Pyongyang area.
Dec. 3: US troops from the Changjin Reservoir area fought their way to Hagaru-ri, while a relief column from Hungnam fought its way toward them, reaching Koto-ri, about seven miles away. Communist troops prevented the two groups from linking and encircled them both, forcing them to rely on airlift for resupply.
Dec. 4: MiG-15s shot down one of the three USAF Tornado reconnaissance aircraft in the theater, making the first successful jet bomber interception in airpower history.
Dec. 5: UN forces abandoned Pyongyang, which they had held since Oct. 19. Greek C-47s joined the Combat Cargo Command airlift to supply UN troops surrounded in northeastern Korea. The command evacuated 3,925 patients from Korea to Japan in the biggest day of the war for aeromedical airlift. Transports flew most of these from a frozen airstrip at Hagaru-ri. USAF suspended attacks on the Yalu River bridges because enemy forces were crossing the frozen river on the ice.
Dec. 6: The 27th Fighter Escort Wing (FEW), a Strategic Air Command unit from Bergstrom AFB, Tex., began flying combat operations from Taegu, introducing F-84 Thunderjet fighters to the war.
Dec. 7: FEAF B-29s bombed North Korean towns in the Changjin Reservoir area to relieve enemy pressure on US Marine and Army units attempting to break out from Hagaru-ri and Koto-ri. Troops in those two locations finally linked and built crude airstrips that allowed Combat Cargo Command airplanes to land food and ammunition and to evacuate casualties. Eight C-119s dropped bridge spans to the surrounded US troops so that they could cross a 1,500-foot-deep gorge to break the enemy encirclement. This was the first air-dropped bridge in the history of warfare.
Dec. 10: A two-week Combat Cargo Command airlift for surrounded US troops in northeastern Korea concluded after delivering 1,580 tons of supplies and equipment and moving almost 5,000 sick and wounded troops. Participating airlift units conducted 350 C-119 and C-47 flights.
Dec. 11: The X Corps began loading on ships in Hungnam Harbor.
Dec. 14: As Chinese forces approached, Combat Cargo Command began an aerial evacuation from Yonpo airfield near Hamhung. A FEAF airplane dropped the first tarzon bomb to be used in Korea on a tunnel near Huichon, with limited effectiveness. The tarzon bomb was a six-ton version of the razon bomb, but generally it did not live up to expectations.
Dec. 15: The 4th FIG inaugurated F-86 Sabrejet operations in Korea. Bomber Command launched its first mission in a new zone interdiction plan. South Korean forces completed their withdrawal from Wonsan, North Korea, and Eighth Army withdrew below the 38th parallel.
Dec. 17: Lt. Col. Bruce H. Hinton, 4th FIG, scored the first F-86 aerial victory over a MiG-15 on the first day Sabres encountered Communist jets. Combat Cargo Command abandoned Yonpo airfield to Communist forces, having transported in four days 228 patients, 3,891 other passengers, and 20,088 tons of cargo.
Dec. 20: Twelve C-54s of the 61st TCG airlifted 806 South Korean orphans from Kimpo to Cheju-Do off the South Korean coast in Operation Christmas Kidlift.
Dec. 22: One USN and five USAF pilots shot down six MiG-15s, the highest daily FEAF aerial victory credit total for the month and the highest since June. A MiG-15 shot down an F-86 for the first time. Headquarters 5th Air Force, Eighth Army in Korea headquarters, and the Joint Operations Center moved from Seoul to Taegu.
Dec. 23: Three H-5 helicopter crews with fighter cover rescued 11 US and 24 South Korean soldiers from a field eight miles behind enemy lines. Eighth Army commander Walker died in a vehicle accident north of Seoul.
Dec. 24: The X Corps completed the sea evacuation of Hungnam. More than 105,000 troops and 91,000 civilians had departed since the exodus began Dec. 11. USAF B-26s and US Navy gunfire held the enemy at bay during the night as the last ships departed. The 3rd ARS flew 35 liberated POWs from enemy territory.
Dec. 25: Chinese forces crossed the 38th parallel into South Korea.
Dec. 26: Lt. Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway, USA, took command of Eighth Army in Korea, as it absorbed X Corps.
Dec. 29: From Taegu, RF-51 aircraft began flying tactical reconnaissance missions in Korea for the first time. They had longer ranges than their RF-80 predecessors.
Dec. 31: Chinese Communist Forces in Korea launched an offensive against UN troops south of the 38th parallel. Ridgway ordered Eighth Army troops to a new defensive line 70 miles farther south.
1951
Jan. 1: As almost half a million CCF and North Korean troops launched a new ground offensive, 5th Air Force embarked on a campaign of air raids on enemy troop columns.
Jan. 2: For the first time, a C-47 dropped flares to illuminate B-26 and F-82 night attacks on enemy forces. The flares also deterred enemy night attacks on US troops. Fifth Air Force withdrew forward-based F-86s assigned to the 4th FIW from enemy-threatened Kimpo airfield near Seoul to the wing’s home station at Johnson AB, Japan.
Jan. 3: As massive numbers of Chinese troops crossed the frozen Han River east and west of Seoul, Eighth Army began evacuating the South Korean capital. The South Korean government began moving to Pusan. In one of the largest Bomber Command air raids, more than 60 B-29s dropped 650 tons of incendiary bombs on Pyongyang. UN forces burned nearly 500,000 gallons of fuel and 23,000 gallons of napalm at Kimpo in preparation for abandoning the base to the advancing enemy. FEAF flew 958 combat sorties, a one-day record.
Jan. 4: For the third time in six months, Seoul changed hands as CCF troops moved in. The last USAF aircraft left Kimpo airfield.
Jan. 5: Fifty-nine B-29s dropped 672 tons of incendiary bombs on Pyongyang. The 18th FBG staged its final missions from Suwon. US ground troops burned the buildings at Suwon’s airfield before withdrawing.
Jan. 6: Combat Cargo Command concluded a multiday airlift of supplies to the US 2nd Infantry Division, which was fighting to prevent a break in the UN defensive line across South Korea. C-47s from 21st TCS landed 115 tons of cargo at Wonju, in central Korea, and C-119s of the 314th TCG dropped 460 tons of supplies to the division.
Jan. 8: When blizzards forced USN Task Force 77 carriers to suspend close air support missions for X Corps, 5th Air Force took up the slack. Superfortresses cratered Kimpo airfield to prevent its use by enemy aircraft. US forces in central Korea withdrew to new positions three miles south of Wonju.
Jan. 10: Continued severe winter weather forced 5th Air Force to cancel close air support missions, and FEAF flew the lowest daily total of sorties since July 1950. Brig. Gen. James E. Briggs, replaced O’Donnell as commander of Bomber Command. From now on, Strategic Air Command changed commanders of Bomber Command every four months to provide wartime experience to as many officers as possible.
Jan. 11: With improved weather, 5th Air Force and Bomber Command resumed close air support missions for X Corps in north central South Korea.
Jan. 12: After Wonju fell to Communist forces, 98th BG sent 10 B-29s to attack the occupied city. For the first time, B-29s dropped 500-pound general purpose bombs fused to burst in the air and shower enemy troops with thousands of steel fragments. The innovation slowed the enemy advance. To improve bombing precision, FEAF installed shoran (a short-range navigation system) on a B-26 for the first time.
Jan. 13: FEAF flew the first effective tarzon mission against an enemy-held bridge at Kanggye, dropping a 6-ton radio-guided bomb on the center span, destroying 58 feet of the structure.
Jan. 14: Chinese Communist Forces reached their furthest extent of advance into South Korea with the capture of Wonju.
Jan. 15: The enemy began a limited withdrawal in some areas of South Korea.
Jan. 17: A 4th FIG detachment began operating from Taegu, restoring F-86 operations in Korea. For the first time, the Sabres flew in the air-to-ground role as fighter-bombers, conducting armed reconnaissance and close air support missions. FEAF temporarily suspended tarzon bombing missions because of a shortage of the radio-guided bombs. Only three, earmarked for emergencies, remained in the theater.
Jan. 17-18: Combat Cargo Command flew an extraordinary 109 C-119 sorties to drop more than 550 tons of supplies to front-line troops in Korea.
Jan. 19: FEAF launched a 13-day intensive air campaign, by fighters, light bombers, and medium bombers, to restrict to a trickle the supplies and reinforcements reaching enemy forces in the field.
Jan. 20: After weeks of almost unbroken absence, MiGs appeared again over Korea, resulting on this date in the first encounter between USAF F-84s and CCF MiG-15s.
Jan. 21: Large numbers of MiG-15s attacked USAF jets, shooting down one F-80 and one F-84. Lt. Col. William E. Bertram of the 27th FEW shot down a MiG-15 to score the first USAF aerial victory by an F-84 Thunderjet.
Jan. 23: No other day in January saw as much air action. Thirty-three F-84s staging from Taegu attacked Sinuiju, provoking a furious half-hour air battle with MiG-15s from across the Yalu. The Thunderjets shot down three MiGs, the highest daily USAF aerial victory credit total for the month. While 46 F-80s suppressed Pyongyang’s anti-aircraft artillery, 21 B-29s cratered the enemy capital’s airfields.
Jan. 25: FEAF replaced its Combat Cargo Command (Provisional) with the 315th Air Division (Combat Cargo), which reported directly to FEAF and did not depend on 5th Air Force for administrative and logistical support.
Jan. 25-Feb. 9: Eighth Army executed Operation Thunderbolt, the first UN offensive of the year. The objectives were to clear the area south of the Han River and recapture the port of Inchon and the airfield at Suwon. To sustain this offensive, 68 C-119s in five days dropped at Chunju 1,162 tons of supplies, including fuel, oil, sleeping bags, C rations, and signal wire.
Jan. 26: FEAF flew its first C-47 “control aircraft,” loaded with enough communications equipment to connect by radio all T-6 Mosquitoes, TACP, and the Tactical Air Control Center. This was the harbinger of today’s warning and control aircraft.
Jan. 30: The first USAF aircraft to land at the recaptured Suwon airfield were C-54s of the 61st TCG, delivering 270 tons of supplies for the advancing UN forces.
Jan. 31: In the first such mission recorded during the Korean War, a special operations unit of the 21st TCS dropped a UN agent behind enemy lines near Yonan, on the west coast just south of the 38th parallel.
Feb. 4: Fifth Air Force modified some B-26s to drop flares because the flare-dropping C-47s that had accompanied B-26 night raiders had trouble keeping up with the fast bombers.
Feb. 5: As part of Operation Roundup, designed to disrupt enemy preparations for a new offensive, X Corps advanced with strong air support near Hoengsong, northeast of Wonju. Maj. Arnold Mullins, 67th FBS, in an F-51 Mustang, shot down a Yak-9 seven miles north of Pyongyang to score the only USAF aerial victory of the month. Capt. Donald Nichols was transferred from Office of Special Investigations to the intelligence section of 5th Air Force to work directly on special and clandestine operations.
Feb. 6: B-26 crews proved that the new MPQ-2 radar equipment, which provided the aircrew better definition of targets, increased the accuracy of night bombing raids. To clear up a backlog of medical patients at Chungju, 315th Air Division C-47s airlifted 343 patients to Pusan. Eight C-54s airlifted a 40-ton, 310-foot treadway bridge, in 279 pieces, from Tachikawa AB, Japan, to Taegu. In a onetime effort to demoralize CCF troops, six C-119s dropped 32 booby-trapped boxes, designed to blow up when opened, on an enemy troop concentration at Kwangdong-ni. The 91st SRS performed its first night photographic mission.
Feb. 8: FEAF, using B-29s, B-26s, and fighters, launched an all-out attack on rail lines in northeastern Korea between Hoeryong and Wonsan. Brig. Gen. John P. Henebry replaced Tunner as commander of the 315th Air Division and airlift operations in the Korean War.
Feb. 9: US troops reached the Han River seven miles east-southeast of Seoul.
Feb. 10: UN forces captured the port of Inchon and the important nearby airfield at Kimpo. Air raids had cratered the field so badly that it required extensive renovation before USAF aircraft could use it. On the east coast, South Korean troops crossed the 38th parallel and entered Yangyang.
Feb. 11/12: In central Korea some 50 miles east of Seoul, Chinese and North Korean forces attacked the South Korean 3rd and 8th Divisions north and northwest of Hoengsong and in two days captured the town, forcing the UN forces toward Wonju, a few miles to the south.
Feb. 12: FEAF cargo aircraft air-dropped supplies to the X Corps command post airstrip at Wonju. A leaflet-dropping C-47 aircraft, hit by enemy anti-aircraft fire, crash-landed at Suwon. FEAF decided to launch subsequent C-47 leaflet drops at night. While B-26s attacked enemy positions at night behind the battle line by the light of air-dropped flares, two enemy aircraft used the same flare light to attack UN positions.
Feb. 13: The 315th Air Division airlifted more than 800 sick and wounded US troops from forward airstrips, such as that at Wonju, to Taegu and Pusan. This airlift used so many C-47s that they were not available for other airlift demands.
Feb. 13-16: Three CCF divisions surrounded UN troops, including members of the US 23rd Infantry Regiment and a French battalion, at a crucial road junction at Chipyong-ni in central Korea. Despite heavy enemy ground fire, 93 transports dropped some 420 tons of food and ammunition to the encircled troops. Twenty C-119s dropped supplies at night over a zone marked by burning gasoline-soaked rags. Also, H-5 helicopters delivered medical supplies to the troops and evacuated more than 40 wounded. The 5th Air Force flew close air support missions for the surrounded troops, who held out until relieved by a friendly armored column.
Feb. 16: For the first time, the US Army began using its own aircraft, the L-19 Bird Dog, for forward air control, artillery spotting, and other front-line duties, relieving 5th Air Force of demands for these types of missions.
Feb. 17/18: B-26s flew the first night bombing mission using shoran, a short-range navigation system employing an airborne radar device and two ground beacon stations for precision bombing.
Feb. 20: FEAF activated a “Special Air Mission” detachment under 315th Air Division to provide air transportation for important officials and for psychological warfare missions, for example, aerial broadcasting and leaflet drops.
Feb. 21: Eighth Army launched Operation Killer to destroy large numbers of enemy troops while moving the UN line northward to the Han River.
Feb. 23: Bomber Command flew the first B-29 mission with the more accurate MPQ-2 radar, bombing a highway bridge seven miles northeast of Seoul.
Feb. 24: The 315th Air Division dropped a record 333 tons of cargo to front-line troops, using 67 C-119s and two C-46s.
Feb. 28: UN ground forces eliminated the last Communist presence south of the Han River.
March 1: Bomber Command B-29s launched the first mission of a new interdiction campaign. Twenty-two F-80s sent to escort 18 B-29s over Kogunyong, North Korea, arrived ahead of the Superfortresses and returned to base because they were running low on fuel. MiGs attacked the unescorted B-29s, damaging 10, three of which had to land in South Korea. One B-29 gunner brought down a MiG.
March 3: A new shipment of tarzon bombs arrived in the Far East, allowing FEAF to resume raids, suspended since Jan. 17, with the large guided weapons.
March 4: Fifty-one C-119s dropped 260 tons of supplies to the 1st Marine Division in the largest airdrop of the month.
March 6: The 334th FIS used Suwon as a staging base from which F-86 Sabres began raiding the Yalu River area after being absent for months.
March 7: UN forces launched a new offensive called Operation Ripper to cross the Han River in central Korea east of Seoul, destroy large numbers of enemy troops, and break up preparations for an enemy offensive. Fifth Air Force flew more close air support missions to support the operation.
March 14: Communist forces abandoned Seoul without a fight after Ridgway’s troops seized high ground on either side of the city north of the Han River. At night B-26s began dropping specially designed tetrahedral tacks on highways to puncture the tires of enemy vehicles. They were more effective than the roofing nails dropped earlier.
March 15: UN forces entered Seoul, the fourth time the city had changed hands since the war began.
March 16: FEAF flew 1,123 effective sorties, a new daily record.
March 17: An F-80, flown by Lt. Howard J. Landry of the 36th FBS, collided with a MiG-15. Both went down with their pilots. Fifth Air Force lost no other aircraft in aerial encounters during the month.
March 20: Fifteen F-94B all-weather jet fighters arrived in the Far East for eventual service as night escorts for B-29s.
March 23: Operation Tomahawk, the second airborne operation of the war and the largest in one day, involved 120 C-119s and C-46s, escorted by 16 F-51s. The 314th TCG and the 437th TCW air transports flew from Taegu to Munsan-ni, an area behind enemy lines some 20 miles northwest of Seoul, and dropped the 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team and two Ranger companies-more than 3,400 men and 220 tons of equipment and supplies. Fifth Air Force fighters and light bombers had largely eliminated enemy opposition. UN forces advanced quickly to the Imjin River, capturing 127 Communist prisoners. Some of the prisoners waved safe-conduct leaflets that FEAF aircraft had dropped during the airborne operation. Helicopters evacuated only 68 injured personnel from the drop zone. One C-119, possibly hit by enemy bullets, caught fire and crashed on the way back. On the same day, 22 B-29s of the 19th and 307th BGs, protected from MiGs by 45 F-86s, destroyed two bridges in northwestern Korea.
March 24: For the first time, FEAF used an H-19, a service test helicopter, in Korea for the air evacuation of wounded troops. The H-19 was considerably larger and more powerful, with greater range, than the H-5s.
March 24, 26-27: Fifty-two C-119s and C-46s dropped an additional 264 tons of supplies to troops at Munsan-ni, because they could not depend on surface lines of communication for supplies.
March 29: With fighter escorts, B-29s returned to the Yalu River to bomb bridges, which had become important targets again as the river ice thawed. Fifth Air Force light bombers and fighters, which had handled interdiction in the area during the winter, could not destroy the larger Yalu River bridges.
March 31: Flight Lt. J.A.O. Levesque, Royal Canadian Air Force, flying with the 334th FIS, scored the first aerial victory since 1950 of an F-86 over a MiG-15. Elements of Eighth Army moved northward across the 38th parallel. The 3rd ARS used the H-19 to retrieve some 18 UN personnel from behind enemy lines, the first use of this type helicopter in a special operations mission. The 315th Air Division grounded its C-119s for modification and reconditioning.
April 3: The service-test YH-19 helicopter with the 3rd ARS picked up a downed F-51 pilot southeast of Pyongyang, receiving small-arms fire during the sortie.
April 12: As of this date in the war, the heaviest concentration of B-29s against a single bridge encountered the largest and most determined enemy counterair effort, resulting in the largest jet air battle so far in the war. Forty-six B-29s attacking the Yalu River bridge at Sinuiju and 100 escorting fighters encountered between 100 and 125 MiGs, which shot down three bombers and damaged seven others. However, B-29 gunners destroyed seven MiGs, and F-86 pilots downed four more, the highest daily MiG tally thus far. The bridge, despite numerous direct hits, remained standing. At President Truman’s direction, Eighth Army commander Ridgway replaced MacArthur, who had several times publicly criticized the Administration’s Korean War and foreign policies.
April 14: Lt. Gen. James A. Van Fleet assumed command of Eighth Army.
April 16-20: Bomber Command flew a daily average of 10 B-29 sorties against Pyongyang, Kangdong, Yonpo, and other North Korean airfields.
April 17: President Truman signed an executive order extending US military enlistments involuntarily by nine months, an indication of the manpower shortage facing the military services during the war. An intelligence operation behind enemy lines resulted in the recovery of vital components of a crashed MiG-15. In Operation MiG, a YH-19 helicopter transported a US and South Korean team to the crash area south of Sinanju. Under friendly fighter cover, the party extracted MiG components and samples and obtained photographs. On the return flight southward the helicopter came under enemy ground fire and received one hit. The successful mission led to greater technical knowledge of the MiG.
April 18: H-5 helicopters from the 3rd ARS evacuated 20 critically wounded US soldiers from front-line aid stations to the nearest field hospital. Five of the 10 sorties encountered enemy fire.
April 19: The first modified and reconditioned C-119 returned to service.
April 21: An SA-16, 3rd ARS, attempted to pick up a downed enemy Yak pilot near Chinnampo for intelligence purposes. The aircrew landed and put out a raft but had to take off because of intense enemy fire, leaving the Yak pilot behind.
April 22/23: Enemy ground forces launched a massive spring offensive.
April 23: FEAF flew some 340 close air support sorties, one of the highest daily totals prior to 1953. The 336th FIS began operating from Suwon, so that its F-86 aircraft could operate for longer periods in MiG Alley near the Yalu River.
April 23-26: FEAF daily flew over 1,000 combat sorties, inflicting enemy casualties and destroying supplies needed to sustain the offensive.
April 24: On separate pickups, an H-5 helicopter from the 3rd ARS rescued first the pilot then the navigator of a downed B-26 near Chorwon, about 15 miles north of the 38th parallel, in the central sector. The navigator, suffering a broken leg, had been captured by two enemy soldiers. But he managed to seize a gun belonging to one of the enemy, causing them to run for cover. Friendly fighters kept them pinned down, while the helicopter made the pickup.
April 26/27: At night, over the western sector, a B-29 close air support strike against enemy troops forming for an attack on the US Army IX Corps broke up the assault.
April 30: Fifth Air Force set a new record of 960 effective sorties. On separate sorties, two H-5 helicopters each picked up a downed UN pilot behind enemy lines. Small-arms fire damaged one helicopter. The first indication of enemy radar-controlled anti-aircraft guns came with the loss of three out of four F-51s making an air-to-ground attack against a target at Sinmak.
May 5: An H-5 helicopter from the 3rd ARS rescued a downed F-51 pilot north of Seoul, encountering small-arms fire in the area.
May 8: Another H-5 helicopter picked up two US soldiers north of Seoul, encountering small-arms fire in the area.
May 9: In one of the largest counterair efforts so far, 5th Air Force and 1st Marine Air Wing fighter-bombers flew more than 300 sorties against Sinuiju airfield in extreme northwestern Korea.
May 15/16: As anticipated, the Communists launched the second phase of their spring offensive against the South Korean corps in the east, a last vain attempt to drive UN forces from the Korean peninsula. The enemy limited its tactical assaults to night because of FEAF daytime aerial attacks.
May 16-26: In a maximum effort, 315th cargo aircraft flew an average of more than 1,000 tons of supplies daily from Japan to Korea to support UN ground forces seeking to halt the Communist offensive.
May 17-22: Bomber Command B-29s flew 94 (mostly nighttime) sorties against enemy ground forces, far more close air support missions in a similar period than previously in the war. The B-29s flew few other type missions during this time.
May 19: An H-5 helicopter rescued a downed F-51 pilot southwest of Chorwon in the central sector, sustaining damage from small-arms fire during the pickup.
May 20: Capt. James Jabara, 334th FIS, destroyed his fifth and sixth MiGs in aerial combat, thereby becoming the world’s first jet-to-jet ace. Eighth Army successfully blunted the Communist offensive, leaving the enemy overextended and under constant aerial attack. Stratemeyer, FEAF commander, suffered a severe heart attack.
May 21: Partridge assumed command of FEAF. Maj. Gen. Edward J. Timberlake took his place as 5th Air Force commander.
May 22: In close air support sorties, 5th Air Force fighter-bombers inflicted some 1,700 casualties on enemy forces, one of the highest daily totals thus far.
May 23: Brig. Gen. Robert H. Terrill assumed command of Bomber Command, replacing Briggs.
May 24: The 136th FBW, one of two Air National Guard organizations sent to Korea, flew its first combat sorties of the war.
May 27-28: Unit 4/Special Air Mission C-47s flew leaflet-drop/voice-broadcast sorties encouraging the enemy to surrender to elements of the US Army’s IX Corps. Some 4,000 enemy soldiers surrendered, many carrying leaflets. The captives reported morale problems among the enemy because of UN aerial attacks.
May 31: Fifth Air Force began Operation Strangle, an interdiction campaign against enemy supply lines in North Korea.
June 1: One flight of F-86s from the 336th FIS, escorting B-29s, engaged 18 MiG-15s, destroying two. A flight of 343rd BS B-29s defended itself against 22 MiG-15s in the vicinity of Sonchon. The MiGs destroyed one B-29 and damaged another, while the defenders destroyed two enemy jets. Special Air Mission C-47s dropped 15 Koreans into enemy-held territory to retrieve parts from a crashed MiG-15. Unfortunately, Communist forces captured all 15. Maj. Gen. Frank F. Everest, assumed command of 5th Air Force, replacing Timberlake.
June 3: UN anti-aircraft artillery destroyed two 315th C-119s while the aircraft were attempting a resupply airdrop. This fratricide incident led to the adoption of new procedures for Identification, Friend or Foe during air-drop operations.
June 7-10: B-26 and B-29 aircraft undertook radar-directed area attacks against the Iron Triangle-the vital Chorwon-Kumhwa-Pyongyang communications and supply area-at night, raining 500-pound bombs set to explode over the heads of the enemy troops. These operations were in preparation for UN ground forces’ assaults.
June 10: The airfield at Chunchon, some 50 miles northeast of Seoul and 10 miles south of the 38th parallel, opened to cargo traffic, adding to 315th Air Division’s ability to meet the growing demand for air-drop capability. In Tokyo, Lt. Gen. Otto P. Weyland assumed command of FEAF, replacing Partridge.
June 11: An SA-16 of the 3rd ARS made a pickup at dusk of a downed F-51 pilot from the Taedong River near Kyomipo, North Korea. The SA-16, although receiving fire from both sides of the river, made a landing approach without lights, avoiding low electrical transmission lines and rocks and debris on the river’s surface. The pilot earned the Distinguished Service Cross for the rescue.
June 15: Fifth Air Force moved its headquarters from Taegu back to Seoul.
June 23: Jacob Malik, Soviet ambassador to the United Nations, called for negotiations between representatives of UN forces and Communist forces for an armistice in Korea based upon the separation of the armies along the 38th parallel.
June 25: The 8th FBG moved to Kimpo after completion of repairs to Kimpo’s short runway. This marked the resumption of combat operations at Kimpo, although aviation engineers continued their work to restore the main runway.
July 1: Kim Il Sung, North Korean premier, and Paeng Te-huai, CCF commander, responded to UN overtures and agreed to participate in truce negotiations. Pioneer in aerial reconnaissance, Col. Karl L. Polifka, commander, 67th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing (TRW), was shot down and killed, while flying an RF-51 near the front lines.
July 6: An Air Materiel Command KB-29M tanker, operated by a Strategic Air Command crew assigned to the 43rd ARS, conducted the first in-flight refueling over enemy territory under combat conditions. The tanker refueled four RF-80 Shooting Stars flying reconnaissance missions over North Korea.
July 10: Naval Forces, Far East, commander Joy led the UN delegation that met the Communists at Kaesong, some 30 miles northwest of Seoul and just south of the 38th parallel, in the first conference of the armistice negotiations. A flight of F-80s reported a long convoy of NKA trucks and tanks halted by a demolished bridge. Fifth Air Force diverted every available aircraft to attack with bombs, rockets, and gunfire, resulting in the destruction of over 150 vehicles, a third of them tanks.
July 14: In one of the more spectacular night strikes of the war, a single B-26 of the 452nd BG attacked two enemy convoys north of Sinanju in the early morning hours, claiming 68 destroyed or damaged vehicles.
July 21: A detachment of the 6004th Air Intelligence Service Squadron completed a week-long effort near Cho-do Island to recover the most components ever salvaged from a MiG-15 aircraft. This combined operation involved 5th Air Force aircraft providing high cover, British carrier aircraft flying low cover, and the US Army contributing a vessel outfitted with a crane.
July 24: The 116th FBW, the second Air National Guard wing deployed to the Far East, arrived with its F-84 Thunderjets at Misawa and Chitose ABs in Japan.
July 25: Fifth Air Force directed the formal establishment of an air defense system for South Korea, utilizing the resources of the 502nd Tactical Control Group and its subordinate squadrons.
July 29: UN jet fighter-bombers and reconnaissance aircraft operating near Pyongyang encountered MiGs much farther south than usual. Evading the attacking MiGs, the UN aircraft returned safely to base.
July 30: In the largest single mass attack for the month on targets in the Pyongyang area, 91 F-80s suppressed enemy air defenses while 354 USMC and USAF fighter-bombers attacked specified military targets. To avoid adverse world public opinion during ongoing peace negotiations, the Joint Chiefs of Staff withheld information on the strike from the news media.
Aug. 4: Communist ground forces violated the Kaesong neutral zone, resulting in suspension of truce talks.
Aug. 10: Armistice negotiations resume at Kaesong with the North Korean promise to respect the neutral zone.
Aug. 17: A typhoon at Okinawa halted B-29 operations.
Aug. 18: FEAF began Operation Strangle against North Korean railroads.
Aug. 22: The Communist delegation trumped up evidence that a UN aircraft bombed Kaesong, resulting in suspension of the armistice negotiations once again.
Aug. 24/25: B-26s claimed over 800 trucks destroyed in the new campaign of night anti-truck operations.
Aug. 25: In Bomber Command’s largest operation of the month, 35 B-29s, escorted by USN fighters, dropped 300 tons of bombs on marshaling yards at Rashin in far northeastern Korea. Previously excluded from target lists because of its proximity of less than 20 miles to the Soviet border, Rashin was a major supply depot.
Sept. 9: Seventy MiGs attacked 28 Sabres between Sinanju and Pyongyang. Despite such odds, F-86 pilots, Capt. Richard S. Becker, 334th FIS, and Capt. Ralph D. Gibson, 335th FIS, each destroyed a MiG, increasing the number of jet aces from one to three.
Sept. 10: South of Pyongyang a 3rd ARS H-5 helicopter, with fighter escort, rescued F-80 pilot Capt. Ward M. Millar, 7th FBS. He had suffered two broken ankles during his ejection from the jet but escaped after two months as a prisoner and then evaded recapture for three weeks. The helicopter also brought out an NKA sergeant who had assisted Millar, delivering both to Seoul.
Sept. 14: Capt. John S. Walmsley Jr., 8th BS, on a night B-26 interdiction sortie, attacked an enemy train, expending his ordnance. He then used a USN searchlight experimentally mounted on his aircraft’s wing to illuminate the target for another B-26. Shot down and killed by ground fire, Walmsley earned the Medal of Honor for his valorous act.
Sept. 23: In an excellent example of shoran bombing technique, eight B-29s from the 19th BG knocked out the center span of the Sunchon rail bridge despite nine-tenths cloud cover.
Sept. 24: Attempts to reopen peace talks at Kaesong failed.
Sept. 25: In the largest air battle in recent weeks, an estimated 100 MiG-15s attacked 36 F-86s flying a fighter sweep over the Sinanju area. Sabre pilots destroyed five MiGs in aerial combat, the daily high for the month.
Sept. 27: In Operation Pelican, a service-test C-124A Globemaster flew its first payload from Japan to Korea, delivering 30,000 pounds of aircraft parts to Kimpo airfield.
Sept. 28: On the longest flight to date for a jet aircraft using in-flight refueling, a Yokota-based RF-80 flew for 14 hours and 15 minutes on a Korean combat sortie, refueling multiple times from two KB-29M tankers.
Sept. 30: Replacing Terrill, Brig. Gen. Joe W. Kelly assumed command of Bomber Command.
Oct. 1-3: In Operation Snowball, 315th C-119s experimentally dropped 55-gallon drums filled with napalm behind enemy lines.
Oct. 10: FEAF marked a significant date for the Chinese, the anniversary of the overthrow of the Manchu Dynasty, by dropping special leaflets and making radio broadcasts aimed at Chinese Communist Forces in Korea.
Oct. 16: Fifth Air Force Sabre pilots destroyed nine MiG-15s in aerial combat, a record daily high.
Oct. 16/17: B-29s flew 31 day and night sorties, the high for the month, including attacks against rail bridges, marshaling yards, and the Samchang airfield and leaflet drop and reconnaissance sorties.
Oct. 19: The US Army opened a 1,000-bed hospital at Camp Drew, north of Tachikawa AB, Japan. Henceforth, C-54s flew medical evacuees from Korea to Tachikawa, then C-47s shuttled them to Camp Drew, thereby reducing transit time.
Oct. 21-30: The enemy flew sorties over North Korea daily for the first time in the war. MiGs appeared in numbers over 100, consistently outnumbering their F-86 counterparts and downing three F-86s at a cost of five MiGs lost to Sabres.
Oct. 22: Two 3rd ARS SA-16s rescued the 12-man crew of a downed B-29, the highest number rescued by SA-16s on any day in the war.
Oct. 23: In one of the bloodiest air battles of the war, during a 307th BW raid on Namsi airfield, MiG-15s destroyed three B-29s and one F-84 and damaged five other bombers. Fighter pilots and B-29 gunners shot down five MiGs.
Oct. 25: In an unusually effective close air support strike, F-51 Mustangs inflicted approximately 200 casualties on enemy troops in the I Corps sector. Enemy small-arms fire hit a rescue helicopter picking up a downed UN pilot. The H-5 made a forced landing in enemy territory. The next day, two other H-5s hoisted all four men to safety from the mountainside where they had hidden from Communist troops during the night. At the request of the Communists, peace negotiations resumed.
Oct. 27: MiGs flew approximately 200 sorties, the high for the month. On a last medium bomber daylight raid, B-29 gunners shot down six MiG-15s, their highest number of enemy aircraft downed on any day of the war. A 3rd ARS H-5, with fighter escort, rescued a downed UN fighter pilot despite intense fire from enemy ground troops.
Oct. 31: The service-test C-124A departed for the United States, having successfully completed its test in the Far East and convinced the 315th Air Division of the need for a Globemaster squadron.
Nov. 3: Enemy ground fire damaged a 3rd ARS SA-16 engaged in a failed rescue attempt; however, the aircrew, in spite of six- to eight-foot seas, successfully landed in Korea Bay, off the west coast of North Korea, and rescued another downed pilot.
Nov. 4: Thirty-four F-86s encountered an estimated 60 MiG-15s in the Sinamju area. The F-86 pilots destroyed two and damaged three others.
Nov. 6: Eleven enemy piston-type, twin-engine light bombers, probably TU-2s, bombed Taehwa-do, a UN-controlled island. This raid was the first confirmed report of air-to-ground action by an enemy light bomber formation since the Korean War started.
Nov. 8: F-86s and F-80s encountered more than 100 MiG-15s, but only a small number chose to fight. USAF pilots destroyed one MiG and damaged another, while losing one F-86.
Nov. 9: A C-47 landed on the beach of Paengnyong-do Island, off the southwest coast of North Korea, and rescued 11 crewmen of a downed B-29. The 19th BG attacked marshaling yards at Hwang-ju, Kowon, and Yangdok; the Saamcham airfield; and a barracks area. In other night attacks, 98th BW B-29s bombed Taechon airfield, flew five close support sorties and a leaflet sortie, and struck Hungnam.
Nov. 12: Peace negotiations moved to Panmunjom, a village less than five miles east of Kaesong, in a newly established demilitarized zone on the 38th parallel. UN Command ceased offensive ground operations.
Nov. 16: Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers made more than 100 rail cuts between Sinanju and Sukchon and between Kunu-ri and Sunchon. They also damaged bridges, knocked out gun positions, destroyed supply buildings, fired fuel dumps, and took a toll of enemy railcars.
Nov. 18: F-86 aircraft strafed eight MiG fighters on the ground at Uiju, destroyed four, and damaged the rest. MiG-15s forced three flights of F-84 fighter-bombers to jettison their bombs and abort prebriefed rail-cutting missions near Sinanju.
Nov. 24: In night operations, 98th BW bombed Taechon airfield and the marshaling yard at Tongchon and flew five close support sorties; 307th BW bombed the marshaling yard at Hambusong-ji; and 19th BG bombed Namsi airfield, the Hoeyang highway bridge, and the marshaling yards at Munchon and Hambusong-ji.
Nov. 27: Maj. Richard D. Creighton, 4th FIG, shot down a MiG to become the fourth ace of the war.
Nov. 28: Representatives of all intelligence gathering organizations in Korea met at Far East Command, Liaison Division, to discuss how to coordinate their activities. Capt. Donald Nichols represented Det. 2, 6004th Air Intelligence Service Squadron. The conference resulted in the establishment of the Combined Command for Reconnaissance Activities in Korea.
Nov. 30: In one of the largest aerial battles of the war, F-86 pilots of the 4th FIG engaged over the island of Taehwa-do 44 enemy aircraft flying south to bomb a UN target. The Sabre pilots destroyed 12 and damaged three others. Maj. George A. Davis Jr., 334th FIS, achieved Korean War ace status by downing a Tu-2 and a MiG-15. He was the first to be an ace in two wars, since he had been an ace in World War II, as well. Maj. Winton W. Marshall, 335th FIS, also became an ace, destroying an La-9 and a Tu-2. Enemy forces attacked Taehwa-do, north of Cho-do, forcing friendly forces to retreat to Cho-do. Fifth Air Force aircraft dislodged the enemy, enabling friendly forces to retake the island.
Dec. 3: Enemy jets made their first air-ground attack of the war, bombing and strafing UN ground positions near Chorwon, almost 60 miles northeast of Seoul.
Dec. 13: Twenty-nine F-86s encountered 75 MiG-15s over Sinanju, and in a wild melee the F-86 pilots shot down nine MiGs, giving USAF pilots a total of 13 aerial victories for the day.
Dec. 14: In the night, 19th BG B-29s inflicted severe damage on marshaling yards at Maengjung-dong.
Dec. 19: The 307th BW sent 10 B-29s to bomb marshaling yards at Chongju.
Dec. 21: Fifth Air Force units flew 530 sorties, making 30 cuts in the main rail line between Sinanju and Sukchon and attacking a supply complex near Kunu-ri.
Dec. 24: In a typical nighttime mission, B-29s from the 98th BW cratered the runway at Taechon airfield and bombed the railroad bridge at Sinanju.
Dec. 27: FEAF aircraft flew 900 sorties, the largest number of the month, damaging or destroying locomotives, railcars, buildings, vehicles, and gun positions.
1952
Jan. 12: F-84s caught three supply trains at Sunchon, racing for the shelter of a tunnel. They blasted the tunnel mouth shut, trapping the trains in the open, then destroyed the boxcars and at least two locomotives.
Jan. 12/13: Ten Okinawa-based Superfortresses dropped 396 high-explosive 500-pound bombs on the railroad bridge east of Sinanju across the Chongchong River, rendering the bridge unserviceable.
Jan. 25: A helicopter rescued a downed airman, near the coastline of the Yellow Sea, while F-84s strafed enemy troops in the area. Escorting F-86s destroyed three MiG-15s during the pickup. In other air-to-air combat, UN jets destroyed six and damaged four Communist aircraft.
Jan. 26: A rescue helicopter, behind enemy lines near the coastline of the Yellow Sea, received small-arms fire while rescuing an F-84 pilot, Capt. A.T. Thawley.
Feb. 9: In a typical mission, 10 medium bombers used radar-aiming methods to drop 100 tons of 500-pound bombs, rendering the north bypass Chongju rail bridge unserviceable.
Feb. 10: Leading a flight of three F-86s on a patrol near the Manchurian border, Maj. George A. Davis Jr. engaged 12 MiG-15s in aerial combat. Davis shot down two enemy aircraft and completely disrupted the enemy formation, but the MiGs destroyed his aircraft as well. Because he executed his attack against superior numbers and successfully protected the fighter-bombers his flight had been escorting, Davis posthumously received the Medal of Honor for his valor.
Feb. 16-22: MiG-15 pilots flew close to 1,400 sorties this week.
Feb. 17: Fifth Air Force flew an impressive 695 sorties, cratering rail tracks in more than 50 locations, damaging a locomotive and 15 railcars north of Huichon, strafing a convoy of trucks near Sinanju, and destroying supply buildings and dumps between Kumsong and Sibyon-ni.
Feb. 19: The Communists flew approximately 389 MiG-15 sorties, the largest aerial effort to date. In aerial combat, USAF pilots destroyed three enemy aircraft.
Feb. 23: By shooting down a MiG-15, Maj. William T. Whisner Jr., 25th FIS, achieved ace status.
Feb. 26: Ten Superfortresses, using radar-aiming methods, dropped 100 tons of bombs on the Sinhung-dong railroad bridge near Huichon in north central Korea, knocking out two spans. Col. Cecil H. Childre replaced Henebry as commander, 315th Air Division.
March 5: While jet fighters stilled enemy anti-aircraft fire, a USAF helicopter lowered a hoist sling and rescued a downed USN pilot in the vicinity of Yongyon.
March 11: Fighter-bombers dropped 150 tons of bombs and approximately 33,000 gallons of napalm on a four-square-mile supply storage and troop training area near Sinmak. Fifth Air Force operations officers reported this to be the most intensive napalm attack on a single area in the war.
March 11/12: Ten B-29s struck the Sinchang-ni choke point, 10 miles east of Sunchon, with 91 tons of high explosives, rendering the point unpassable.
March 15: Brig. Gen. Wiley D. Ganey replaced Kelly as commander, Bomber Command.
March 20: In the Sui-ho Reservoir area, MiG-15s attacked a USAF patrol. The F-86 pilots destroyed five MiGs and damaged approximately 13 others.
March 25: Fifth Air Force flew 959 sorties, concentrating on interdiction of the rail line from Sinanju to Chongju and making approximately 142 cuts in the track. Some aircraft struck the Sunchon-Pyongyang highway, scoring 27 hits.
March 27: A helicopter crew, learning that Chinese troops had captured a downed US pilot near Pyoksong, made several low passes, enabling him to escape. While one helicopter crew member fired at the Chinese soldiers with a rifle, others lowered a hoist and rescued the pilot.
March 31/April 1: Bomber Command B-29s flew 29 sorties, approximately twice the normal rate, mostly against the Sinhung-dong rail bridge and Kwaksan railroad track.
April 1: Fifth Air Force Sabre pilots destroyed 10 MiGs while losing one F-86. Col. Francis S. Gabreski, commander, 51st FIW, destroyed a MiG to become the eighth jet ace of the war.
April 3: In aerial combat, Capt. Robert H. Moore, 336th FIS, destroyed his fifth MiG to become an ace.
April 6: In air-to-air operations, Capt. Iven C. Kincheloe Jr., 25th FIS, destroyed a MiG, becoming the war’s 10th ace.
April 10: Brig. Gen. Chester E. McCarty assumed command of the 315th for the remainder of the war.
April 14: The first Air Force Reserve wing ordered to active duty service, the 403rd TCW (Medium), arrived at Ashiya. An SA-16 of the 3rd ARS, while under enemy small-arms fire from the shoreline, rescued a US naval aviator from the water.
April 21: In aerial combat, Capt. Robert J. Love, 335th FIS, destroyed two MiGs to become an ace.
April 22: Because of shortage of fighter-bombers, 5th Air Force assigned Sabres of the 4th FIW and 51st FIW a new commitment-the armed reconnaissance of enemy lines of communication.
April 26: In air-to-air operations, Maj. William H. Wescott, 51st FIG, destroyed his fifth MiG in four weeks to become the war’s 12th ace.
April 28: An H-19 helicopter of the 3rd ARS picked up a downed Royal Netherlands air force Sea Fury pilot. It was the second time in three weeks that the same pilot had been picked up by a 3rd ARS helicopter.
April 29-30: Unrelated crashes of a C-47, a C-119, and a C-46 claimed the lives of 16 people, the greatest loss for the 315th Air Division in the first half of 1952.
May 3: Sabre pilots destroyed five MiG-15s, with Maj. Donald E. Adams, 16th FIS, destroying two and Capt. Robert T. Latshaw Jr., 335th FIS, downing another to increase the number of aces to 14.
May 4: Twenty-five F-86s strafed and destroyed five of 24 Yak-9s parked in revetments at Sinuiju airfield.
May 8: In the first of four major interdiction strikes, 5th Air Force fighter-bombers flew approximately 465 sorties against the enemy supply depot at Suan, located about 40 miles southeast of Pyongyang, in the largest one-day attack since the war began. Over a 13-hour period, the UN pilots damaged or destroyed more than 200 supply buildings, personnel shelters, revetments, vehicles, and gun positions. Enemy anti-aircraft fire downed an F-86 on a dive-bombing strike against the Kunu-ri marshaling yards, the first loss of a Sabre on a fighter-bomber sortie.
May 12: Gen. Mark W. Clark, USA, replaced Ridgway as CINC, UN Command and Far East Command.
May 13: Fifth Air Force Sabres destroyed five MiG-15s in aerial combat. In the morning, 12 F-86s attacked targets in Sinuiju and Sinuiju and Uiju airfields. In early afternoon, Sabres struck the marshaling yards at Kunu-ri and, in late afternoon, bombed Sinuiju with 1,000-pound bombs. Unfortunately, Col. Walker M. Mahurin, commander, 4th FIG, who had led all three missions, was shot down and captured.
May 15: Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers flew 265 sorties against a vehicle repair factory at Tang-dong, north of Pyongyang, destroying at least 39 buildings and a power plant. First Lt. James H. Kasler, 335th FIS, destroyed two MiGs to become an ace.
May 16-17: In an outstanding example of emergency unit movement by air, 315th C-119, C-54, and C-46 aircraft transported 2,361 members of the 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team and combat equipment, vehicles, and supplies from Japan to Pusan. The team quelled rioting POWs at Koje-do, where the UN Command had established a large POW compound.
May 18: An SA-16 amphibian from the 3rd ARS, while under fire from the enemy shoreline, rescued a downed F-84 pilot.
May 20: Col. Harrison R. Thyng, commander, 4th FIW, destroyed his fifth MiG to become the 16th jet ace of the war.
May 22: Fifth Air Force flew 472 fighter-bomber sorties against the Kijang-ni industrial area southwest of Pyongyang to destroy more than 90 percent of the complex, which produced hand grenades, small arms, and ammunition.
May 23: In the last of four major interdiction strikes, 5th Air Force flew 275 fighter-bomber sorties against a steel factory complex in the Kijang-ni area, destroying 80 percent of the target. Because of poor weather, an H-19 helicopter from 3rd ARS flew most of a sortie on instruments and picked up a downed Marine Corps AD-2 pilot-one of the first instances of a primarily instruments helicopter rescue.
May 23/24: B-26s seeded the Kijang-ni area with delayed-action bombs to hamper repair efforts.
May 26: The 315th Air Division received its first Globemaster as two squadrons began the conversion from C-54 to C-124 aircraft.
May 26/27: Ten B-29s from the 19th BG attacked the Sinhung-dong rail bridge, destroying one locomotive, 16 boxcars, 350 linear feet of the bridge, and nearly 400 feet of track on the approaches.
May 30: Lt. Gen. Glenn O. Barcus replaced Everest as commander, 5th Air Force.
June 4: An H-19 helicopter of 3rd ARS picked up a downed British pilot, encountering automatic weapons fire during the rescue.
June 6: Fifth Air Force Sabres destroyed eight MiGs in aerial combat, the highest daily tally for the month.
June 7: In initiation of an air refueling test, code-named Operation Hightide, 35 F-84 Thunderjets took off from Japan, refueled from KB-29M aircraft over Korea, and attacked targets in the north.
June 9: A 3rd ARS H-19 helicopter picked up a downed UN pilot, encountering moderate small-arms fire en route.
June 10/11: Eight 19th BG B-29s attacked the rail bridge at Kwaksan. Enemy MiGs, operating in conjunction with radar-controlled searchlights and flak, destroyed two B-29s and badly damaged a third. This new development in the enemy’s air defense system prompted FEAF to improve electronic countermeasures to jam and confuse enemy radar.
June 14: Following reconnaissance flights that indicated repairs at the Pyongyang airfield, 5th Air Force fighter-bombers cratered the runways, rendering them unserviceable in approximately 150 sorties without a loss.
June 15: In aerial combat, 2nd Lt. James F. Low, 335th FIS, destroyed his fifth MiG, becoming an ace just six months after completing flight training.
June 19/20: B-29s flew 35 sorties against North Korean targets, nearly three times the nightly average for the month. Twenty-seven medium bombers attacked the Huichon rail bridge.
June 23: Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers, with F-86 cover, flew approximately 250 sorties against North Korean hydroelectric power plants. The Sui-ho complex sustained 70 percent structural damage, rendering it nonoperational.
June 24: FEAF flew 1,043 sorties, the highest daily total for the month. Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers flew more than 250 sorties against North Korean hydroelectric power plants, four of them having been targets the previous day.
June 24/25: Twenty-six B-29s flew close air support sorties, one of the largest such medium bomber missions since the early days of the war. Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers rendered temporarily unserviceable the Samdong-ni rail complex, the choke point of the east-west and north-south rail lines in North Korea. Night-flying B-26s seeded the area with delayed-action bombs to hamper repair efforts.
June 30: The first two aircrews of the 374th TCW completed their proficiency checks in the C-124 Globemaster.
July 3: McCarty, 315th Air Division commander, flew the 374th TCW’s first operational C-124 from Japan to Korea. In 13 sorties over enemy territory, C-47s dropped more than 22 million leaflets, over one-sixth of all dropped during the month.
July 4: Approximately 53 MiGs, some piloted by Soviets, attacked some 50 F-86s and 70 F-84s during a raid on the North Korean military academy at Sakchu near the Yalu. Fifth Air Force pilots downed 13 MiG-15s at a cost of two Sabres. Although four MiGs succeeded in passing through the protective fighter screen, they failed to destroy any fighter-bombers. Bombing results were poor, however.
July 10: Beginning this date, over the next three weeks the 315th airlifted the 474th FBW from Misawa to Kunsan, the largest unit movement by air to date.
July 11: FEAF flew 1,329 sorties, the highest daily total for the month. In the first raid of Operation Pressure Pump, nearly every operational air unit in the Far East attacked 30 targets in Pyongyang, in the largest single strike so far of the war. Attacking aircraft destroyed three targets, including the North Korean Ministry of Industry. Most others sustained heavy damage.
July 11/12: As part of Pressure Pump, B-29s flew 71 effective sorties, more than 50 against the Pyongyang supply area.
July 13: FEAF initiated a new general-warning leaflet-drop program over enemy territory. The new leaflet identified specific towns and targets to be destroyed by air attacks.
July 15: Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers flew approximately 175 sorties against the Sungho-ri cement plant and a nearby locomotive repair facility.
July 20: Fifty-eight F-84Gs of the 31st FEW arrived in Japan, the first large-scale Pacific crossing of jet fighters using in-flight refueling.
July 30: Following extended heavy rains, helicopters of the 3rd ARS carried approximately 650 flood-stranded US military members and Koreans to safety. Flying more than 100 sorties, five large H-19s transported some 600 evacuees, while two H-5s carried the rest. In the I Corps sector, two H-5s flew more than 30 sorties to rescue 60 flood-stranded Koreans and US soldiers.
July 30/31: In one of the largest medium bomber raids against a single target, 60 B-29s destroyed a noteworthy 90 percent of the Oriental Light Metals Co. facility, only four miles from the Yalu River. The B-29s achieved the unusually extensive destruction of the target in spite of encountering the largest nighttime counterair effort to date by the enemy. The attacking bombers suffered no losses.
Aug. 6: Fifth Air Force pilots observed an estimated 250 MiGs, the largest daily total since April 1. In the major air-to-air battle of the month, 34 F-86s destroyed six of 52 MiG-15s. FEAF organized Det. 3, 6004th Air Intelligence Service Squadron, to increase effectiveness of evasion and escape techniques by downed airmen. The detachment continued ongoing experiments, such as “snatching” downed personnel by especially equipped C-47s. It also emphasized aircrew training in emergency procedures, the use of radios and survival equipment, and helicopter rescue procedures.
Aug. 7-8: Capt. Clifford D. Jolley, 335th FIS, destroyed three additional MiGs in two days to become the 18th ace of the war.
Aug. 8: Fifth Air Force fighters flew 285 close air support sorties, the highest daily total for the month. Indicative of FEAF’s increased use of propaganda, at night B-26s flew three voice-broadcast sorties totaling almost four hours over enemy-held positions near the east coast.
Aug. 15: The 315th transported 300 medical evacuees, the highest daily total for the month.
Aug. 19/20: FEAF aircraft dropped general-warning leaflets over Pyongyang concerning the next night’s attacks.
Aug. 20/21: Thirty-eight B-29s bombed supply areas of the enemy’s capital, the highest number of medium bomber sorties against a single target this month.
Aug. 22-23: On successive nights, three C-47s flew 60-minute voice-broadcast sorties near the front lines, indicating a greater emphasis by UN Command on psychological war.
Aug. 29: At the request of the US Department of State, FEAF conducted against Pyongyang the largest air attack to date as a dramatic military action during a visit by China’s foreign minister, Chou En-lai, to the Soviet Union. The State Department hoped that the attack might lead the Soviets to urge the Chinese to accept an armistice rather than expend further Communist resources in the war. FEAF aircraft, protected by USAF Sabres and RAAF Meteors, flew approximately 1,400 air-to-ground sorties. The 31 targets sustained moderate to severe damage, but 5th Air Force lost three aircraft to ground fire.
Aug. 31: The 31st FEW, stationed at Misawa, completed the last phase of the USAF air refueling test program, Operation Hightide, begun in June.
Sept. 3/4: B-29s flew 52 effective sorties, the monthly high, and all but two against the Chosin hydroelectric power plant complex.
Sept. 4: Seventy-five fighter-bombers flew well north of the Chongchon River to attack targets, flushing out an estimated 89 MiGs from their Manchurian bases. The 39 Sabres screening the F-84s engaged the MiGs, destroying 13, to equal the one-day records set on Dec. 13, 1951, and July 4. Four F-86s fell to the MiG pilots. Maj. Frederick C. Blesse, 334th FIS, destroyed his fifth enemy aircraft to become an ace. An H-19 from the 3rd ARS rescued a downed fighter pilot and two crewmen of a USN helicopter, which had lost power and crashed in the water while attempting to pick up the pilot.
Sept. 5: In two daylight strikes, FEAF flew more than 200 sorties against an ore-processing plant located northeast of Sinanju, damaging or destroying approximately 70 buildings and repair shops.
Sept. 9: Protected by F-86s, 45 F-84s attacked the North Korean military academy at Sakchu. Of approximately 64 MiGs in the area, some penetrated the Sabre screen, shot down three Thunderjets, and forced several flights to jettison their bombs. The F-86s suffered no losses during the aerial combat and destroyed five MiGs.
Sept. 12/13: Twenty-five B-29s attacked the generator building at the giant Sui-ho power plant. Prior to and during the attack, USAF B-26s and USN aircraft dropped low-level fragmentation bombs to suppress enemy searchlights, rendering eight of approximately 30 unserviceable. At the same time, four B-29s orbiting to the east jammed enemy radar. Enemy fighters shot down one medium bomber and flak damaged several others, but the B-29s dropped their bombs on target, again rendering the plant unserviceable. FEAF concluded that searchlight suppression and electronic countermeasures probably had saved the B-29s from greater losses.
Sept. 15: To improve air-ground coordination and mutual understanding between the US Air Force and the US Army, 5th Air Force commander Barcus began sending groups of 15 pilots at a time on three-day tours to the front lines.
Sept. 16: Fifth Air Force flew 110 B-26 sorties, the high figure for the month, mostly night armed reconnaissance and interdiction. Using the recently developed roadblock tactics, the light bombers damaged or destroyed more than 100 enemy vehicles.
Sept. 19: In the first daylight medium bomber raid in 11 months, 32 B-29s with F-86 escorts attacked an enemy barracks and two supply areas southwest of Hamhung. An RB-45 preceded the B-29 formation, and an RB-29 orbited in the assembly area, providing weather information.
Sept. 21: Sabre pilot Capt. Robinson Risner, 336th FIS, destroyed two MiG-15s to become an ace when the enemy responded to an attack on the Pukchong munitions plant by 41 F-84s.
Sept. 27: At night, three B-26s flew in the central sector loudspeaker sorties totaling 3.5 hours, an unusually high amount of broadcast time.
Sept. 29: Fifth Air Force fighter-bombers flew against enemy bunkers and gun positions 207 close air support sorties, the highest figure this month and well above the daily average.
Sept. 30/Oct. 1: Including five electronic countermeasures flak suppression aircraft, 48 B-29s from three units-19th BG, 98th BW, and 307th BW-destroyed the last strategic-type target in Korea, the Namsan-ni chemical plant located 1,300 feet from the Yalu River and near the Sui-ho dam. During the bombing, seven B-26s swept in at low altitudes to suppress eight of some 40 searchlights.
Oct. 4: Brig. Gen. William P. Fisher succeeded Ganey as commander, Bomber Command.
Oct. 5: Fifth Air Force combined attacks with USN aircraft against barracks and supplies of the Chinese 67th Army at Loeyang.
Oct. 7: Fifth Air Force fighter pilots and USN aviators attacked the CCF 26th Army at Yongpyongni.
Oct. 8: To support the Kojo amphibious hoax, 10 B-29s of the 98th BW conducted a rare daylight visual bombing mission on the supply area at Kowon in eastern Korea in coordination with USN fighter-bomber attacks. Truce talks at Panmunjom recessed over the issue of forced repatriation of POWs. The UN delegates proposed to allow enemy POWs to choose repatriation or not; the Communist delegates insisted o
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 85
|
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/a-new-nato-command-structure/
|
en
|
A new NATO command structure
|
[
"https://px.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=1698650&fmt=gif",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/ACYellow-adjust.png",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/themes/atlantic-council/dist/images/icon-search.svg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2023-06-14T114250Z_117765946_RC2ZI1A3CROU_RTRMADP_3_UKRAINE-CRISIS-GERMANY-NATO-EXERCISE-1024x768.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2024-04-17T160036Z_253532126_RC2E87A19XVR_RTRMADP_3_NATO-HEADQUARTERS-1024x768.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2022-02-02T213428Z_482379714_RC2PBS9VZU2O_RTRMADP_3_UKRAINE-CRISIS-USA-WARSHIP-1024x768.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2022-05-09T093504Z_988145608_RC2L3U9TP0H7_RTRMADP_3_NATO-EXERCISES-1024x768.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Rich-Hooker-4x3-1-225x300.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Image-1-1-scaled-e1695248454720-500x350.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-04-26T075310Z_1032208624_MT1HNSLCS0002DA17L_RTRMADP_3_HANS-LUCAS-500x350.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Final_Report_Cover_Color_Alteration-500x350.png",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/TSI-landing-page-e1715635773362-1024x769.jpg",
"https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/themes/atlantic-council/dist/images/AC-logo-light.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"dkaminskas"
] |
2024-06-05T14:00:00+00:00
|
The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO suggest an urgent need for a revised NATO Command Structure, better suited to the security needs of allies and better organized to deter and defend in light of these new realities.
|
en
|
Atlantic Council
|
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/a-new-nato-command-structure/
|
By Richard D. Hooker, Jr.
The 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and Russian aggression in the Donbas brought home to NATO the need for a relook of the NATO Command Structure (NCS), resulting in the creation of Joint Force Command Norfolk and the Joint Support and Enabling Command, both in 2018. The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO have once again altered the security landscape in the North Atlantic treaty area. These dramatic events suggest an urgent need for a revised NATO Command Structure, better suited to the security needs of allies and better organized to deter and defend in light of these new realities.
The current structure consists of two strategic military commands: Allied Command Operations (ACO) based in Mons, Belgium, and Allied Command Transformation (ACT) based in Norfolk, Virginia. These are supported by three “operational” commands: Joint Force Command Brunssum, oriented to the east; Joint Force Command Naples, oriented to NATO’s southern flank; and Joint Force Command Norfolk, oriented to the North Atlantic sea lanes of communication. In addition, there are three “tactical” commands: Allied Air Command, based in Ramstein, Germany; Allied Land Command, based in Izmir, Turkey; and Allied Maritime Command, based in Northwood in the United Kingdom. While suitable for peacetime requirements, these arrangements are not optimized for major theater war against Russia. What has changed, and why do these changes require new command structures?
The obvious answer is that Russian aggression in the European security space has brought the possibility of direct confrontation with Russia closer to NATO than at any time since the fall of the Soviet Union. For allies bordering Russia, in particular, the threat level is perceived as high, driving major changes in force structure, defense spending, operational planning, and foreign and security policy. For Finland and Sweden, accession to NATO even a decade ago was considered unlikely. Today it is a reality, accentuated by efforts to establish unified air forces and steep increases in defense spending. Poland has emerged as one of the strongest military powers in Europe, exceeding France, Germany, and even the United Kingdom in conventional capability and spending nearly 4 percent of GDP on defense. Romania has also embarked on a remarkable military buildup. The Baltic States have responded as well; all three spend at least 2 percent of GDP on defense. Latvia has reintroduced conscription, while Estonia transferred all its 155 mm howitzers to Ukraine and ordered more modern replacements. Lithuania is moving to equip an entire infantry division with tanks. For its part, NATO has moved to double the size of the four battle groups established in 2017 on the eastern flank, and added four more, matched by five air policing missions. The United States has added an additional brigade set of prepositioned equipment in Europe, forward-based two additional F-35 squadrons in Europe, and increased its presence on the eastern flank from brigade to division size, augmented by a corps forward headquarters with enablers.
These moves demonstrate that allies are deeply concerned about the prospect of further Russian aggression. Some argue that Russia’s losses in Ukraine have negated the threat, but an increasingly likely frozen conflict in Ukraine suggests that “a wounded, vengeful Russia will remain a threat as long as Vladimir Putin, or like-minded successors, are in power.” Two years into the conflict, the Russian economy is actually experiencing modest growth despite doubling its defense budget, while leaky international sanctions and support from China, Iran, and others continue to prop up Russian industry and economic performance. Putin’s ambitions to restore Russian imperial greatness and recover lost Russian territories are well documented. The threat of more Russian aggression is real and may well transpire unless deterred.
How should the NATO Command Structure evolve? The first step should be to acknowledge a changed security environment and the importance and contributions of new members. (The current NCS dates to a time when Russia was viewed as a partner, and major theater war in the North Atlantic region was considered unlikely.) To achieve consensus for change, political realities must be taken into account; major NATO powers should occupy key posts that reflect their roles and influence in the Alliance. Existing infrastructure and staffs should be leveraged to avoid unnecessary expense. Finally, as much as possible, changes to the command structure should not add bloat or generate waste.
Lean, high-performing command arrangements are best suited to both peacetime economy and wartime stresses.”
With these concerns in mind, a revised NATO Command Structure should retain ACO and ACT as strategic headquarters, with some caveats. ACO should focus first and foremost on its responsibilities as a trained and ready battle staff, thoroughly exercised and ready to provide theater command and control of joint and multinational forces in time of war across the vast NATO area of responsibility. Historically, ACO planning and intelligence functions were subject to a degree of politicization in order not to “provoke” the Russian Federation. In recent years, these functions have been strengthened and those trends should continue. Its traditional leadership—a US four star as supreme commander with a UK deputy—is sound and should be retained.
Formally established in 2003, ACT is charged with contributing to “preserving the peace, security and territorial integrity of Alliance member states by leading the strategic warfare development of military structures, forces, capabilities and doctrines.” It executes this mission through four principal functions: strategic thinking; development of capabilities; education, training and exercises; and cooperation and engagement. ACT serves as the higher headquarters for NATO’s Joint Warfare Center in Stavanger, Norway; the Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Center in Lisbon, Portugal; and the Joint Force Training Center in Bydgoszcz, Poland. ACT shares responsibility for NATO’s exercise program with ACO and is also responsible for the “establishment, accreditation, preparation of candidates for approval, and periodic assessments” of NATO’s twenty-nine Centers of Excellence.
Though one of only two strategic commands in NATO, ACT has struggled to establish itself on an equal footing; according to some observers, ACT is not sufficiently staffed with “the best and brightest” and is held in less regard by the North Atlantic Council (NAC) than legacy units and commands. Struggling to make its voice heard in Brussels, it has been termed “the forgotten command.” Part of ACT’s “second class” status has to do with geography. Initially commanded by US Admiral Edmund Giambastiani, ACT was the successor to Allied Command Atlantic, located in Norfolk (Giambastiani was the last Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic, or SACLANT, disestablished in 2002). ACT is commanded by a French four star with a four-star German deputy and three-star UK chief of staff. The command would benefit by relocating to Paris or Washington, enhancing its prestige and enabling closer cooperation with the US Department of Defense and Joint Staff and defense industries as well as ACO and NATO headquarters. Given persistent challenges with interoperability and standardization across the Alliance, as well as the great potential of advanced technologies in the form of artificial intelligence, unmanned air and sea vehicles, robotics, quantum computing, ACT can only increase in importance for the Alliance. Accordingly, it should receive priority for staffing on a par with ACO.
Relocating ACT to Paris or Washington is also advisable given the new Joint Force Command (JFC) headquarters, which is located in Norfolk. Clearly established as a response to the reemergent Russian threat, JFC Norfolk is primarily a maritime headquarters that closely resembles the former Allied Command Atlantic in form and purpose. Currently commanded by a US vice admiral (dual-hatted as commander US 2d Fleet), its mission is to “protect the Strategic Lines of Communication across all domains, protect sea-lanes between Europe and North America, and enable the reinforcement of Europe.” In a revised NATO Command Structure, JFC Norfolk would be redesignated “JFC West,” with geographic responsibility for the North Atlantic up to the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap. Given its vast area of responsibility, and the fact that the commanders of the other JFCs are four stars, the JFC West commander should be a US four-star admiral, dual-hatted as commander US Fleet Forces command (the lineal successor to the former US Atlantic Fleet, also currently based in Norfolk), with three-star UK and French officers as deputy and chief of staff. JFC West should not be tasked with the conduct of land or air operations in the Nordic region.
The accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO this year suggests that establishing a new “JFC North” is both appropriate and opportune. The Nordic region is enormous, encompassing 3,425,804 kms, larger than the territory of all other European allies combined. With a total strength of more than 360,000 troops (active and reserve), 250 combat aircraft, 2,000 armored vehicles, and 290 naval combatants (including 11 submarines), the Nordic allies represent a formidable and modernized deterrent force. Collectively, their size, population, geographic importance, and economic heft deserve a strong voice and senior representation inside NATO. Perhaps based at Bodo in Norway (the site of the current Norwegian Joint National Headquarters), or in Stockholm (the site of Sweden’s Joint Forces Command), JFC North should be commanded by a Swedish four star, with rotating Finnish and Norwegian three-star deputies and a Danish chief of staff. Its geographic responsibilities would include the North, Norwegian, Barents, Greenland, and Baltic seas, as well as the airspace and land territories of NATO members Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, and Iceland.
The most imminent threat lies along NATO’s eastern flank, presumably the province of JFC Brunssum in the Netherlands under an Italian or German four star. Established in 2004, its stated mission is “to foster an open and active family of headquarters based on enduring relationships focusing on issues of common interest in order to enhance coordination, cooperation and situational awareness.” The lack of a specific geographic area of responsibility and precise mission statement arguably do not focus the command on defense and deterrence, while Brunssum is very far from the most likely scenes of Russian aggression (it is some 2,200 kms from Brunssum to Narva in eastern Estonia, for example). The growing capabilities of Poland, the importance of geographic proximity, and the reality of large scale combat operations just across its border with Ukraine strongly suggest that JFC Brunssum should be replaced with a “JFC East,” possibly located at Szczecin near the German-Polish border.
As the preponderance of forces would likely come from Poland, JFC East should be commanded by a Polish four star with a Romanian deputy and Baltic chief of staff. Its geographic area of responsibility should include the Baltic States, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria.”
NATO’s southern flank has traditionally been the responsibility of JFC Naples, commanded by a US four-star admiral dual-hatted as commander US Naval Forces Europe and Africa. This bifurcation pulls that officer and staff between NATO’s southern flank and maritime operations far to the north. The JFC Naples mission statement, like that of JFC Brunssum, is vague and imprecise and reads “to prepare for, plan and conduct military operations in order to preserve the peace, security and territorial integrity of Alliance member states throughout the Supreme Allied Commander’s Area of Responsibility (AOR) and beyond.” In a revised NATO Command Structure, JFC Naples would be redesignated as “JFC South” under the command of an Italian four star, with a three-star Greek deputy and two-star Spanish or Portuguese chief of staff. Its geographic AOR would include Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Turkey as well as NATO’s Balkan allies (Albania, North Macedonia, Croatia, Montenegro, and Slovenia). As described below, US Naval Forces Europe and Africa would relocate to the UK.
To ensure the right kind of mission focus, the mission statements of these four JFCs—North, East, West, and South—should be recast as “provide command and control of assigned joint and combined forces in order to deter and defend against aggression by opposing forces in the assigned geographic area of responsibilities; be prepared to execute other military tasks as assigned by SACEUR.” General and flag officers (GOFOs) assigned to these headquarters should come principally from the nations present in their geographic AORs. Given their missions, they are more properly referred to as “geographic” commands.
In response to Russian aggression in Ukraine in 2014, NATO established the Joint Support and Enabling Command (JSEC) in Ulm, Germany, in 2018. Commanded by a German three star, JSEC’s mission is “to contribute to enablement and help the Alliance set the theatre for reinforcement by forces, if and when required.” During crisis and conflict, JSEC will coordinate reinforcement by forces and their subsequent sustainment. Solving the problem of military mobility across national boundaries in wartime is a prime task, along with the reception, staging, onward movement, and integration (RSOI) of reinforcing forces and their theater-level support and sustainment. Theater-level, high-altitude air defense against ballistic and cruise missiles in central Europe may also fall to this command. To execute these tasks efficiently, the JSEC commander should have equal rank and status with the other JFC commanders. Accordingly, JSEC should be renamed “JFC Center” with a German four star as commander. Given the importance of prepositioned equipment storage sites in Eygelshoven, Netherlands, and Zutendaal, Belgium, those nations should rotate at the three-star level as deputy commanders, with a two-star French chief of staff.
NATO’s three “tactical level” commands—Allied Air Command (AIRCOM) in Ramstein, Germany; Allied Land Command (LANDCOM) in Izmir, Turkey; and Allied Maritime Command (MARCOM) in Northwood in the United Kingdom—have several responsibilities. The first is to serve as principal advisors to SACEUR for operations in the land, sea, and air domains. Next, these commands are tasked to monitor the readiness and interoperability of NATO’s land, sea, and air forces. They are also responsible for providing wartime component command headquarters. As they do not actually operate at the tactical level, they are more properly referred to as “functional” commands.
AIRCOM in Ramstein is tasked “to provide air and space power to the Alliance” and is commanded by a US four star, dual-hatted as commander US Air Forces Europe and Africa. That officer therefore commands the air component for both USEUCOM and ACO. The Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) at Uedem in Germany manages air operations north of the Alps, while a second CAOC in Torrejón, Spain, covers NATO airspace south of the Alps. There is also a deployable or “flyaway” CAOC based in Poggio Renatico in northern Italy. All three report to AIRCOM, along with some fifty control and reporting centers. This organization is sound, well-resourced, and resilient and requires no significant reorganization.
LANDCOM in Izmir is commanded by a US four star, dual-hatted as commander US Army Europe. Its mission is “on order, serve as Land Component Command in support of Joint Force Commands and as a Combined Force Land Component Command to provide theater-wide domain expertise to SACEUR; as SACEUR’s principal land advisor, LANDCOM coordinates AOR-wide activities to effectively deter Russia and Terror Groups and ensure a trained, ready, and lethal land force for NATO.” Reporting suggests that, while LANDCOM can effectively monitor and flag readiness and interoperability shortfalls, its ability to field a fully staffed and trained battlestaff as an effective land component command for SACEUR remains a work in progress. One solution is to reactivate US Seventh Army as an operational field army headquarters, akin to US Central Command’s Third Army, on the backbone of US Army Europe and Africa. This would provide a trained and ready Land Component Command able to command two or more NATO corps. LANDCOM would retain its current functions and location and be prepared, when augmented, to provide an additional land component command for lesser or alternate contingencies. Because the commander LANDCOM is often in Wiesbaden performing duties as commander USAREUR and AF, and also because of Turkey’s size and importance, the LANDCOM deputy commander should be a Turkish four-star general.
MARCOM in Northwood serves as “the central command of all NATO maritime forces” and the MARCOM commander is the primary maritime advisor to the Alliance. Currently commanded by a UK vice admiral, MARCOM serves as the maritime headquarters for Standing NATO Maritime Groups 1 and 2 and Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Groups 1 and 2. Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO (STRIKEFORNATO), built around the US 6th Fleet, reports directly to SACEUR and is headquartered in Oeiras, Portugal. MARCOM is also host to the NATO Shipping Centre (NSC), which links NATO and the merchant shipping community. For challenging contingencies, such as maritime operations against the Russian Northern Fleet in the North Atlantic and Norwegian Sea, US naval forces would certainly predominate. As the Russian Northern and Baltic fleets represent the primary maritime threat, US Naval Forces Europe and Africa should accordingly relocate from Naples, Italy, to London (its former headquarters through 2005) as the naval component of USEUCOM. Its four-star commander could then be dual-hatted as commander MARCOM, placing MARCOM on a par with LANDCOM and AIRCOM. The MARCOM headquarters would remain in Northwood under a UK three-star deputy. For maritime operations north of the GIUK Gap, MARCOM should command, reporting directly to ACO, with JFC West exercising command of the sea lanes of communication in the North Atlantic.
These recommended changes to NATO’s Command Structure offer several advantages. They acknowledge the importance of the US as leader of the Alliance but provide four-star representation for NATO’s largest and most important military contributors, both old and new (the US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Turkey, and Poland)—important for achieving consensus for any adaptations. They represent a more rationalized and practical geographic approach to command and control, recognizing the addition of important new members and far more territory to the Alliance. They provide flexible options for SACEUR, particularly for two or more campaigns that may occur simultaneously within NATO’s area of responsibility. They align component commanders between NATO and USEUCOM, simplifying SACEUR’s command arrangements in times of fast-moving crises and for sustained multi-domain warfare. Most importantly, they modify and adapt the command structure to more effectively address a changed security environment in the North Atlantic Treaty area, now facing its most serious military threat since 1945.
To be sure, change is hard—and nowhere more so than in NATO. Political sensitivities and equities will be hotly contested, and the gears of the NATO bureaucracy may wind slowly. But the need is urgent. Europe finds itself in the largest shooting war since 1945, and it is right on NATO’s doorstep. Russian aggression and imperialism are not going away. As presently constituted, the NATO Command Structure is not fit for purpose in a post-2022 NATO. The time is therefore right to consider improvements—both to deter and, if necessary, to contain and defeat a dangerous adversary.
About the author
Related content
Image: US Navy sailors operate onboard aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman, in the Adriatic Sea, February 2, 2022. REUTERS/Yara Nardi
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 9
|
https://www.flightglobal.com/first-dutch-f-35-squadron-established/115088.article
|
en
|
First Dutch F-35 squadron established
|
[
"https://sb.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=2&c2=32394014&cs_ucfr&cv=2.0&cj=1",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=526026152009400&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://www.flightglobal.com/magazine/dest/graphics/logo/print_logo.png",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/1/7/104217_ethiopiansigning_156995.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/1/4/104214_aeroflotcaeroflot_179442.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/1/1/104211_thai_airways_a350941_290455.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/2/2/104222_mv22usmcospreydarwinaustralia_914473.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/2/0/104220_f35clightingiiaircraftaboardussabrahamlincoln3viausnavy_949649.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/0/9/104209_nz_delivery_ceremony_photo_862295.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/6/8/3/103683_a321xlrilacmesseberlin_18321.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/7/1/4/103714_jala350caviationwire_aflo_shutterstock_273157_crop_crop.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/3/6/6/103366_rohaidaharon_ade_2_653926_crop.jpeg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/3/7/8/102378_1376x928px_357801.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/2/8/7/102287_flightglobalcombanner_726563.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/7/8/1/100781_1376x928px_357801.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/4/2/5/101425_274x183engineerx2_520377.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/4/2/3/101423_pilot274x183_23160.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/4/2/1/101421_274x183engineer_748514.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/6/6/2/67662_thelatestaviationcareersnewsnew_121564.png",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/7/0/5/103705_737max10cairteamimages_215921.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/4/2/1/100421_rodgerfostercairlink_71410.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/3/2/1/100321_qantaslinkairbusa220_17149_crop.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/274x183/1/1/7/100117_finnaircfinnair_145698.jpg",
"https://d1a2ot8agkqe8w.cloudfront.net/web/2014/11/dutch-f-35-usaf_58458.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/100x67/2/3/3/104233_img_3265_76191.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/100x67/2/2/8/104228_airbaltica220ckaroliskavolelis_shutterstock_983900.jpg",
"https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/100x67/2/2/0/104220_f35clightingiiaircraftaboardussabrahamlincoln3viausnavy_949649.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Anno Gravemaker",
"Dominic Perry",
"Graham Dunn",
"Ryan Finnerty",
"Exclusive partner Honeywell"
] |
2014-11-11T00:00:00
|
The Royal Netherlands Air Force on 4 November changed the command of its Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II detachment at Eglin AFB, Florida to 323 Sqn. The unit had been officially disbanded on 31 October at Leeuwarden air base, having previously operated the Lockheed F-16.
|
en
|
/magazine/dest/graphics/favicons/favicon-32x32.png
|
Flight Global
|
https://www.flightglobal.com/first-dutch-f-35-squadron-established/115088.article
|
The Royal Netherlands Air Force on 4 November changed the command of its Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II detachment at Eglin AFB, Florida, to 323 Sqn. The unit had been officially disbanded on 31 October at Leeuwarden air base, having previously operated the Lockheed F-16.
Now re-established in the USA, 323 Sqn will be tasked primarily with conducting initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) of the F-35, following its relocation to Edwards AFB in California by the end of this year.
The Dutch air force has taken delivery of two conventional take-off and landing F-35As to support the US-led IOT&E activity, and has three pilots qualified on the type.
US Air Force
The F-35A is due to become operational with the Royal Netherlands Air Force during 2019, with the service expected to eventually receive another 37 of the type.
Source: Flight International
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 93
|
https://delta.tudelft.nl/en/article/how-delft-aerospace-engineers-guided-air-force-space
|
en
|
How Delft aerospace engineers guided Air Force into space
|
[
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/logo_Delta-EN.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/logo_Delta-EN.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/BRIK-in-space.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Parties_with_a_model_of_the_BRIK-II_satellite-768x513.jpg",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Parties_with_a_model_of_the_BRIK-II_satellite-768x513.jpg",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Schermafbeelding-trevor_0-768x451.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Schermafbeelding-trevor_0-768x451.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Jos-Wassink_4734_vierkant.jpg",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Jos-Wassink_4734_vierkant.jpg",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off_off-white.svg",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off.png",
"https://delta.tudelft.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Delta_logo_zonderpay-off_RGB_zonder-pay-off.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Jos Wassink",
"Science editor Jos Wassink"
] |
2021-02-17T11:30:25+01:00
|
Two AE employees have spent two years part-time co-developing the first-ever Dutch military satellite, BRIK II. The launch is scheduled for April. That is just the start.
|
en
|
Delta
|
https://delta.tudelft.nl/en/article/how-delft-aerospace-engineers-guided-air-force-space
|
If you want to look some five years into the future of flight and space exploration, just visit the yearly Design Synthesis Exercise (DSE) for bachelor Aerospace Engineering students in June. It’s here that external parties float their ideas, and scout for talent.
At the DSE of 2014, the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) tested an eye-in-the-sky called HIRES. Six and a half years later, the Air Force’s first-ever satellite is about to be shipped for launch. But it carries no camera. This is what happened in between.
The newly established Air Force Space Office contacted Space Systems Engineering Professor Eberhard Gill (AE Faculty) in 2014. The Office initiated a design synthesis exercise whose mission statement was: ‘To provide the Royal Netherlands Air Force with an independent resource to obtain Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) information about any specific Earth location’. Dr Angelo Cervone led the project and satellite veteran Trevor Watts was one of the coaches.
‘The RNLAF wanted their own observations’
“Remember the summer of 2014?” asks Trevor Watts. He joined TU Delft after retiring from Airbus Defense & Space because TU Delft was looking for ‘someone experienced’ to talk to their students. “It was the summer that MH-17 was shot down over Ukraine,” Watts explains. “The RNLAF looked into the future and wanted their own observations. Could we have seen the missile? Could we have detected it by satellite?” That was the impetus for another DSE assignment in 2015 to ‘make a conceptual design of a constellation of spacecraft for a … mission to detect and locate radars …’ With four satellites worth EUR 88 million, the outcome of this LeopardSat study was way over budget (by EUR 25 million).
Three million
Nevertheless, the interest in a demonstrator satellite had been awakened in the Air Force. Lieutenant Colonel Bernard Buijs, an AE alumni himself, remembers that Commander Schnitger wanted a feasibility study into the relevant possibilities of Cubesats. “The Air Force did not yet want a contractor, but needed impartial scientific advice,” Buijs explains. “That brought us to TU Delft’s Space Systems Engineering section.” Watts continues. “The RNLAF gave us a small budget,” he remembers. “Stefano Speretta, Alessandra Menicucci and I did the study, which terminated in the summer of 2016. The Ministry of Defence then raised funding for the BRIK II programme.”
Michel Pieters – director NLR, Airforce Commander Dennis Luyt, TU Professor space systems engineering Eberhard Gill TU, and ISISPace director Jeroen Rotteveel at the signing of the contract on 30 November 2017 (Photo: RNLAF).
The contract for the Air Force’s first BRIK II satellite for about EUR 3 million was signed on 30 November 2017 by Michel Pieters (Director Netherlands Aerospace Centre, NLR), the new Air Force Commander Dennis Luyt, Professor Eberhard Gill (Space Systems Engineering, TU Delft) and Jeroen Rotteveel (CEO ISISpace) at the Dutch defence and security industry’s (NIDV) annual convention. The name, BRIK II, was a tribute to Air Force’s first-ever aeroplane, ‘De Brik’, in 1913.
Cubesat specialist ISISpace signed to do the design, assembly, launch and subsequent transfer of control over the satellite. The TU Delft spin-off can look back on 15 years of experience in small satellites and over 40 launches. ISISpace CEO and TU Delft alumnus Jeroen Rotteveel enjoyed the collaboration with the Air Force. “They were open and keen to learn. In an innovation project like this, it’s essential to be open about what you don’t know yet and learn along the way. Not all our clients can do that.”
All aboard
Lieutenant Colonel Buijs, who led the operation for the Air Force, was responsible for the choice of instruments on board. “The payload had to be relevant for the military,” he explains. “And we had to choose between buying off the shelf, developing instruments ourselves or commissioning them.” Eventually, Buijs and his team from the Defense Space Security Centre: (I) ordered one tested instrument from the University of Oslo; (II) had the Air Force communications group in Dongen develop a satellite communication system; and (III) commissioned NLR to develop a locating receiver.
At 550 kilometres altitude, the satellite is flying in the middle of the ionosphere where a strange phenomenon occurs called ‘scintillation’. Small-scale (100 metres to dozens of kilometres) irregularities in the ionospheric plasma (freely floating electrons and ions) disturb or disrupt radio waves, like GPS signals, that go through it. It predominantly happens near the equator, where GPS receivers are prone to serious misreading. But it also occurs at high latitudes, where there is a correlation between the Northern Lights (aurora borealis) and scintillation. The scintillation monitor (I), manufactured by the University of Oslo, measures the conductivity of the plasma between antenna tips. The measurements may contribute to space weather maps giving information about the amount of scintillation, and thus of the attenuation or phase shift of signals that can be expected.
The Air Force’s own instrument (II) called Store & Forward may be compared to Voicemail. Someone knowing when and where the BRIK II passes overhead can upload a message, which is then transferred to the Air Force ground station in Dongen. There are multiple passes, about 12 hours apart. So, the maximal delay for this Space Voicemail is about 12 hours. The digital message can be voice, text, image or any other file format.
The third instrument (III), developed and built by NLR, determines the position of ‘sources of certain frequencies’, which can be read as positions of military systems.
‘The Cubesat is very tightly packed’
The launch was originally planned for mid-2019 and has now been deferred to April 2021. What happened? “Lots of things happened,” says Speretta. “We had planned a launch with the European launcher Vega, but that didn’t work because Vega was grounded for 18 months after an accident in 2019. Meanwhile, Virgin Orbit had issues too. The satellite development process had some problems and of course Covid didn’t help either.”
“The Cubesat is very tightly packed,” Watts explains. “It has three instruments on board and we had to solve the electromagnetic interference issues that these caused. That took time. Now we’re waiting for the final tests of flight software.”
BRIK II is currently undergoing these tests in the cleanroom at ISISpace in Delft. Shipment to the USA for the launch will take place between the end of February and mid-March, says Rotteveel. Rocket launches are notoriously hard to plan, but launching from a flying Boeing 747, as the Virgin Orbit does, takes away some of the obstacles. The weather has much less influence, and you don’t need to evacuate an area for safety. And yet, says Rotteveel, launching on time is probably an illusion.
Next steps
Assuming all goes well, and the RNLAF will have a functioning satellite by the beginning of April, what is next?
“It’s definitely meant as the first in a series,” says Watts. “This was mostly an exercise in satellite procurement. Now the RNLAF trains its own officers to go through the commissioning process. There are new programmes coming up.”
The NRC newspaper writes: ‘The launch of two military satellites in cooperation with Norway are planned for 2022.’
In a reaction, Buijs writes: ‘The cooperation with Norway is also a technology demonstrator, like BRIK II, and it is an ongoing programme. The Netherlands’ goal to protect our critical space infrastructure and to use the potential of the space domain in gathering the right information to make the right decisions, strongly depends on the new Cabinet formation (after the general elections in March, Eds.).’
Cooperation with other countries offers enormous potential as satellites can be coupled into almost continuous coverage. Dozens to hundreds of microsatellites have already been coupled into swarms. With prices going down for launches, access to space is becoming affordable. While international cooperation with small satellites has great potential, as Buijs explains, you have to bring your own satellite to get a place at the table.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 65
|
https://www.usmcu.edu/Research/Marine-Corps-History-Division/Research-Tools-Facts-and-Figures/Chronologies-of-the-Marine-Corps/
|
en
|
Chronologies of the Marine Corps
|
[
"https://www.usmcu.edu/Portals/218/mdmlogo.png?ver=K-7fBNAjE86c9lpDhNZWrg%3d%3d",
"https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/10/2003434058/150/150/0/231010-M-HC389-0030.PNG",
"https://www.usmcu.edu/Portals/218/Images/RequiredLinks/EagleEyes.jpg",
"https://www.usmcu.edu/Portals/218/Images/RequiredLinks/MilOneSource.jpg.png",
"https://www.usmcu.edu/Portals/218/Images/RequiredLinks/SAPR.jpg",
"https://www.usmcu.edu/Portals/218/Images/RequiredLinks/MilitaryVeteransCrisis.png",
"https://www.usmcu.edu/DesktopModules/SharedLibrary/Images/VCL 988_Hoz_CMYK.jpg",
"https://www.usmcu.edu/Portals/_default/skins/marinestheme/resources/img/logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/Portals/218/MCU_fav.ico?ver=tQ9u7r6RKJcfAwOsA-Lhow%3d%3d
| null |
1982
1 January – The strength of the armed forces was 2,093,032, of which 190,039 were Marines.
5 January – An auditorium used for weapons and tactics instructor training at Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), Yuma was named in honor of the late Colonel John H. Ditto. Colonel Ditto was instrumental in the creation and development of Marine Aviation and Weapons Squadron based at MCAS Yuma. Colonel Ditto was killed 19 January 1981 at the age of 44 when his AV-8A Harrier crashed at MCAS Cherry Point.
9 January – A Marine Security Guard duty vehicle in San Salvador, El Salvador, was fired upon as it was enroute to the Marine House. The vehicle sustained one hit from a 7.62 millimeter weapon; there were no injuries.
13 January – Jiro Horikashi, 78, designer of the Japanese Zero fighter that challenged Marine aviators at the outset of World War II, died of pneumonia in a Tokyo hospital.
13 January – The first Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornet aircraft went on the assembly line at the Northrop Corporation in Hawthorne, California. After final assembly and extensive testing, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 314 (VMFA-314) was the first squadron at MCAS El Toro to receive the F/A-18, followed by VMFA-323 and 531.
15 January – The Basic Skills Education Program (BSEP) opened its new learning center at Camp Geiger, Okinawa. The BSEP, which prepares Marines for the Graduate Equivalency Degree examination, has helped almost 4,500 Marines since its inception in 1977.
20 January – General Robert H. Barrow, the Commandant of the Marine Corps advised that urinalysis test results received from drug testing laboratories could be used in disciplinary proceedings involving Marines accused of drug usage for any drug except cannibis.
29 January – The base theater at Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort, South Carolina, was named in honor of the late Lieutenant Colonel Lee T. Lasseter, who served as a fighter pilot during his career in the Marine Corps.
29 January – River Road, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, was renamed to Julian C. Smith Drive in honor of the late Lieutenant General Julian C. Smith, who commanded the 2d Marine Division on Tarawa during World War II.
31 January – Marines of the Marine Security Guard Detachment in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, responded to a fire in one of the American Embassy buildings and were instrumental in extinguishing the blaze. A Marine inside the building was badly burned and was evacuated to the United States as a result.
1 February – The Commandant of the Marine Corps launched a concentrated campaign to eliminate the use of illegal drugs in the Corps following specific guidelines set in ALMAR 246. The language of the order was simple, beginning with: “the distribution, possession or use of illegal drugs is not tolerated in the United States Marine Corps,” and all Marines were subject to random urinalysis testing.
3 February – The flag at the American Embassy in Beijing, China, was lowered to half-mast by Marines of the security guard detachment in memory of Lieutenant General Joseph C. Burger, who died on 1 February. Lieutenant General Burger served with the 4th Marines in Shanghai and later at the embassy in Peiping in 1935.
12 February – A decision was made by the Commandant of the Marine Corps to have east coast Marine amphibious units (MAUs) redesignated. Under the new system, they would be numbered in the 20s with the first digit “2” reflecting the Marine amphibious force (MAF) from which each MAU orignated. MAUs from II MAF would be designated 22, 24, 26, and 28 instead of 32, 34, 36, and 38.
13 February – Marines from III MAF participated in “Team Spirit 82,” conducted in the Republic of Korea (ROK) to exercise deployment, reception, and employment of ROK/US forces responding to possible contingencies in the Korean theater.
20 February – The 20th anniversary of the historic flight of Friendship Seven Mercury Spacecraft, in which Senator John Glenn (Colonel, USMC, Ret.) was the first American to orbit the earth in outer space, was observed. The flight, which took four hours and 56 minutes, consisted of three orbits around the earth.
28 February – The Defense Department rejected all bids by competing companies to manufacture a new 9 millimeter handgun, which was designed to be compatible with NATO sidearms and replace the Colt .45 currently in use by U.S. armed forces. Of the four companies bidding, none was able to meet more than 11 of the 71 specifications laid down by the Defense Department, which plans to purchase 400,000 9mm pistols over a 10-year period.
5 March – The Commandant of the Marine Corps announced that the Marine Corps program designed to reveal drug usage among Marines is now applicable to the Marine Corps Reserve.
5 March – The first of 15 CH-53E “Super Stallion” helicopters was unveiled at MCAS Tustin, California, by Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 465. New features of the CH-53E included the ability to refuel in flight (a first for helicopters) and lift capability twice that of earlier models. East coast helicopter squadrons had received their first CH-53Es in 1981.
15 March – The USS New Jersey, a 40-year old veteran battleship of three wars, was refloated at the Naval Shipyard, Long Beach, California. The ship is being returned to service for a fourth tour of duty, and will include a Marine detachment among its complement of officers and men.
17 March – An attempt was made by dissident military forces of Guatemala to take over the government in that country. U.S. Marines were placed on alert inside the American Embassy, but were later ordered to stand down. There were no casualties.
22 March – The space shuttle Columbia (STS-3) embarked on its third trip into space in a mission that lasted 7 days, 3 hours, and 25 minutes. The crew on board included Marine Colonel Jack R. Lousma, 46, who previously was a member of the astronaut support crews for the Apollo 9, 10, and 13 missions and pilot for Skylab 3.
23 March – “Woodland” camouflage utilities replaced “poplin” utilities in use throughout the Marine Corps. The new utilities improvements include reinforced knee, elbow, and seat patches, unpleated breast pockets, slightly heavier material, smaller trouser pockets, and larger collars. The cost of new utilities remained the same as the old ones.
27 March – A group of 120 politcians and ex-combat troops broke ground on the Mall near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., for a $6 million memorial to those who served and died in Vietnam. The U.S. Marine Band played “God Bless America” at the groundbreaking.
31 March – A group of unidentified individuals fired a Chinese-made rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) and 20 rounds of small arms ammunition at the American Embassy in Guatemala. The RPG caused a 4-inch hole in a second floor. No injuries were reported. The local police arrived in a timely manner and conducted an investigation.
1-6 April – “Gallant Eagle 82” employed 10,000 Marines and sailors of the 7th Marine Amphibious Brigade (MAB) at Twentynine Palms, California, in a United States Readiness Command exercise. The purpose of “Gallant Eagle 82” was to provide a simulated combat environment to exercise, train, and evaluate the 7th MAB, along with other multi-service forces of the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force, in a desert environment. In all, “Gallant Eagle 82” employed 25,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines.
2 April – The annual Navy League awards were presented to the following: Colonel Jack B. Hammond, 2d Marine Air Wing (MAW), received the General John A. Lejeune award for inspirational leadership; Major Richard F. Vercauteren, 2d Marine Division, received the General Holland M. Smith award for operational competence; and Gunnery Sergeant J. J. Brown, 1st Marine Division, received the General Gerald C. Thomas award for inspirational leadership.
5 April – Approximately 15 shots were fired by unknown assailants using a small caliber rifle at the American Embassy in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. There were no injuries and only minor damage to the outside of the building was incurred.
11 April – The Dome of the Rock shooting by unidentified assailants in Jerusalem caused extensive re-examination of political priorities throughout the Middle East. Marine Security Guards at overseas posts in the Middle East increased security measures for the protection of American interests and property as directed by the Secretary of State.
17 April – The USS Lewis B. Puller (FFG 23) was commissioned at the Long Beach, California, Naval Shipyard and was named in honor of Lieutenant General Lewis B. “Chesty” Puller, the only Marine in history to receive five Navy Crosses. The Puller, a 445-foot guided missile frigate, was under construction since 1979.
17 - 29 April – 29,000 sailors and Marines from the United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, and New Zealand participated in Exercise “RIMPAC ‘82” to enhance tactical capabilities of participating units in most major aspects of conventional maritime warfare.
22 April – The battleship USS Iowa (BB 61), leader of the fourmember class of battleships remaining in the U.S. Navy, was moved from its moorings at Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in preparation for reactivation and recommissioning in January 1985.
23 April – Rotation of the 31st Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) units occurred with Battalion Landing Team, 3d Battalion, 3d Marines (BLT 3/3), Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 165 (HMM-165), and MAU Service Support Group 31 (MSSG-31) departing Hawaii for deployment to WestPac. These units replaced BLT 1/3, HMM-265, and MSSG-37.
27 April - 16 May – Exercise “Ocean Venture 82” was conducted in the Carribbean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the southeastern United States to emphasize command and control of forces in a simulated combat environment. It included 5,500 Marines in the overall force of 45,000 active and reserve military from all the armed services and units of the Royal Netherlands Navy and Marines. The exercise was designed to signal that the U.S. is prepared to defend its Caribbean interests.
28 April – Lejeune Hall, the United States Naval Academy Physical Education Center, was dedicated. The new center was named after Lieutenant General John A. Lejeune, an 1888 graduate of the Naval Academy who became the 13th Commandant of the Marine Corps. Lejeune Hall is a 95,000-square foot, steel, concrete, granite, and glass building. It features swimming and diving pools, six wrestling rings, strength training rooms, a 120-person classroom, and administrative offices. The grounds surrounding Lejeune Hall feature three memorial monuments.
30 April – Marine Helicopter Training Squadron 303 (HMT-303) was activated at Camp Pendleton, California, and was attached to Marine Aircraft Group 39, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing.
21 May – Brigadier General Paul A. Putnam, USMC (Retired), died in Mesa, Arizona. He commanded Marine Fighting Squadron 211, the “Wake Island Avengers,” on Wake Island at the beginning of World War II and was a Japanese prisoner of war for four years.
21 May – Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 252, the oldest continually active squadron in the Marine Corps, reached 250,000 accident-free flight hours.
21 May – The winner of the 1982 Annual Rifle Squad Combat Competition was 1st Squad, 1st Platoon, Company E, 2d Battalion, 3d Marines, 1st Marine Brigade led by Sergeant Jack Lawrence.
22 May – The 70th anniversary of Marine aviation was observed. On 22 May 1912, Lieutenant Alfred Austell Cunningham became Marine Aviator Number 1 in a solo flight at Annapolis, Maryland, after two hours and 40 minutes of instruction.
24 May – The 32d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU), commanded by Colonel James Mead, began deployment with the Amphibious Task Force, U.S. Sixth Fleet on duty in the eastern Mediterranean. The 32d MAU was composed of Battalion Landing Team, 2d Battalion, 8th Marines, Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 261 and MAU Service Support Group 32.
28 May – The 1981 Colonel Robert Debs Heinl Award for Marine Corps history was awarded to Mr. Jack Shulimson and Dr. Graham A. Cosmas for their article in the November 1981 issue of Marine Corps Gazette, “Teddy Roosevelt and the Corps’ Sea-Going Mission.”
2- 6 June – The Marine Security Guard Detachment in Paris, France, provided support during President Reagan’s visit at the Versailles Summit.
7 June – The embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, was the subject of a rocket and machine gun attack which caused minimal damage. A Marine was wounded by shrapnel but continued in a full-duty status.
8 June – Camp Kuwae, Marine Corps Base, Camp Smedley D. Butler, Okinawa, was renamed Camp Lester in honor of the late Hospital Apprentice (HA) First Class Fred F. Lester, USNR. HA1 Lester was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for heroism while serving as a medical corpsman attached to the 6th Marine Division on Okinawa during World War II.
11 June – Colonel Michael P. Sullivan, commanding officer of Marine Aircraft Group 11, became the first Marine Corps pilot to achieve 4,000 accident-free flight hours in an F-4 “Phantom” aircraft.
21 June - 2 July – 7th Marine Amphibious Brigade (MAB) units from Camp Pendleton and Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms participated in Exercise “Stratmobex 2-82” to exercise and test 7th MAB alert, marshalling, and deployment plans and procedures.
23 June – Initial evacuation of the American Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, began with the Marine Security Guard Detachment providing security.
24 June – The American Embassy in Beirut was secured then abandoned due to severe fighting in the area. Remaining personnel were relocated to the ambassador’s residence in the nearby city of Yarze. Nine Marines of the Marine Security Guard Detachment provided security.
26 June - 26 November – Over 250 Marines from the 2d Marine Division and the 2d Force Service Support Group participated with other U.S. forces and navy/air forces from various South American nations in Exercise “Unitas XXIII” designed to promote military professionalism between the United States and participating South American navies.
28 June – The Marine Corps’ last C-117D aircraft was officially retired at Marine Corps Air Station, Iwakuni, Japan, after a final flight to Naval Air Station, Cubi Point, in the Republic of the Philippines. Better known as the “Skytrain,” the C-117D had been used for combat support, transporting troops, cargo lift, medical evacuations, and had been modified for cold weather missions by having skis attached.
30 June – The strength of the armed forces was 2,107,709, of which 193,399 were Marines.
2 July – The last Marine U11A Piper “Aztec” aircraft was retired at Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, North Carolina.
9 July – President Ronald Reagan designated this date as National POW/MIA Recognition Day, in honor of all former American prisoners of war, those still missing, and their families. The President called on all Americans to join in honoring those who made the uncommon sacrifices of being held captive in war. From World War I to the Vietnam conflict, more than 142,000 U.S. servicemen were taken prisoner and more than 17,000 died while in captivity. During the same period, more than 92,000 servicemen were lost in combat and their remains were never recovered.
16 July – Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 101 participated with U.S. air and naval forces, along with Canadian military forces, in Exercise “Amalgam Chief 82-5” designed to exercise NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense) personnel throughout the radar network along with fighter-interceptor squadrons.
16 July – Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 164 (HMM-164) was the first squadron recognized by the Boeing/Vertol Company, the manufacturer of the CH-46 “Sea Knight” helicopter, to reach 100,000 cumlative flight hours. HMM-164 is based at Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter), Tustin, California.
18 July – Operation “Phoenix Bear,” an all-Reserve amphibious landing exercise, was executed by the 46th Marine Amphibious Unit to test readiness of reservists and equipment for partial or complete mobilization at Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.
26 July – The USS Vandegrift (FFG 48) was launched by Todd Shipyard Corporation, Seattle, Washington. The ship was named in honor of General Alexander A. Vandegrift, the 18th Commandant of the Marine Corps (January 1944 – December 1947).
29 July – Colonel Justice M. Chambers, who received the Medal of Honor for heroism on Iwo Jima, died at National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, at the age of 74. Colonel Chambers commanded the 3d Battalion, 25th Marines in the Iwo Jima landing on 19 February 1945. In addition to the Medal of Honor, Colonel Chambers received many other medals including the Silver Star, Legion of Merit with Combat “V,” and three Purple Hearts. Commissioned in the Marine Corps in 1932, Colonel Chambers retired from the Marine Corps Reserve on 1 January 1946. After his retirement, he began a career in the federal government largely devoted to the Nation’s non-military preparedness.
5 August – General Paul X. Kelley, Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps and Chief of Staff, laid the keel of the Dock Landing Ship 42 (LSD 42) at the Lockheed Shipbuilding and Construction Company in Seattle, Washington. The ship is designed to transport combat-ready and equipped Marines to a deployment area.
6 August – Deputy Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci, Postmaster General William F. Bolger, and Army Sergeant John O. Marsh dedicated a new twenty cent embossed stamped envelope commemorating the 200th anniversary of the Purple Heart award.
7 - 9 August – The 40th anniversary of the landing on the beaches of Guadalcanal and Tulagi in the Solomon Islands during World War II was observed. The landings marked the first Allied land offensive in the Pacific and were the first amphibious assaults against the enemy forces by the 1st Marine Division (Reinforced).
14 August – President Reagan proclaimed this day as National Navajo Code Talkers Day to honor the Navajo code talkers from the New Mexico and Arizona reservations who joined the Marine Corps during World War II. They used their native language as a base for a Marine Corps communications code in operations against the Japanese throughout the Pacific.
25 August – Approximately 800 Marines of the 32d Marine Amphibious Unit under the command of Colonel James Mead went ashore in Beirut, Lebanon, to form the United States element of a multinational force called in to assist Lebanese armed forces and to assure the safe and orderly departure of Palestine Liberation Organization forces from Lebanon. U.S. Marines joined approximately 400 French and 800 Italian military personnel to form the peacekeeping force.
27 August - 18 October – Marines from the 4th Marine Amphibious Brigade and sailors from east coast commands joined forces with servicemen from nine other NATO nations to participate in two exercises: “Northern Wedding ‘82” and “Bold Guard ‘82” in Norway, Denmark, and the Federal Republic of Germany. The exercises tested the capacity of alliance forces to bring in reinforcements and resist aggression in the Atlantic, Baltic, and Norwegian sea areas. The exercises provided an opportunity for the conduct of a combined amphibious assault in the North Sea followed by a tactical reembarkation for subsequent amphibious landings in the Baltic approaches and the Baltic.
1 September – General Roy S. Geiger was named to the Naval Aviation Hall of Honor and will be enshrined in the Hall of Honor in May of 1983. General Geiger was the first Marine aviator to have tactical command of all Marine Corps ground forces in the Pacific during World War II, and, as a lieutenant general, became the third Marine officer to wear three stars on active duty. On 30 June 1947, Congress passed a special act promoting General Geiger posthumously to four-star rank in the Marine Corps.
2 September – Captain Dirk R. Ahle, of Weapons Company, 2d Battalion, 1st Marines, 1st Marine Division was the recipient of the 1982 Leftwich trophy for outstanding leadership as the unit’s company commander. The award was presented to Captain Ahle who is from St. Louis, Missouri, at the evening parade at the Marine Barracks, Washington, D.C.
10 September – By order of the President, Marines of the 32d Marine Amphibious Unit were withdrawn from Lebanon for scheduled redeployment to Camp Lejeune.
15 September – The Marine Detachment, USS New Jersey activated at Long Beach, California. The detachment will help man the vessel that has assisted the Marine Corps in accomplishing its mission in three wars. The USS New Jersey is scheduled to be brought back for a fourth tour of duty in formal recommissioning ceremonies in January 1983.
20 September – President Reagan announced that U.S. forces will again join French and Italian troops in Beirut to enable the government of Lebanon to resume control of the city. President Reagan’s decision was spurred by the massacre of hundreds of Muslim Palestinians, reportedly by Lebanese Christian militiamen, in two Beirut refugee camps.
25 September – Camp Pendleton, California, the largest Marine Corps amphibious base, celebrated its 40th anniversary. First dedicated by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942, the Marine Corps base has been the home of the 1st, 3d, 4th, and 5th Marine Divisions spanning three wars. It is currently the home of the I Marine Amphibious Force, the 1st Marine Division, 1st Force Service Support Group, and Marine Aircraft Group 39.
26 September – The Defense Department announced that the Armed Forces, in an effort to find contraband, have the power to open overseas mail for the first time since World War II.
26 September – The Navy Unit Commendation was awarded to Marines and sailors for their handling of the U.S. peacekeeping effort in Beirut, Lebanon. While on the initial 16-day operation, Marines of the 32d Marine Amphibious Unit oversaw the departure of more than 6,000 Palestine Liberation Organization soldiers. Marine Corps Commandant, General Robert Barrow, and the Commander of the Sixth Fleet, Vice Admiral William Rowden, presented the awards in a ceremony aboard the USS Guam, about sixty miles off the coast of Beirut.
27 September – The laying of the keel for FFG 47, a guided missile frigate, took place at Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine. FFG 47 will be named in honor of Major Samuel Nicholas, the Revolutionary War Marine who is considered to be the Corps’ first Commandant.
29 September – 1,200 Marines of the 32d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) again joined 2,200 French and Italian troops already in Beirut, Lebanon, as part of the multinational peacekeeping force assigned to protect Palestinians and prevent factional strife of the sort that led to the massacres at the Palestinian refugee villages of Sabra and Shatila. The 32d MAU was under the command of Colonel James Mead.
30 September – The strength of the armed forces was 2,108,612, of which 195,715 were Marines.
30 September – Corporal David L. Reagan, USMC, serving with the multinational peacekeeping force, was killed and three other Marines wounded as they attempted to defuse a piece of ordnance inside the grounds of the international airport in Beirut, Lebanon.
1 October – The Marine Detachment, USS Long Beach was reactivated at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington.
5 October – The Communications/Electronics School at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California, celebrated its 40th anniversary. The Marine Corps’ largest formal school offers 69 classes to Marines in 38 different job specialties.
9 October – Station Operations and Maintenance Squadron (SOMS) activated at Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro. The activation of SOMS was a result of splitting Headquarters and Headquarters Squadron, the largest squadron in the Marine Corps, to form two separate squadrons. The split made the SOM’S command responsible for all station aircraft activities.
15 October – Three thousand precooked and frozen hamburgers, complete with bun, ketchup, salt and pickle, were shipped to U.S. Marines serving in Beirut as part of several American companies’ reaction to headlines that Marines were not eating as well as their French and Italian counterparts. The burgers were paid for and shipped free of charge by American firms in response to an appeal by radio Station WDJX in Dayton, Ohio.
15 October – Fiscal year (FY) 1982 topped FY81 and was cited by the Defense Department as the best recruiting and retention year for the armed forces since the draft ended in 1973. Not only did the Marine Corps meet its recruiting goals, but 90 percent of the recruits were high school graduates. The retention of quality Marines during FY82 resulted in the second largest number of reenlistments on record.
18 October – The High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), the “Humvee”, replaced the jeep and some of its younger brothers. The “Humvee” is a basic four-wheel drive 1 and ¼ ton payload vehicle that will serve as a personnel carrier, cargo carrier, command vehicle, weapons platform, and ambulance. Contracts for the development of this vehicle were scheduled to be awarded at the end of 1982 in a contest involving AM General, Teledyne Continental Motors, and General Dynamics, who competed for a $1 billion, 5-year contract for 50,000 vehicles including an option for another 50,000 at a later date.
19 October – A decision was reached by the Marine Corps Chief of Staff Committee to develop a new concept for organizing and manning Marine Air Ground Task Force Headquarters. The new plan called for the establishment of three Marine Amphibious Force planning headquarters each headed by a brigadier general and each permanently staffed with 47 officers and 45 enlisted men. Six Marine amphibious brigades, two in each division-wing team, manned by 65 officers and 85 enlisted men, were also planned.
22 October – Headquarters and Maintenance Squadron 13 (H&MS-13) was awarded the 1982 Villard C. Sledge Memorial Award for best J52 turboshaft engine repair unit in the naval service. H&MS-13 has received the award for five consecutive years.
22 October – In a recent test of the new “Meal, Ready-to-Eat” (MRE) rations, 91.5 percent of the Marines at Camp Lejeune preferred the new C rations over the old ones. The most important feature of the new C rations was the old tin cans gave way to a new flexible package – a “retort” pouch. MREs are lighter than C rations and the new packaging materials are designed to withstand climate and rough handling stresses. The new MREs will be issued this year as old C ration supplies are depleted.
29 October – The 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU), under the command of Colonel Thomas M. Stokes, Jr., replaced the 32d MAU as part of the multinational peacekeeping force in Beirut, Lebanon.
29 October - 3 November – The 32d Marine Amphibious Unit backload into five amphibious ships in Beirut enroute to Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.
4 November – U.S. Marines extended their presence in the Lebanese capital of Beirut to the Christian eastern sector, sending their first patrol into one of the most devastated areas along the old “Green Line” that for seven years divided the war torn city into sectarian parts. The Marines carried M16 rifles and .45 caliber pistols, while two of the jeeps were mounted with 60 mm machine guns.
5 November – Retired Marine Corps General Edwin Allen Pollock, 83, the only Marine to command both the Atlantic and Pacific Fleet Marine Forces died in Charleston, South Carolina. He commanded the 1st Marine Division in Korea from August 1952 - June 1953.
7 November – The Seventh Annual Marine Corps Marathon took place in Washington, D.C., and Arlington, Virginia, covering 26 miles and 385 yards. 9,996 runners from every state and 27 foreign countries participated in the second largest marathon in the nation after New York’s. Jeff Smith, a 27-year-old postal worker from Cumberland, Maryland, took first place with a time of 2:21:29.
9 November – The “Green Knights” of Marine Attack Squadron 121 exceeded the 45,000-hour accident free flight mark. This milestone marked more than eleven years of accident free flying and distinguished the “Green Knights” as the leading accident-free fixed-wing tactical jet squadron in the Marine Corps.
9 November – The Commandant of the Marine Corps issued a statement elaborating on the approval of the Marine Corps’ new service rifle, the M16A2. The M16A1 underwent significant engineering changes to produce a more sound and reliable weapon. The Commandant stated that the Marine Corps’ well-deserved reputation for military professionalism stems in part from the unique relationship that has existed between a Marine and his rifle and from the Corps’ devotion to marksmanship proficiency as a fundamental skill of all Marines. The Commandant also stated that he was confident that the selection of the M16A2 will enhance the Corps’ combat effectiveness. Due to the rapidly declining inventory of M161As, the Corps has elected to replace them with the newer models on a one-for-one basis in FY84, with inventory conversion completed by FY89.
10 November – Marines throughout the world celebrated the 207th birthday of the Marine Corps, in honor of the founding of the Marine Corps on 10 November 1775 by the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia. In his birthday message, the Commandant of the Marine Corps said that “on this special day, as always, those who rely on us can feel confident that, if needed, we are ready.”
10 November – The 3d Marine Aircraft Wing celebrated its 40th birthday at Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, California.
11 November – Space shuttle Columbia’s first satellite-carrying commercial flight took place with Marine Colonel Robert Overmyer on board as pilot of the vehicle and Vance D. Brand, a former Marine who served with the Corps from 1953-1957, as shuttle commander. The four-astronaut team successfully released a massive communications satellite from the space shuttle Columbia and left it behind them in the open sea of space.
13 November – The dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial took place at the memorial site in Washington, D.C., immediately following a parade in tribute to Vietnam Veterans. The dedication and parade was part of the week long National Salute to Vietnam Veterans which included a candlelight vigil, unit reunion registration, and religious services for Marine Corps Vietnam veterans and those from other services.
16 November – Space shuttle Columbia, piloted by a Marine and commanded by a former Marine, landed at Edwards Air Force Base, California, at the completion of a successful mission which included the placing into orbit around the earth of two $50 million communications satellites.
24 November – The 32d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) arrived at Morehead City, North Carolina, from Beirut, Lebanon, concluding its Mediterranean deployment. The 32d MAU was relieved in Beirut on 29 October 1982 by the 24th MAU and participated in a training exercise in Morocco prior to its return.
24 November – The last F-4 “Phantom” fighters departed Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), El Toro, California. Flight operations have been slowly phased out at MCAS El Toro due to the noise levels of modern aircraft and their incompatibility with neighboring communities. This marked the end of a twenty-year era at the air station.
3 December – The new Federal Aviation Administration Building in New York City was named after Major Robert M. Fitzgerald, a highly decorated Marine aviator. Major Fitzgerald was killed in action in the Quang Nam Province of Vietnam on 1 June 1970 while attempting a helicopter rescue of a six-man reconnaissance team that was engaged in combat.
3- 7 December – The 31st Marine Amphibious Unit participated in Exercise “Jade Tiger 83” conducted at Wahibah Sands, Oman. The exercise included close air support in conjunction with the establishment of the beachhead by amphibious forces, follow-on strikes as the force moved inland, and interdiction against designated hostile surface contacts.
7 December – President Reagan approved the activation of a new U.S. Central Command (US CENTCOM) responsible for protecting U.S. security interests in the Middle East, Persian Gulf, and Indian Ocean areas. The command will be empowered to draw from a pool of about 230,000 troops in the U.S. in the event of a war emergency in that critical region. The unified command is an outgrowth of the Rapid Deployment Force created by the Carter Administration in 1980, in the wake of the Iranian Revolution and the Soviet invasion of Afganistan.
10 December – A 250-man Marine Detachment assigned to Exercise “UNITAS XXII” and the “West African Training Cruise 82” on board the USS Portland returned after a six-month deployment. Navy and embarked Marine Corps personnel made goodwill visits to numerous African areas conducting training activities, community relations projects, open houses, and other events to enhance U.S. and African relations.
13 December – U.S. Marine peacekeeping troops began training a special unit of the Lebanese Army in an expansion of the American role in Lebanon. About 75 Lebanese soldiers joined a company of 220 Marines at the Americans’ camp near Beirut airport for 21 days of training in basic infantry skills including helicopter assaults.
16 December – The 36th anniversary of Fleet Marine Force Atlantic was observed. The force was born out of necessity for a grouping of Marine air, ground, and specialized units under one command to produce the Marine Corps highly effective air-ground “Force in Readiness.” This force in readiness was able to respond quickly and effectively to the crisis in Lebanon this year.
29 December – The USS New Jersey was recommissioned. The battleship was first commissioned in 1943 and fought in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. The New Jersey was modernized with the addition of 32 Tomahawk Cruise missiles, 16 Harpoon surface-to-surface missiles, and a close-in weapons system of computerized radar-guided Gatling guns. Three helicopters, known as Light Airborne MultiWeapons System (LAMPS), have also been added. The modernizing and commissioning of the battleship took place three weeks ahead of schedule. The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Barrow, and President Reagan attended the recommissioning ceremonies. Two officers and 42 enlisted men make up the Marine Detachment on board.
31 December – Marine Fighter Squadron 214, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, was named attack squadron of the year and received the Lawson H.S. Sanderson Award. Major General Sanderson was the Marine Corps’ dive-bombing pioneer noted for his experimental close support bombing exercises. The award was established to recognize superior performance of a Marine attack squadron.
31 December – The Commandant announced that Marine Corps aviation achieved a new milestone of a major mishap rate of approximately 6.3 major mishaps per 100,000 flight hours for 1982. Against the 6.5 goal the Commandant set for 1982, this represented significant progress and is the lowest annual rate ever attained by Marine Corps aviation. While the ultimate goal of Marine Corps aviation will continue to be a zero mishap rate, the Commandant was confident that with the emphasis on successful measures already established, the Marine Corps can continue to work towards that goal by attaining a mishap rate of 6.0 or less in 1983.
1983
1 January – A composite U.S. Marine Corps band participated in the 94th Annual Tournament of Roses Parade in Pasadena, California. The 100-plus member band was composed of musicians from Marine units stationed at Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii; El Toro, California; Camp Pendleton, California; and San Diego, California. This marked the 36th consecutive year that the Corps’ bandsmen participated in the Rose Parade. Over one million spectators saw the Marine musicians and millions more viewed the marching unit on nationwide television.
1 January – A new unified command for Southwest Asia known as the U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) was activated. The new command, made up of Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine units, is responsible for protecting U.S. security interests in the Middle East, Persian Gulf, and the Indian Ocean areas. USCENTCOM command took the place of the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force and is empowered to draw from a pool of 230,000 troops in the U.S. in the event of a war emergency in that critical region.
1 January – The Basic Skills Education Program (BSEP) became effective to provide training in reading, mathematics, and English to Marines who were identified as deficient in any of the basic skills. Guidelines for screening eligible BSEP participants included motivation, level of basic skills required for satisfactory performance in a specific military occupation series, and military classification test scores.
1 January – The strength of the armed forces was 2,112,500, of which 195,700 were Marines.
3, 5, 7 and 12 January – Purple Heart Medals were awarded to three Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, Marines and the widow of another for wounds suffered 30 September 1982 at the Beirut International Airport, Lebanon, from an explosion of a cluster bomb during mine-clearing operations. Lance Corporal George Washington was presented the medal on 3 January, Corporal Anthony Morgan received his medal on 7 January, and Lance Corporal Leslie R. Morris was awarded the Purple Heart on 12 January. The widow of Corporal David L. Reagan, who was seriously injured by the blast and later died during surgery aboard the USS Guam, was presented his Purple Heart on 5 January.
6 January – Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 361 (HMH-361) at Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin, California, achieved its 25,000th accident –free flight hour. Major General Clayton L. Comfort, commanding general of the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing, stated that the “Flying Tigers” of HMH-361 showed leadership, professionalism, and dedication to accomplish all tasks and missions safely and successfully for five years to achieve this milestone.
7 January – Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 314 (VMFA-314), the first tactical squadron of any service to receive the F/A-18 Hornet, began flight operations at Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, California. VMFA-314 personnel were trained to operate the Hornet at Naval Air Station Lemoore, California, with joint Navy/Marine Fleet Readiness Squadron 125. The F/A-18 Hornet, as a replacement for the aging F-4 Phantom, provides a quantum improvement for Marine fighter-attack squadrons.
13 January – Retired General David Monroe Shoup, 78, a former Commandant of the Marine Corps, died of a heart ailment at Circle Terrace Hospital, Alexandria, Virginia. General Shoup served as the 22d Commandant of the Marine Corps from 1 January 1960 until his retirement from active service, 31 December 1963. As a colonel in World War II, General Shoup earned the Medal of Honor while commanding the Second Marines, 2d Marine Division on Tarawa. The highly decorated general was buried with full honors at Arlington National Cemetery on 17 January.
14 January – Retired Major General Samuel C. Cumming, 88, died in Sarasota, Florida. Major General Cumming entered the Marine Corps 1917 and served with the 5th Marines in World War I. He was commanding officer of the 25th Marines and the assistant division commander of the 4th Marine Division during World War II. The decorated general retired from the Marine Corps in 1946.
22 January - 1 February – The Commandant of the Philippine Marines, Brigadier General Rodolfp M. Pumsalang, visited the United States as a guest of the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Robert H. Barrow. The purpose of this visit was to tour Marine Corps operational and support commands, observe equipment, individual and unit training, and amphibious operations.
___ February – Technology replaced the versatile World War II “steel pot” helmet with a synthetic fabric model weighing the same three pounds but offering 25 percent more protection to the wearer’s head, temple, ear and neck areas. The same Kevlar fabric developed by Dupont Corporation was also used in the manufacture of flak jackets. Marines of the 32d Amphibious Unit sported the Kevlar flak jackets during their deployments to Lebanon in 1982.
___ February – The first M198, 155mm towed artillery piece was received by the 1st Marine Division cannoneers at Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California. The regiment’s aging fleet of 105mm howitzer cannons were slowly retired in favor of the Corps’ new M198. The M198 has a range nearly 30 kilometers, weighs 15,700 pounds, and has a hydraulic pedestal so it can be rotated 360 degrees in 15 seconds.
2 February – Captain Charles B. Johnson, USMC, of Neenah, Wisconsin, drew and loaded his pistol while blocking an attempt by three Israeli tanks to pass through his checkpoint near the Beirut University Library, Lebanon. The lead tank in the Israeli formation stopped a foot in front of Captain Johnson of Company L of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit. The confrontation appeared to be the most serious of six or seven reported between Israeli soldiers and U.S. Marines on peacekeeping duty in Lebanon.
7 February – A McDonald’s restaurant had a grand opening ceremony at Camp Pendleton, California, marking the first fast-food enterprise invasion of a U.S. military base. McDonald’s won the contract for an on-base operation through competitive bidding late in 1982 after the base commander approved a request from the Marine Corps Exchange. McDonald’s believed the company would have great potential at Camp Pendleton, a base for 40,000 Marines.
15 February – Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) replaced the 24th MAU in Beirut, Lebanon, as part of an international peacekeeping force. The 22d MAU was commanded by Colonel James Mead who also commanded the 32d MAU during the initial landings in Lebanon during August and September 1982. The 22d MAU was composed of Battalion Landing Team, 2d Battalion, 6th Marines, Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 264, and MAU Service Support Group 22.
15 February – Retired Brigadier General Robert Hugh Williams, 75, died of cancer at his farm “Bryn Mawr” near Wales, Wisconsin. During World War II, General Williams commanded the 1st Parachute Battalion and in 1943 became the first commanding officer of the 1st Parachute Regiment. He was awarded the Navy Cross for action at Gavutu, Solomon Islands, and was executive officer of the 28th Marines when the regiment captured Mount Suribachi and raised the flag on Iwo Jima.
16 February – Marine Helicopter Training Squadron 301 (HMT-301) of the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter), Tustin, California, celebrated eight years of accident-free flying. In addition to training Marine Corps personnel, HMT-301 also trained pilots from the Naval Flight School at Pensacola, Florida.
21-24 February – The U.S. Marines in Lebanon conducted humanitarian relief operations in the town of Quartaba during Lebanon’s worst blizzard in memory. The operations consisted of snow removal, distribution of food and heating fuel, and medical assistance. U. S. Marine helicopters also flew into Syrian -- held territory in Lebanon’s central mountains -- and rescued four Lebanese men suffering from frostbite and exposure. The operation brought about a degree of cooperation between the Syrians, Israelis, Lebanese and the multinational force.
24 February – Marine Colonel Robert F. Overmeyer, who piloted the fifth flight of the space shuttle Columbia in November 1982, visited Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), El Toro, California. Colonel Overmeyer presented the commanding general of MCAS El Toro, Brigadier General Richard M. Cooke, with plaques displaying Columbia patches and Marine Corps flags taken on the shuttle flight.
26 February – The honor platoon from Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, California, was on hand to welcome Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, on the first stop of their West Coast tour at San Diego. The Marines were part of a dual ceremonial guard which included a platoon of Navy recruits and a Navy/Marine Corps joint color guard. The Queen inspected the military units and toured the San Diego harbor area.
28 February – Major General David M. Twomey assumed command of Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia, upon the retirement of Lieutenant General Richard E. Carey. Since June 1981, General Twomey was director of the Quantico Education Center, an 11-school complex. Prior to assuming his assignments at Quantico, General Twomey served as Commanding General of the 2d Marine Division at Camp Lejeune from July 1979 - June 1981; and Inspector General of the Marine Corps from July 1978 - June 1979.
1-3 March – Over 100 volunteers from the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing, Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, California, assisted Huntington Beach, California, civil authorities in flood relief operations.
3-22 March – “Team Spirit 83,” a joint combined exercise involving some 188,000 U.S. and Republic of Korea Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force personnel, was staged in South Korea. III Marine Amphibious Force Marines stationed at Okinawa and Iwakuni, Japan, participated by forming a Marine Air Ground Task Force comprised of about 8,000. “Team Spirit 83” maneuvers were structured to train for a Korean contingency based on the defense of South Korea against North Korean aggression.
8 March – The 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU), the second American MAU to serve as part of the international peacekeeping force in Beirut, Lebanon, arrived at Morehead City, North Carolina. The 24th MAU was relieved in Beirut by the 22d MAU on 15 February 1983.
9 March – Retired Brigadier General Robert Bostwick Carney, Jr., 63, former commander of Marine Barracks in Washington, D.C. from 1964-1968, died at his home in Arlington, Virginia. General Carney earned the Bronze Star Medal with Combat “V” for his service with the 5th Marine Division on Iwo Jima and was awarded the Legion of Merit with Combat “V” for his service in Vietnam. He retired from active duty in July 1972.
11-17 March – Elements of the 4th Marine Amphibious Brigade and ships of Amphibious Squadron 4 joined Naval and Air Forces of Norway, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands for exercise “Cold Winter ‘83” in Norway. The biennial exercise, sponsored by the Norwegian Brigade North, was designed to exercise coordination procedures between Norwegian and allied units in combat operations under winter conditions.
12-26 March – More than 3,200 Marines from the 4th Marine Aircraft Wing participated in “Operation Skyhawk,” the largest Marine air reserve exercise ever held. Approximately 100 aircraft from 48 units and personnel from all reserve units in the continental United States participated in the exercise consisting of close air support, combat air patrols, troop lifts, electronic warfare missions and aerial refueling. Marine units included elements of the 3d Marine Amphibious Brigade, elements of the 5th and 11th Marines, and Marine Aircraft Group 42. The exercise took place at Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma, Arizona, and other military installations in Nevada and California.
14 March – General Robert H. Barrow, Commandant of the Marine Corps, demanded that “firm and strong action” be taken to stop Israeli forces in Lebanon from putting Marines in “life-threatening situations” that are “timed, orchestrated and executed for obtuse Israeli political purposes.” The general’s charges were contained in a letter to Secretary of Defense, Caspar W. Weinberger. General Barrow had been concerned for months over what he considered deliberate Israeli provocations designed to discredit international peacekeeping forces in Lebanon.
16 March – Five Marines from Weapons Company, Battalion Landing Team 2d Battalion, 6th Marines, 22d Marine Amphibious Unit were wounded superficially during a foot patrol in an urban area called Warzia, northwest of Marine Corps positions at Beirut International Airport. An unknown assailant tossed a fragmentation hand grenade at the patrol marking the first direct attack against the 1,200-man force since American troops took up positions in Beirut during 1982. An Islamic fundamentalist group known as Jihad Islami, or Islamic Holy War, claimed responsibility for the attack on the Marines.
17 March – The 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) was presented the Navy Unit Commendation by Major General Alfred M. Gray, Jr., Commanding General of the 2d Marine Division, for meritorious service from 29 October 1982 to 15 February 1983 as part of the multinational peacekeeping force in Lebanon. During that period, the 24th MAU was commanded by Colonel Thomas M. Stokes, Jr.
18 March – Marine Light Helicopter Squadron 267 (HML-267) celebrated 80,000 hours of accident-free flying. Major General Clayton L. Comfort, commanding general of the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing congratulated the Marines of HML-267 and praised them for soaring past aviation milestones.
18 March – The Bachelor Enlisted Quarters at Henderson Hall, Arlington, Virginia, were dedicated in honor of Marine Lance Corporal Miguel Keith, USMC (Deceased), a Vietnam War Medal of Honor recipient. Keith Hall consists of two separate five-story buildings which share a common garden and green area and a two-level underground parking complex. The facility has 260 individual rooms and houses 553 Marines. LCpl Keith was awarded a Medal of Honor posthumously for his actions as a machine gunner with Combined Action Platoon 1-3-2, III Amphibious Force in Vietnam.
18 - 22 March – Approximately 13,000 Marines, Navy, Army, and Air Force personnel participated in exercise “Gallant Knight ‘83.” Marines of the I Marine Amphibious Force participated in the exercise which was conducted under the aegis of the U.S. Central Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina; San Diego, California; and Camp Pendleton, California. The exercise was designed to test command and control functions and employment plans. It also examined procedures of the U.S. Central Command.
21 March – Lebanon’s President, Amin Gemayel, visited U.S. Navy ships which directly supported the peace-keeping mission of the multinational force in Lebanon. He flew aboard the USS Nimitz (CVN-68) and was briefed on U.S. Sixth Fleet missions by Rear Admiral Edward H. Martin, Commander, Battle Force Sixth Fleet. He also toured the USS Guadalcanal (LPH-7) and was briefed by Captain George D. Bess, Commander, Amphibious Force Sixth Fleet, on the capabilities of Navy and Marine Corps forces in the Mediterranean.
21 March – Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 323 (VMFA-323) of the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing (3d MAW) at Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, California, received the first of 12 F/A-18 “Hornet” aircraft. The “Death Rattlers” of VMFA-323 are the second 3d MAW squadron to convert to the strike fight jet.
22 March – The High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) contract was awarded to AM General Corporation. A $59.8 million fixed price contract included an economic price adjustment for 2,334 vehicles with spare parts, provisioning support, publications, and training. This was the first of a five-year multi-year procurement. The total multi-year contract is $1,184,766,345 for 54,973 vehicles. The 5/4-ton HMMWV can be adapted for multiple missions, including reconnaissance, command and control, troop and weapons carrier, and utility roles.
24 March – President Reagan announced his intention to nominate General Paul X. Kelley, Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps and Chief of Staff since 1 July 1981, as the next Commandant of the Marine Corps. General Kelley was scheduled to succeed General Robert H. Barrow, Commandant of the Marine Corps, on 1 July 1983.
25 March – Retired Major General Samuel S. Jack who served with the 2d Marine Brigade in Nicaragua and commanded the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army fighter planes operating from Guadalcanal during World War II, died in San Diego, California. He was awarded the Navy Cross for actions in Nicaragua and three Legions of Merit during World War II and Korea.
26 March - 1 April – The presentation of the annual Navy League awards took place at the Navy League Convention in Washington, D.C. Five Marines were selected for the 1982 awards: Captain Kenneth T. McCabe, 2d Marine Division received the General John A. Lejeune Award for inspirational leadership; Colonel James M. Mead, Commanding Officer of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit and Master Sergeant Steven R. Head of the 2d Marine Division received the General Gerald C. Thomas Award for inspirational leadership; and CWO-4 Bruce M. Wincentsen of Marine Corps Development and Education Command, Quantico received the Rear Admiral William S. Parsons Award for scientific and technical progress.
27 March – Retired Brigadier General Samuel Blair Griffith II, 76, a decorated veteran of World War II and an authority on Chinese military history, died of respiratory arrest at the Newport Naval Regional Hospital in Newport, Rhode Island. In the 1930s General Griffith was stationed at the U.S. Embassy in Peking as a Chinese language officer. He returned to China in 1946 and commanded Marine forces in Tsingtao for two years. After he retired from the Marine Corps in 1956, he took a doctorate in Chinese history at New College, Oxford University.
28 March – A CH-53 “Sea Stallion” helicopter from Marine Helicopter Squadron 362, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing, Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter), New River, North Carolina, crashed near San Simon, Arizona, while enroute to Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma, Arizona. While flying, the tail section of the plane detached and caused the helicopter to crash. Six Marines were killed and one was injured.
5 April – The result of the third annual Colonel Robert D. Heinl, Jr. Award in Marine Corps History was announced at a meeting of the Board of Directors of the Marine Corps Historical Foundation. The 1982 award went to Lieutenant Colonel Robert E. Mattingly for “Who Knew Not Fear,” on article that appeared in Studies in Intelligence, a quarterly publication of the Central Intelligence Agency.
9 April – President Ronald Reagan designated this date as National POW/MIA Recognition Day in honor of all former American prisoners of war, those still missing, and their families. From World War I to the Vietnam conflict, more than 142,000 U.S. servicemen were taken prisoner and more than 1,700 died while in captivity. During the same period, more than 92,000 servicemen were lost in combat and their remains were never recovered.
11 April – Louis Gossett, Jr. won an Oscar for his performance as a Marine Corps drill instructor in “An Officer and a Gentleman,” one of 1983’s romantic smash-hits. Mr. Gossett was also the first black performer in 20 years to win an Oscar.
15 April – The Commandant of the Marine Corps approved the Commemorative Renaming of a portion of Malecon Drive at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, South Carolina, in honor of General Edwin A. Pollock, USMC (Deceased).
17 April - 11 May – More than 47,000 persons from the Marine Corps, Navy, Army, and Air Force participated in Exercise “Solid Shield ‘83”. It was the 21st in a series of annual Commander in Chief Atlantic joint exercise at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina; Fort Stewart, Georgia; and Morehead City, North Carolina. The exercise was designed to emphasize command and control of military forces in a simulated combat environment and included extensive air operations. Approximately 16,000 Marines from II Marine Amphibious Force and the 4th Marine Amphibious Brigade participated.
18 April – A large car bomb exploded just outside the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, causing massive structural damage including the collapse of portions of all seven floors. The French contingent of the multinational peacekeeping force in Beirut was first to respond and provided the initial security and relief efforts at the scene. Shortly afterward, U.S. Marines from the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit secured the area around the embassy. The explosion killed 61 people, including one Marine Security Guard and 16 other Americans, and wounded more than 100 persons. An Islamic group known as the Islamic or Muslim Holy War claimed responsibility for the attack.
25 April – A monument was dedicated at Arlington National Cemetery to the three Marines and five airmen who died in the attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran during 1980.
26 April – Lance Corporal Robert McMaugh of Manassas, Virginia, was buried at Arlington National Cemetery. Corporal McMaugh, a Marine Security Guard at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, was one of 61 people killed when the embassy was bombed on 18 April. He was standing guard at Post 1, just inside the front entrance when the bomb exploded outside the door. The other seven Marine Security Guards in the building were wounded in the blast.
26 April – Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 266 was activated as part of Marine Aircraft Group 26, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter), New River, North Carolina.
27 April – The USS Nicholas (FFG-47), a guided missile frigate, was launched at Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine. General Leonard F. Chapman, Jr., former Commandant of the Marine Corps, was the principal speaker at the ceremony. The ship was named in honor of Major Samuel Nicholas, the Revolutionary War Marine considered to be the Corps’ first Commandant.
27 April – A CH-53D “Sea Stallion” helicopter from Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 461, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing, Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter), New River, North Carolina, crashed in Virginia Beach, Virginia. The helicopter was conducting an amphibious assault rehearsal in conjunction with Exercise “Solid Shield ‘83.” The crash killed one Marine and injured three others.
5 May – In Beirut, Lebanon, a UH-1 Huey helicopter carrying the commander of the American peacekeeping force, Colonel James Mead, was hit by machine gun fire. The six Marines aboard escaped injury. Colonel Mead and his crew had taken off in the helicopter to investigate artillery and rocket duels between rival Syrian-backed Druze Muslim militiamen and Christian Phalangists that endangered French members of the multinational force.
7-21 May – The Commandant General of the United Kingdom’s Royal Marines, Lieutenant General Sir Steuart R. Pringle, visited the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Robert H. Barrow. The visiting general toured Marine Corps facilities in Washington, D.C. and southern California.
12 May – President Reagan nominated Lieutenant General John K. Davis, Commanding General, Fleet Marine Force, Pacific for promotion to full General and assignment as Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps. General Davis was scheduled to succeed General Paul X. Kelley, Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1 July 1983.
15 May – The Veterans Administration dedicated its newest national cemetery in Quantico, Virginia. The first burial took place 16 May. The new cemetery will relieve pressures for burial space at Arlington National Cemetery which has been forced to restrict eligibility in recent years. Interment in the Quantico National Cemetery will be available to any veteran who was discharged under conditions other than dishonorable, regardless of rank or length of service. The creation and designation of the Quantico site was made possible when the Marine Corps transferred 725 acres of land to the Veterans Administration, thereby providing for the burial needs of more than 600,000 veterans and their dependents. When fully developed, the Quantico National Cemetery will include 275 interment acres, a memorial center, assembly areas, mausoleum, administrative and maintenance facilities, and a six-acre lake.
25 May – The Commandant of the Marine Corps announced the selection of Sergeant Major Robert E. Cleary as the next Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps effective 1 July 1983. Sergeant Major Cleary succeeded the retiring Sergeant Major Leland D. Crawford as the Marine Corps’ highest ranking enlisted Marine. He becomes the tenth Marine to hold the post.
26-27 May – General Robert H. Barrow, Commandant of the Marine Corps, and Sergeant Major Leland D. Crawford, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, visited with Marines and sailors of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit in Beirut, Lebanon. The Commandant presented Purple Heart Medals to five Marines who were wounded in a grenade attack on 16 March. He also presented 12 awards to French Marines for their assistance after the bombing of the U.S. Embassy on 18 April.
27 May – Two explosions occurred outside the American Embassy at Lima, Peru. Marines took up defensive positions. No further incidents occurred and there were no injuries.
29 May – The Marine Corps provided assault amphibian vehicle support to the state of Louisiana due to the imminent danger of the Mississippi River flooding the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola, Louisiana. The extent of damage was minor water seepage along the inboard side of the 18-mile long levee and an unknown amount of water absorbed by the levee itself. The support was requested by the governor of Louisiana.
30 May – Marines of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) took over peacekeeping duties in Beirut, Lebanon, and replaced 22d MAU Marines who had been ashore since 15 February 1983. The 24th MAU was commanded by Colonel Timothy J. Geraghty.
7 June – The U.S. Postal Service issued a stamp at a Pentagon ceremony commemorating the 120th anniversary of the Medal of Honor. Local postmasters planned ceremonies to present special stamp albums to Medal of Honor recipients in their communities. There are 260 living Medal of Honor recipients including 47 Marines.
7-13 June – More than 30,000 Marine Corps and Navy personnel participated in Exercise “Valiant Blitz ‘83” on Okinawa, Japan. The exercise was designed to provide forces with training in amphibious landing techniques and operations ashore. “Valiant Blitz” involved approximately 3,000 Marines plus 20 ships and 250 aircraft. It was the biggest exercise on Okinawa since “Fortress Gale” in 1979.
14 June – A bomb exploded under a van outside the residence of Marines assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina, damaging the vehicle but causing no injuries. The bombing came on the first anniversary of Argentina’s surrender to Britain in the 1982 Falklands war.
16 June - 13 December – Marines of the 2d Marine Division participated in Exercise “Unitas XXIV/West African Training Cruise 83” in the Caribbean, South American, and West African waters. It provided training opportunities and interactions for South American and West African Navies and Marine Corps to exercise in combined training operations and to support mutual interest in the defense of the free world. The exercise was conducted in eight phases followed by seven port visits to five West African countries.
17 June – Navy Hospital Corpsmen were honored at Camp Pendleton, California, with the dedication of the Hospital Corpsmen/Dental Technician/Marine Combat Memorial at the Naval Regional Medical Center. The monument was made by Oceanside, California, artist, Raul Avina, whose design was based on a scene he had witnessed at Iwo Jima while serving in the Marine Corps.
21 June – Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) arrived at Key West, Florida, after serving as part of the international peacekeeping force in Beirut, Lebanon, for four months. The 22d MAU was relieved in Beirut by the 24th MAU on 30 May 1983.
26 June – Before an estimated 3,400 Marines and visitors including President Ronald Reagan, the Commander in Chief, General Paul X. Kelley received the official battle color of the Marine Corps, relieving General Robert H. Barrow as Commandant of the Marine Corps. The ceremonies were conducted at Marine Barracks, Washington, D.C. General Kelley assumed command as the 28th Commandant of the Marine Corps and General Barrow officially retired. General Kelley’s command was effective 1 July 1983.
27 June – The U.S. Embassy in San Salvador, El Salvador, was sprayed with gunfire by unknown assailants in two passing vehicles. Seconds later, a rocket fired at the building hit a nearby tree and exploded. There were no reports of injuries in the attack and only minor damage was inflicted upon the embassy building. The attack caused some alarm since the embassy is located in a residential sector of the city.
27 June – The 22d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) received a Navy Unit Commendation for meritorious service in Lebanon. The award was made during the promotion ceremony of Colonel James Mead, former commanding officer of the 22d MAU, to brigadier general.
30 June – The strength of the armed forces was 2,113,400 of which 193,993 were Marines.
5 July – Secretary of State, George Shultz, visited the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit in Beirut, Lebanon. A former Marine major who served in the Pacific during World War II, Secretary Shultz was enroute to Damascus, Syria, to discuss the withdrawal of Syrian and Israeli forces from Lebanon.
6 July - 1 August – More than 6,000 U.S. troops, along with air and sea support, participated in Exercise “Cobra Gold 83,” a joint military exercise with Thailand’s armed forces in and around the Gulf of Thailand. The exercise was designed to strengthen the ability of Thailand’s armed forces to defend their country. The exercise involved training in mine-laying and sweeping, explosive ordnance disposal, special warfare operations, simulated air and sea battle, and amphibious assault and shore operations by Thai and U.S. Marines. “Cobra Gold” was the first exercise for the USS New Jersey since it was recommissioned in 1982.
11 July – The U.S. Marine Band, the oldest continuously active military musical organization in the nation, observed its 185th birthday. A concert for the new Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley, was performed at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. with President Ronald Reagan in attendance. The Marine Band was under the leadership of Colonel John R. Bourgeois, its 25th director since its founding in 1798.
11 July – An exhibition of a new series of historical paintings titled “Marines in the Frigate Navy 1794-1834” by Lieutenant Colonel Charles Waterhouse opened at the Marine Corps Museum in Washington, D.C. The display illustrated Marine Corps activities during the first 40 years of the United States Navy. “Marines in the Frigate Navy” will remain on exhibition in the Marine Corps Museum through February 1984. It will then appear in a number of naval and maritime museums from Virginia to Massachusetts during 1984 - 1986.
18 July - 1 August – More than 2,000 Marine Corps reservists participated in a combined arms exercise “CAX 8-83” at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California. The live-fire exercise was designed to improve the proficiency of the reservists in all phases of modern combat skills. Scenarios involving all facets of Marine Corps combat training were brought into play as reservists combined forces and operated as they would under battle conditions. “CAX 8-83” also indoctrinated troops to techniques of desert warfare and survival.
22 July – A U.S. Marine stationed in Beirut, Lebanon, as part of the multinational peacekeeping force was hit by flying shrapnel and suffered a superficial shoulder wound when the Beirut International Airport came under heavy shellfire from unknown positions.
26 July – The 6th Marine Amphibious Brigade (MAB) was activated by Lieutenant General John H. Miller, Commanding General Fleet Marine Force, Atlantic at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. The 6th MAB was activated as part of the Maritime Prepositioning Ship program designed to provide rapid introduction of combat forces anywhere they are needed.
29 July – Sergeant Charles A. Light, Jr. was promoted to the rank of staff sergeant and awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for outstanding service when the American Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, was devastated by a car bomb last April. In a ceremony at Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley, made the presentation to the former assistant non-commissioned officer in charge of the Marine Security Guard Detachment, U.S. Embassy, Beirut.
31 July – Unidentified gunmen fired a burst of shots at a group of U.S. Marines as they were jogging on the edge of their encampment near Beirut International Airport. The gunfire struck the ground between two groups of Marines jogging on the road and hit about 20-25 yards from the nearest Marine. There were no injuries. Jogging as part of the multinational peacekeeping force in Beirut, were changed after the attack.
10 August – U.S. Marines at the Beirut International Airport in Lebanon were on their highest state of alert following an airport shelling that wounded one Marine. The rocket attack by Druze militia in the mountains east of Beirut provided the opening shots for a day of warfare between Muslim militiamen and the government. Rockets also hit the Defense Ministry and the Presidential Palace. The daylong hostilities by Druze Muslims against the Christian government included the kidnapping of three cabinet ministers.
16-17 August – The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley, visited with Marines of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit in Beirut, Lebanon. In the Commandant’s press statement upon his arrival at the Beirut International Airport, he vowed that threats from Druze gunmen would not intimidate the 1,200 Marines in Lebanon. The Commandant later made a mobile/aerial tour of Marine positions.
17-24 August – Exercise “Bright Star/Eastern Wind 83,” a combined exercise involving military forces from the United States and Somalia, was held near Berbera, Somalia. The exercise was designed to allow forces of both nations to conduct combined training in a harsh desert environment and to enhance Somalia’s ability to defend itself. About 2,800 U.S. servicemen, including Marines from the 31st Marine Amphibious Unit and the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing, participated in the exercise.
26 August – Captain Ronald L. King of Battery I, 3d Battalion, 12th Marines, 3d Marine Division was the recipient of the 1983 Leftwich Trophy, as the battery’s commanding officer. The Leftwich Trophy, an award for a captain in Fleet Marine Force who best exemplifies the principles of leadership, was presented to Captain King at the Evening Parade, Marine Barracks, Washington, D.C.
28 August – Marines fought a 90-minute battle with militiamen thought to be Shiite Muslims in their first combat involvement since they went to Beirut, Lebanon, as part of the multinational peacekeeping force a year ago. The combat outpost manned by about 30 Marines and Lebanese army troops east of the Beirut International Airport came under fire by semiautomatic weapons and two rocket propelled grenades. The Marines returned the fire with M-16 rifles and M-60 machine guns. There were no Marine casualties.
29 August – Two Marines were killed and 14 were wounded when dozens of rocket, mortar, and artillery rounds landed in positions occupied by the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit on the eastern side of the Beirut International Airport. It was the second day of heavy fighting and the second day that the Marines struck back at their attackers.
31 August – The Department of Defense authorized hostile-fire pay for Marines and sailors of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit in Lebanon. Each of the 1,200 U.S. Marine peacekeepers serving in Lebanon were eligible for up to $65.00 a month extra pay. The authorization was under a Pentagon regulation that did not trigger any War Powers Act provisions.
2 September – President Ronald Reagan ordered a second 1,800 man amphibious unit to reinforce the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) in Lebanon. The 31st MAU was not expected to go ashore, but rather act as a back up force on board ship.
3 September – The 35th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) was activated for western Pacific contingency operations in relief of the 31st MAU ordered to Lebanon.
6 September – Two Marines were killed and two were wounded when rockets hit their compound in Beirut, Lebanon. Since 28 August 1983, when fighting broke out between Muslim and Christian militiamen and the Lebanese army, 4 Marines were killed and 24 were wounded. Heavy fighting continued for the peacekeeping force in the area near their positions around the Beirut International Airport.
8 September – The U.S. Navy unleashed its firepower in Lebanon for the first time destroying a Druze militia battery that shelled Beirut International Airport. The frigate Bowen fired four rounds from its five-inch guns as mountain fighting raged and the U.S. Marine base was shelled. Lieutenant General John H. Miller and Major General Alfred M. Gray were inspecting the Marine compound when the shelling started. Marine gunners responded with six rounds from a 155mm howitzer as the Bowen’s guns blasted away.
13 September – President Reagan authorized Marine commanders in Lebanon to call in air strikes from Navy fliers if such action is needed to defend U.S. troops in Beirut. Marines in Beirut could request air strikes from carrier-based fighters off shore and the request, if granted, would be approved locally, rather than in Washington. Additionally, such support could be sought if other troops in the multinational peacekeeping force were threatened or if threats to the Lebanese army could endanger the Marines.
14 September – The USS Tarawa, with its force of Harrier jets and combat helicopters, arrived off the coast of Lebanon bringing an additional 1,800 Marines into position to be deployed as needed. With the arrival of the 31st Marine Amphibious Unit, under the command of Colonel James H. Curd, the United States had a total of 14,000 Marines and sailors on shore and on board ships in the Beirut, Lebanon area.
15 September - 19 November – Exercise “Bold Eagle 84” took place at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Approximately 19,000 Marines, sailors, soldiers and airmen participated in the exercise. It was the sixth in a continuing series of U.S. Readiness Command exercises. It was designed to exercise and evaluate participating commanders, staff and forces in joint service tactics, techniques and procedures employed by forces operating in a sophisticated air environment.
16 September – The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley, was the principal speaker at the keel-laying ceremony for the first two of thirteen maritime prepositioning ships (MPS) to be built at the Quincey, Massachusetts Shipbuilding Division of General Dynamics. General Kelley announced that the ships would be named in honor of two Marine Medal of Honor recipients: Second Lieutenant John P. Bobo and Private First Class Dewayne T. Williams. The MPS program is the key to the Rapid Deployment Force concept.
17 September – U. S. warships off the coast of Beirut, Lebanon, fired dozens of shells from their five-inch guns deep into Syrian-controlled parts of Lebanon. The Naval salvos marked the first time the United States responded to shelling on targets other than U.S. Marine positions around the Beirut International Airport. The naval gun fire from the destroyer John Rodgers and the frigate Bowen came in response to continued shelling in the area around the residence of U.S. Ambassador, Robert Dillon, and the Lebanese Defense Ministry about a mile from the ambassador’s house.
19-20 September – U.S. Navy warships shelled Syrian-backed Druze positions in the hills overlooking Beirut. A continuous, 15-minute barrage from the USS John Rodgers and USS Virginia were fired into the mountains. The battleships fired hundreds of five-inch shells, the heaviest naval bombardment since the Vietnam War, to stop anti-government Druze Muslim and Palestinian forces from taking the village of Souk el Gharb. It marked the first time U.S. naval gunfire was used directly in support of the Lebanese Army.
20 September – U.S. Marines operated on the Lebanese war front for the first time when six Marine and Lebanese army observers went to the front line of fighting between the U.S. backed Lebanese army and Druze Muslim militiamen near the village of Souk el Gharb. The observers relayed information to the Marines and to naval gunners as U.S. Navy ships bombarded Muslim positions.
20 September – The residence of the U.S. Ambassador, Robert Dillon, and the Lebanese Defense Ministry were bombarded by Syrian-backed insurgents in Beirut, Lebanon.
24 September – The Department of Defense announced that 1,600 Marines were ashore at Beirut, 400 more than the number called for in the agreement with Lebanon that set up the multinational force. Defense Department officials stated that the 400 extra men included members of ordinance disposal squads, public information units, and the American Forces Radio and Television staff. They also included American Embassy guard reinforcements, and communication, medical, Post Exchange, and helicopter maintenance personnel.
25 September – The USS New Jersey arrived off the coast of Lebanon to increase the firepower of the U.S. naval forces off Beirut. The USS New Jersey, capable of firing a one-ton shell 20 miles, would be able to shell anti-government artillery positions that hammered targets around the U.S. Marine peacekeeping force. The battleship joined 12 other American warships.
26 September – A cease-fire for Lebanon was announced by Saudi Arabian and Syrian officials in Damascus. The leader of the Druze force also announced that his troops were committed to the cease-fire. The U.S. Marines continued peacekeeping duties in Beirut as talks on the formation of a new coalition government began.
27 September – Two Marine aviators were injured when their AH-1T Cobra helicopter crashed into the sea. The USS Tarawa-based Cobra went down during a routine training mission about eight to nine miles from the beach adjacent to the Beirut International Airport. The cause of the accident was not a result of hostile fire. The two pilots were recovered shortly after the crash by a USS Tarawa search and rescue helicopter. The USS Tarawa was off-shore Beirut as a contingency to support U.S. Marine and Navy forces.
27 September – General Alfred Houston Noble, USMC (Retired), died at his home in La Jolla, California, at the age of 88. General Noble, who retired in 1956, was a company commander in World War I and was awarded a Navy Cross for gallantry in action during the battle of Belleau Wood. The highly decorated general served with the 1st Marine Amphibious Corps during World War II and was commanding general of Camp Pendleton, California, from 1950 – 1951.
29 September – The Senate voted to let the Reagan administration keep U.S. Marines in Lebanon for as many as 18 more months. The Senate approved a resolution essentially the same as the 18-month authorization passed by the House of Representatives on 28 September. The action by both chambers marked the first time Congress sought to invoke the War Powers Act which was passed in 1973 after U.S. troops were withdrawn from fighting in the undeclared war in Vietnam.
1 October – The Pentagon announced that the 31st Marine Amphibious Unit, an emergency force of about 2,000 U.S. Marines on board three American ships, was sailing toward the Indian Ocean reportedly to take up position off the Strait of Hormuz, the entrance to the Persian Gulf. There was speculation that this move was linked to threats by Iran to blockade the strait and cut off the movement of oil tankers.
2 October – Major General Robert Blake, USMC (Retired), died at the age of 89 in Oakland, California. A combat veteran of both world wars, General Blake was twice awarded the Navy Cross for his actions at Belleau Wood in World War I and for bravery during fighting in Nicaragua.
4 October – Marine Air Control Squadron 1 (MACS-1) was activated at Camp Pendleton, California, as part of Marine Air Control Group 38, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing.
14 October – One Marine was killed and another Marine was wounded in a series of small-arms attacks near Beirut’s international airport as sporadic violations of the 26 September cease-fire continued. The incident erupted a three-hour exchange of fire between Marines and Muslim militiamen. This marked the first Marine killed since the start of the cease-fire which ended three weeks of fighting in the mountains east of Beirut between Lebanese Army and factional militias.
15 October – Lieutenant Colonel William G. Barnes, Jr., the former commanding officer of Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 263 (HMM-263) that provided more than three months of accident-free airlift support for Marines in Beirut, received the Alfred A. Cunningham award for the Marine Corps Aviator of 1983 at the Marine Corps Association convention in San Diego, California. The CH-46 “Sea Knight” pilot earned the award for performance of duty with HMM-263, the aviation combat element of the 24th Marine Amphibious Force in Beirut, Lebanon from 29 October 1982 to 14 February 1983. HMM-263 was selected as the helicopter squadron of the year for 1983.
16 October – One Marine was killed and three other Marines were wounded as Muslim militiamen continued sporadic firing at peacekeeping troops in Beirut, Lebanon. The Marines responded by firing M-16 rifles and two Dragon rockets at a Muslim slum, the source of several attacks over the past few days. This marked the sixth combat death since the Marines arrived in Lebanon.
21 October – A ten-ship task force carrying 1,900 Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit was ordered to head for Grenada to signal the United States’ intentions to protect American citizens on the Caribbean Island. The force was in the Caribbean and was on its way to Lebanon when the orders were received.
23 October – A suicide terrorist driving a truck loaded with explosives blew up the headquarters of 1st Battalion, 8th Marines in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 220 and wounding approximately 70, the highest number of Marine casualties in a single day since World War II. 18 Navy and three Army U.S. servicemen were also killed in the blast. Almost simultaneously with the blast that devastated the Marine Corps building, a second suicide bomber drove a car into a building occupied by French paratroopers and destroyed it too.
23 October – An unspecified number of Marine replacements embarked for Beirut, Lebanon, to replace Marines killed or wounded by the terrorist attack. Major General Alfred M. Gray, commander of the 2d Marine Division based at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, said the departing troops would bring the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit back up to strength.
25 October – The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley, visited seriously wounded Marines from the Beirut terrorist bombing at the Wiesbaden, West Germany, Air Force hospital. General Kelley presented 16 purple hearts there.
25 October – General Paul X. Kelley, inspected the flattened Marine headquarters at the Beirut International Airport. He viewed the devastation caused by the 23 October terrorist bombing that left 241 Marines and other U.S. servicemen dead.
25 October – An American force of up to 1,900 Marines, from the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit, and Army Rangers invaded the leftist-ruled Caribbean nation of Grenada. The force seized two airfields and the campus of an American-run medical school in an action that President Ronald Reagan said he ordered to protect 1,100 United States citizens living on the island. The airborne American units were joined by 300 soldiers from six neighboring Caribbean states that asked the U.S. to intervene to restore order after a new leftist government took power a few days earlier. The landing was the first large-scale American military intervention in the Western Hemisphere since the invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965. Three Marine aviators died in the operation.
26 October – Vice President George Bush inspected the devastated Marine building where a bomb killed 241 U.S. servicemen and said “insidious terrorist cowards” would not change U.S. foreign policy. Accompanying Vice President Bush on the tour were: Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley; Reginald Bartholomew, the U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon; Colonel Timothy Geraghty, commander of the 1,600 Marines in Lebanon; and Mrs. Bush.
26 October – The Marine Corps took delivery of the first of its eight-wheeled, amphibious light armored vehicles, LAV-25s. Following a competitive evaluation in which U.S. armed forces compared vehicles from three manufacturers, a contract was awarded to Diesel Division, General Motors of Canada, Ltd. The joint Marine Corps/Army contract called for the delivery of 969 vehicles during a five-year period and options for 598 more vehicles.
29 October – Bodies of 14 Marines and one sailor killed in Beirut, Lebanon, on 23 October, arrived at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware, marking the first American casualties scheduled to return home in the upcoming weeks. The slain Marines were part of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. The caskets, each draped with an American flag, were arranged in a row inside an aircraft hanger converted to a funeral chapel for the day’s ceremonies. The bodies of seven soldiers and one Marine killed in Grenada which arrived at Dover earlier, awaited their compatriots’ return along with the grieving families and U.S. military leaders including Marine Corps General Paul X. Kelley.
1 November – 300 Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit staged an amphibious and helicopter landing on the island of Carriacou, a dependency 15 miles northeast of Grenada’s main island, in a search for Cuban military installations or personnel. 17 Grenadian soldiers were captured, and arms, ammunition and training sites were found.
2 November – Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) pulled out of the Caribbean area and proceeded on route to Beirut, Lebanon, where the unit was scheduled to replace the 24th MAU later in the month.
4 November – President and Mrs. Ronald Reagan paid solemn tribute to the American servicemen killed and wounded in Grenada and Lebanon at a memorial service at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A somber crowd of 5,000 assembled in the rain at Camp Lejeune’s natural amphitheater. Also in attendance were: Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley; Secretary of Defense, Caspar Weinberger; Secretary of State, George Schultz; and National Security Advisor, Robert MacFarlane.
4 November – The Department of Defense Commission on the Beirut International Airport Terrorist Attack, October 23, 1983, was established. The Secretary of Defense directed that this Commission make a thorough investigation into all circumstances connected with the attack, and report to him it findings of fact and opinions relating to the attack, the Rules of Engagement then in force, the adequacy of security measures in place at the time of the explosion, and the adequacy of security measures subsequently established. Heading the Commission was Admiral Robert L.J. Long, USN (Retired).
6 November – Staff Sergeant Farley Simon, a native of Grenada, became the first Marine to win the Marine Corps Marathon in Washington, D.C. Sergeant Simon, stationed at Camp Smith, Hawaii, completed the marathon in 2 hours, 17 minutes, and 45 seconds. More than 11,000 runners participated in the eighth annual marathon.
6 November – A religious service was held for the U.S. Marine Corps at the Washington Cathedral, Washington, D.C. It was the Marines’ turn for the yearly armed services religious gathering at the cathedral. The service paid special tribute to the Marines who died in the terrorist bombing in Beirut and in the invasion of Grenada. Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley and Sergeant Major Robert E. Cleary, the Marines’ top-ranking enlisted man, attended the hour-long service.
10 November – Major General Richard C. Schulze, USMC (Retired), died in Boca Raton, Florida. The decorated general, commissioned in 1951 served in the Korean War and the war in Vietnam. His assignments included: Commanding General of Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, California; Inspector General of the Marine Corps; and Director, Personnel Management Division, Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps.
10 November – U.S. Marines throughout the world celebrated the 208th birthday of the Marine Corps. On this date in 1775, the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia founded the Marine Corps. In his birthday message, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Paul X. Kelley, said, “If there is a word which more accurately describes pride than any other, that word is Marine.”
15 November – General Paul X. Kelley returned a salute to Lance Corporal Jeffrey Lee Nashton, the Beirut bombing victim whose speechless devotion to the Marine Corps led him to scrawl “Semper Fi” as General Kelley stood by his hospital bed in West Germany on 25 October. In a brief ceremony at Bethesda Naval Hospital, Bethesda, Maryland, General Kelley presented the Marine, from Rome, New York, a plaque containing his four-stars and the words “Semper Fi.”
15 November – General Paul X. Kelley, Commandant of the Marine Corps, upgraded the command of the Marine force in Lebanon from colonel to brigadier general. General Kelley said in a statement that the move was necessary so that the commander of the U.S. contingent would be on the same level as leaders of the French and Italian elements of the multinational force in the Beirut area.
18-25 November – Approximately 1,000 Marines of the 28th Marine Amphibious Unit joined over 500 Honduran infantrymen in a joint amphibious landing exercise, “Ahuas Tara” (Big Pine II), on the Honduran coast. The joint maneuver was a major event in a series of exercises at sea around Central America and in Honduras which began during the summer. “Big Pine II” was designed to exercise and evaluate objectives in defending Honduras, which borders Nicaragua.
19 November – Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU), took over peacekeeping duties in Beirut, Lebanon. Commanded by Brigadier General James R. Joy, the 22d MAU replaced the 24th MAU which was stationed in Beirut since 30 May 1983. The 1,800 Marines of the 22d MAU was on its way to Beirut when it was sent to Grenada in October. The 22d MAU was the fifth Marine unit to serve in Beirut since the multinational peacekeeping force entered Beirut 25 August 1982. It was also the second time the 22d MAU was deployed to Lebanon.
29 November – The Pentagon announced that the U.S. Central Command, responsible for protecting United States interests in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean area, would establish a small floating headquarters in that region. A staff of up to 20 officers and men would be placed aboard a Navy ship operating with a small flotilla of warships called the Middle East Force. The command could draw on a pool of thousands of Marines, Army, Navy, and Air Force personnel as needed for rapid deployment in a region covering 19 nations.
4 December – Eight Marines of the 22d Marine Amphibious Unit were killed in Beirut, Lebanon, by heavy shelling from Syrian positions. In retaliation, U.S. Navy warships opened fire on the militia positions. Earlier on this day, 28 American warplanes went on their first combat mission in Lebanon and attacked Syrian positions in the mountains east of Beirut in retaliation for repeated Syrian attacks on U.S. reconnaissance planes. This marked the first combat use of U.S. aircraft in the Middle East and the highest number of Marines to die in Lebanon combat in one day since they went there in 1982.
7 December – Marines of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) arrived at Moorehead City, North Carolina, after six-months of duty in Beirut, Lebanon. The 24th MAU suffered a loss of 220 Marines in the 23 October bombing of their headquarters. The unit was composed of Battalion Landing Team, 1st Battalion, 8th Marines; Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 162, and MAU Service Support Group 24.
14 December – Marines assigned to the U.S. Embassy Security Guard Detachment at Kuwait responded when a bomb-laden truck crashed through the gate at the compound and exploded in one of a series of coordinated terrorist attacks. The embassy suffered considerable damage. There were no American casualties, but five persons were killed and 37 were injured. In addition to the U.S. embassy attack, other explosions rocked the French Embassy, the Kuwait airport control tower, a Kuwaiti power station, a Raytheon Company headquarters compound, and a separate residential facility.
15 December – The USS New Jersey opened fire with its 16-inch guns on antiaircraft positions in the Syrian-occupied mountains southeast of Beirut. Last used in action off the Vietnam Coast in 1968, the ship was joined in the second straight day of offshore shelling by two smaller ships. They sent projectiles into the hills in an effort to silence Syrian firing at U.S. reconnaissance flights over the area. This marked the first time the USS New Jersey was put into action since arriving off the Lebanese coast 25 September.
18 December – Retired Lieutenant General Carson A. Roberts, 78, died in Pinehurst, North Carolina. Upon his retirement in March 1964, General Roberts was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal for exceptionally meritorious service as Commanding General, Fleet Marine Force, Pacific, from July 1962 to March 1964. Appointed a second lieutenant in 1929, the Marine aviator served in World War II and the Korean War. He was buried with full honors at Arlington National Cemetery on 21 December.
23-27 December – Comedian Bob Hope, flanked by a host of U.S. stars, brought the Marines in Lebanon a bit of America as a Christmas present with shows filled with pretty girls and hometown songs. His first series of Christmas shows to U.S. troops overseas since the Vietnam War, the 80-year-old comedian and his troupe hop-scotched among three ships of the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet off the Lebanese coast. He also gave an unscheduled performance on Christmas Day to the Marines at their Beirut International Airport compound.
28 December – The Department of Defense Commission on the Beirut International Airport Terrorist Act released a 140 page unclassified report on the 23 October 1983 incident. A key recommendation by the Commission asked that the Secretary of Defense direct the development of doctrine, organization, force structure, education, and training necessary to defend against and counter terrorism.
31 December – The strength of the armed forces was 2,123,915 of which 193,858 were Marines.
1984
1 January – A four-percent pay increase for all military personnel, authorized by the Defense Authorization Act of 1984, went into effect. Those serving in the grade of Private (E-1) with less than four months service, were excluded from the pay raise.
1 January – The strength of the armed forces was 2,123,915, of which 193,858 were Marines.
8 January – A Marine was killed in Beirut, Lebanon, when unidentified gunmen opened fire on a helicopter unloading troops near the temporary American Embassy on Beirut’s northwest waterfront. The fatality was the first in the U.S. contingent of the multinational peacekeeping force in Lebanon, since 4 December 1983, when eight Marines were killed in a mortar attack.
11 January – General Paul X. Kelley, Commandant of the Marine Corps, saluted the New York Post for selecting the U.S. Marine as its first “Man of the Year.” The general expressed his appreciation for the positive portrayal which the New York Post has given the Marines. On the front page of the 23 December 1983 edition the New York Post described their “Man of the Year” as brown, black, yellow, red, and white, dressed in khaki touched with camouflage. The Post said the Marine charged forward in a year stained with his blood by bombs and bullets to raise the American flag.
12 January – The first McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II was welcomed to the Fleet Marine Force in ceremonies by the 2d Marine Aircraft Wing, at Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, North Carolina. The Marine Corps’ second generation vertical or short takeoff and landing attack aircraft, the AV-8B represents an evolutionary, low-risk improvement over its predecessor, the AV-8A. Several technological advancements increase the AV-8B’s performance and readiness potential.
12 January – Aircrews of Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 162 were presented the Combat Aircrew Insignia earned by flying combat missions in Beirut, Lebanon, while under hostile enemy fire. This marked the first time since the Vietnam War that this insignia was awarded. While in Lebanon, as the aviation element of the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit, the squadron accumulated almost 7,500 accident-free flight hours, a naval aviation record for a deployed squadron.
13 January – A two-hour movie entitled “Hard Knox” premiered on NBC-TV network. The movie starred Robert Conrad in the role of Marine Colonel Joseph Knox, who retires from the Marine Corps to take charge of a struggling military school he attended in his youth. Actor Robert Conrad previously portrayed Marine World War II ace, Gregory “Pappy” Boyington, in “Baa Baa Black Sheep” a few years ago.
15 January – For the first time since 18 December 1983, U.S. warships fired into the mountains above Beirut, Lebanon, to quell a heavy rock and mortar attack on Marine positions around the Beirut International Airport. The naval gunfire was provided by the battleship, USS New Jersey and the destroyer, USS Tattnall. Marines also responded with small arms fire, mortar rounds, and tank shells. There were no U.S. casualties.
16 January – Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger announced that the Marine Corps would list Marines killed in Beirut, Lebanon, as battle casualties rather than non-combat deaths. Mr. Weinberger said that the Marines were casualties of a battle while not necessarily active participants in the conflict. For this reason, the Marine Corps redesignated all casualties suffered as a result of terrorist or other acts directed against them in Lebanon as battle casualties.
18 January – Marine Corps Bulletin 1742 of 18 January 1984 indicated that a lack of knowledge about the voting process was the most common reason for voter non-participation. In an effort to correct the situation, commanding officers were given the responsibility of establishing a command voter assistance program designed to encourage all eligible Marines to vote in the 1984 elections by providing information on absentee voting.
20 January – An enlisted club at Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter) New River, North Carolina, was dedicated in honor of Corporal George N. Holmes, Jr., USMC (Deceased). Corporal Holmes was killed during the Iranian hostage rescue attempt in April 1980. The dedication date was selected in honor of the third anniversary of the release of the Iranian hostages.
30 January – One U.S. Marine was killed and three others were wounded when Marine Corps positions came under attack from suspected Muslim gunners in Beirut’s southern suburbs. Marines responded with tank guns, mortars, machine guns, and small arms fire. The attack coincided with intense U.S., French, and Saudi Arabian diplomatic efforts concentrated in Damascus to break the
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 67
|
https://www.government.nl/
|
en
|
Information from the Government of the Netherlands
|
[
"https://www.government.nl/binaries/content/gallery/government/channel-afbeeldingen/logos/beeldmerk-rijksoverheid-desktop.svg",
"https://www.government.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/government/content-afbeeldingen/topics/coronavirus-covid-19/corona-nederland-inreizen-hero-1920x330.png",
"https://www.government.nl/binaries/medium/content/gallery/government/banners-en-uitgelichtjes/home/2024/immigration-to-the-netherlands.jpg",
"https://www.government.nl/binaries/medium/content/gallery/government/banners-en-uitgelichtjes/home/2023/rented-housing.jpg",
"https://www.government.nl/binaries/medium/content/gallery/government/banners-en-uitgelichtjes/home/2024/working-in-the-netherlands.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/binaries/content/assets/government/iconen/favicon.ico
|
https://www.government.nl/
|
Learn more about what you need to arrange when you want to live in the Netherlands.
If you are renting your home, you may be eligible to receive huurtoeslag (housing benefit). This is a contribution towards the payment of your rent.
Rape and sexual assault victims will be able to file a police report in more situations, descendants of enslaved people can ...
This morning, the Schoof government was sworn in at Huis ten Bosch Palace. The new government is a coalition of the Freedom Party ...
The war in Ukraine is not over yet. The Council of the European Union has therefore extended the Temporary Protection Directive ...
The Foreign Affairs Council has adopted sanctions against six Russian individuals responsible for serious cyber operations that ...
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 32
|
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CPRT-106SPRT66922/html/CPRT-106SPRT66922.htm
|
en
|
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS: THE ROLE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
[Senate Prints 106-71] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] 106th Congress COMMITTEE PRINT S. Prt. 2d Session 106-71 _______________________________________________________________________ TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS: THE ROLE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ---------- A S T U D Y PREPARED FOR THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE BY THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TONGRESS.#13 JANUARY 2001 106th Congress 2d Session COMMITTEE PRINT S. Prt. 106-71 _______________________________________________________________________ TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS: THE ROLE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE __________ A S T U D Y PREPARED FOR THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE BY THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TONGRESS.#13 JANUARY 2001 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 66922 cc WASHINGTON : 2001 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS JESSE HELMS, North Carolina, Chairman JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut GORDON SMITH, Oregon JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts ROD GRAMS, Minnesota RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas PAUL WELLSTONE, Minnesota CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey BILL FRIST, Tennessee LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island Stephen Biegun, Staff Director Edwin K. Hall, Minority Staff Director Richard J. Douglas, Chief Counsel Brian McKeon, Minority Counsel LETTER OF SUBMITTAL ---------- Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, Washington, DC, January 2, 2001. Hon. Jesse Helms, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: In accordance with your request, we have revised and updated the study ``Treaties and Other International Agreements: The Role of the United States Senate,'' last published in 1993. This new edition covers the subject matter through the 106th Congress. This study summarizes the history of the treatymaking provisions of the Constitution and international and domestic law on treaties and other international agreements. It traces the process of making treaties from their negotiation to their entry into force, implementation, and termination. It examines differences between treaties and executive agreements as well as procedures for congressional oversight. The report was edited by Richard F. Grimmett, Specialist in National Defense. Individual chapters were prepared by policy specialists and attorneys of the Congressional Research Service identified at the beginning of each chapter. The Congressional Research Service would like to thank Richard Douglas, Chief Counsel of the Committee, Edwin K. Hall, Minority Staff Director of the Committee, Brian P. McKeon, Minority Counsel of the Committee, and Robert Dove, Parliamentarian of the Senate, for their comments on Senate procedures for consideration of treaties. We would also like to thank Robert E. Dalton, Assistant Legal Adviser for Treaty Affairs, Department of State, and other staff members of the Treaty Office for their assistance with various factual questions regarding treaties and executive agreements. Sincerely, Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director. C O N T E N T S ---------- Page Letter of submittal.............................................. iii Introductory note................................................ xi I. Overview of the treaty process................................ 1 A. Background................................................ 2 The evolution of the Senate role......................... 2 Treaties under international law......................... 3 Treaties under U.S. law.................................. 4 Executive agreements under U.S. law...................... 4 (1) Congressional-executive agreements............... 5 (2) Agreements pursuant to treaties.................. 5 (3) Presidential or sole executive agreements........ 5 Steps in the U.S. process of making treaties and executive agreements................................... 6 Negotiation and conclusion........................... 6 Consideration by the Senate.......................... 7 Presidential action after Senate action.............. 12 Implementation....................................... 12 Modification, extension, suspension, or termination.. 13 Congressional oversight.............................. 14 Trends in Senate action on treaties...................... 14 B. Issues in treaties submitted for advice and consent....... 15 Request for consent without opportunity for advice....... 15 Multilateral treaties.................................... 16 Diminishing use of treaties for major political commitments............................................ 17 Unilateral executive branch action to reinterpret, modify, and terminate treaties......................... 18 Difficulty in overseeing treaties........................ 19 Minority power........................................... 19 The House role in treaties............................... 19 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties................. 20 C. Issues in agreements not submitted to the Senate.......... 21 Increasing use of executive agreements................... 22 Oversight of executive agreements--the Case-Zablocki Act. 22 Learning of executive agreements......................... 22 Determining authority for executive agreements........... 23 Non-binding international agreements..................... 23 D. Deciding between treaties and executive agreements........ 24 Scope of the treaty power; proper subject matter for treaties............................................... 24 Scope of executive agreements; proper subject matter for executive agreements................................... 25 Criteria for treaty form................................. 26 II. Historical background and growth of international agreements. 27 A. Historical background of constitutional provisions........ 27 The Constitutional Convention............................ 28 Debate on adoption....................................... 29 B. Evolution into current practice........................... 31 Washington's administrations............................. 32 Presidencies from Adams to Polk.......................... 35 Indian treaties.......................................... 36 Conflicts and cooperation................................ 37 Executive agreements and multilateral agreements......... 38 Increasing proportion of executive and statutory agreements............................................. 40 Growth in multilateral agreements........................ 42 III. International agreements and international law.............. 43 A. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.............. 43 International law status................................. 43 Senate action on the convention.......................... 45 B. Treaty definition......................................... 49 C. Criteria for a binding international agreement............ 50 Intention of the parties to be bound under international law.................................................... 50 Significance............................................. 51 Specificity.............................................. 52 Form of the agreement.................................... 52 D. Limitations on binding international agreements and grounds for invalidation................................... 53 Invalidation by fraud, corruption, coercion or error..... 53 Invalidation by conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law ( jus cogens)................ 54 Invalidation by violation of domestic law governing treaties............................................... 56 E. Non-binding agreements and functional equivalents........ 58 Unilateral commitments and declarations of intent....... 59 Joint communiques and joint statements.................. 60 Informal agreements..................................... 61 Status of non-binding agreements........................ 62 IV. International agreements and U.S. law........................ 65 A. Treaties.................................................. 65 Scope of the treaty power............................... 65 Treaties as law of the land............................. 72 B. Executive agreements...................................... 76 Congressional-executive agreements...................... 78 Agreements pursuant to treaties......................... 86 Presidential or sole executive agreements............... 87 V. Negotiation and conclusion of international agreements........ 97 A. Negotiation............................................... 97 Logan Act................................................ 98 B. Initiative for an agreement; setting objectives........... 100 C. Advice and consent on appointments........................ 103 Unconfirmed presidential agents.......................... 105 D. Consultations during the negotiations..................... 106 Inclusion of Members of Congress on delegations.......... 109 E. Conclusion or signing..................................... 111 F. Renegotiation of a treaty following Senate action......... 112 G. Interim between signing and entry into force; provisional application................................................ 113 VI. Senate consideration of treaties............................. 117 A. Senate receipt and referral............................... 118 Senate Rule XXX.......................................... 118 Executive session--proceedings on treaties............... 119 Action on receipt of treaty from the president........... 119 B. Foreign Relations Committee consideration................. 122 C. Conditional approval...................................... 124 Types of conditions...................................... 124 Condition regarding treaty interpretation................ 128 Condition regarding supremacy of the Constitution........ 131 D. Resolution of ratification................................ 136 E. Senate floor procedure................................... 136 Executive session........................................ 136 Non-controversial treaties.............................. 137 Controversial treaties.................................. 138 Consideration of treaties under cloture.................. 141 Final vote.............................................. 142 Failure to receive two-thirds majority.................. 143 F. Return or withdrawal..................................... 145 VII. Presidential options on treaties after Senate action........ 147 A. Ratification.............................................. 147 Ratification of the treaty............................... 147 Exchange or deposit of instruments of ratification (entry into force)............................................ 149 B. Resubmission of the treaty or submission of protocol...... 150 C. Inaction or refusal to ratify............................. 152 Procedure when other nations attach new conditions....... 153 VIII. Dispute settlement, rules of interpretation, and obligation to implement................................................... 157 A. Dispute settlement........................................ 157 Conciliation............................................. 158 Arbitration.............................................. 159 Judicial settlement...................................... 161 B. Rules of interpretation................................... 163 C. Obligation to implement................................... 166 IX. Amendment or modification, extension, suspension, and termination of treaties and other international agreements..... 171 A. Introduction.............................................. 171 B. Amendment and modification................................ 176 Treaties................................................. 176 Executive agreements..................................... 183 C. Extension................................................. 184 Treaties................................................. 184 Executive agreements..................................... 187 D. Suspension................................................ 187 Treaties................................................. 187 Executive agreements..................................... 192 E. Termination or withdrawal................................. 192 Treaties................................................. 192 Terms of treaty; unanimous consent................... 192 Breach............................................... 193 Impossibility of performance......................... 194 Rebus sic stantibus.................................. 194 Jus cogens........................................... 195 Severance of diplomatic relations.................... 195 Hostilities.......................................... 196 State succession..................................... 196 F. U.S. law and practice in terminating international agreements................................................. 198 General.................................................. 198 Treaties................................................. 201 Executive action pursuant to prior authorization or direction by the Congress.......................... 202 Executive action pursuant to prior authorization or direction by the Senate............................ 204 Executive action without prior specific authorization or direction, but with subsequent approval by the Congress........................................... 205 Executive action without specific prior authorization or direction, but with subsequent approval by the Senate............................................. 205 Executive action without specific prior authorization or direction, and without subsequent approval by either the Congress or the Senate.................. 206 Executive agreements..................................... 208 X. Congressional oversight of international agreements........... 209 A. The Case Act.............................................. 209 Origins................................................. 210 Provisions for publication.......................... 210 The Bricker amendment and its legacy................ 212 National commitments concerns....................... 213 Military base agreements (Spain, Portugal, Bahrain). 215 Separation of Powers Subcommittee approach.......... 216 Intent and content of the Case Act...................... 217 Implementation, 1972-1976............................... 218 Amendments of the Case Act, 1977-1978................... 222 Committee procedures under the Case Act................. 224 Senate Foreign Relations Committee procedures....... 224 House International Relations Committee procedures.. 225 Impact and assessment of the Case Act................... 225 Number of agreements transmitted.................... 226 Late transmittal of Case Act agreements............. 228 Insufficient transmittal of agreements to Congress.. 230 Pre-Case Act executive agreements................... 232 B. Consultations on form of agreement....................... 233 C. Congressional review or approval of agreements........... 235 D. Required reports to Congress............................. 238 E. Other tools of congressional oversight................... 239 Implementation legislation.............................. 240 Recommendations in legislation.......................... 240 Consultation requirements............................... 242 Oversight hearings...................................... 243 XI. Trends in major categories of treaties....................... 245 A. Political and security agreements......................... 246 National security and defense commitments................ 247 Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany............................................ 250 Maritime Boundary Agreement with the Soviet Union.... 251 Arms control treaties.................................... 251 INF Treaty........................................... 254 Threshold Test Ban Treaty and Protocol............... 256 CFE Treaty........................................... 257 CFE Flank Agreement.................................. 257 START I Treaty....................................... 258 START II............................................. 260 Open Skies Treaty.................................... 261 Chemical Weapons Convention.......................... 261 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty........................ 262 B. Economic treaties......................................... 265 Friendship, commerce, and navigation treaties............ 265 Investment treaties...................................... 266 Consular conventions..................................... 269 Tax conventions.......................................... 270 Treaty shopping...................................... 271 Exchange of information.............................. 272 Allocation of income of multinational business enterprises........................................ 272 Taxation of equipment rentals........................ 272 Arbitration of competent authority issues............ 272 Insurance excise tax................................. 273 C. Environmental treaties.................................... 273 No-reservations clauses.................................. 274 Fishery conventions...................................... 276 D. Legal cooperation......................................... 278 Extradition treaties..................................... 278 Mutual legal assistance treaties......................... 282 E. Human rights conventions.................................. 285 Genocide Convention...................................... 287 Labor conventions........................................ 288 Convention Against Torture............................... 290 Civil and Political Rights Covenant...................... 291 Racial Discrimination Convention......................... 292 Other human rights treaties.............................. 293 Appendixes 1. Treaties and other international agreements: an annotated bibliography................................................... 295 A. Introduction.............................................. 295 B. International agreements and international law............ 295 1. Overview.............................................. 295 a. General........................................... 295 b. Treaties and agreements involving international organizations...................................... 298 2. Negotiation and conclusion of treaties and international agreements............................... 299 a. Negotiation and the treatymaking process.......... 299 (1) General...................................... 299 (2) Multilateral treaties........................ 299 b. Amendments, interpretive declarations, and reservations....................................... 300 c. Acceptance, depositary, registration and publication........................................ 301 (1) Acceptance................................... 301 (2) Depositary................................... 301 (3) Registration and publication................. 302 3. Entry into force...................................... 302 4. Interpretation........................................ 303 5. Modification, suspension, and termination of treaties. 307 a. Overview.......................................... 307 b. Questions of treaty validity...................... 310 6. Dispute settlement.................................... 312 7. Succession of states.................................. 313 C. International agreements and U.S. law..................... 314 1. General............................................... 314 2. Congressional and Presidential roles in the making of treaties and international agreements.................. 319 3. Communication of international agreements to Congress. 330 4. U.S. termination of treaties.......................... 332 D. Guides.................................................... 334 1. Guides to resources on treaties....................... 334 2. Compilations of treaties, and indexes international in scope.................................................. 335 3. U.S. treaties and the treatymaking process............ 338 a. Sources for treaty information throughout the treatymaking process............................... 338 CIS/index........................................ 338 Congressional Index.............................. 338 Congressional Record............................. 341 Executive Journal of the Senate.................. 341 Senate executive reports......................... 341 Senate Foreign Relations Committee calendar...... 341 Senate treaty documents.......................... 341 Department of State Dispatch..................... 341 Department of State Bulletin..................... 341 Foreign Policy Bulletin.......................... 342 Department of State Press Releases............... 342 Federal Register................................. 342 Monthly Catalog.................................. 342 Shepard's United States Citations--Statutes Edition........................................ 342 Statutes at Large................................ 342 Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents..... 343 b. Official treaty series............................ 343 TIAS............................................. 343 UST.............................................. 343 c. Indexes and retrospective compilations............ 343 Current.......................................... 343 1950+............................................ 344 1776-1949........................................ 344 1776-1949 (Bevans)............................... 344 1776-1931 (Malloy)............................... 344 1776-1863 (Miller)............................... 344 d. Status of treaties................................ 345 Treaties in force................................ 345 Unperfected treaties............................. 345 Additional information........................... 345 4. Topical collections................................... 346 a. Diplomatic and national security issues........... 346 b. Economic and commercial issues.................... 347 c. International environmental issues and management of common areas.................................... 348 2. Case-Zablocki Act on Transmittal of International Agreements and Related Reporting Requirements............................. 349 3. Coordination and reporting of international agreements, State Department regulations......................................... 351 4. Department of State Circular 175 Procedures on Treaties....... 357 710 Purpose and disclaimer................................... 357 711 Purpose (state only)..................................... 357 712 Disclaimer (state only).................................. 357 720 Negotiation and signature................................ 357 721 Exercise of the international agreement power............ 358 722 Action required in negotiation and/or signature of treaties and agreements.................................... 359 723 Responsibility of office or officer conducting negotiations............................................... 361 724 Transmission of international agreements other than treaties to Congress: compliance with the Case-Zablocki Act 364 725 Publication of treaties and other international agreements of the United States............................ 364 730 Guidelines for concluding international agreements....... 364 731 Conformity of texts...................................... 366 732 Exchange or exhibition of full powers.................... 366 733 Signature and sealing.................................... 366 734 Exchange of ratifications................................ 367 740 Multilateral treaties and agreements..................... 367 741 Official and working languages........................... 368 742 Engrossing............................................... 369 743 Full powers.............................................. 370 744 Signature and sealing.................................... 370 745 Disposition of final documents of conference............. 370 746 Procedure following signature............................ 371 750 Responsibilities of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Treaty Affairs............................................. 371 5. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Senate Ex. L, 92d Congress 1st Session, with list of signatures, ratifications and accessions deposited as of December 11, 2000. 375 Letter of transmittal........................................ 377 Letter of submittal.......................................... 378 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties..................... 384 List of signatures, ratifications deposited and accessions deposited as of December 11, 2000.......................... 407 6. Glossary of treaty terminology................................ 411 7. Simultaneous consideration of treaties and amending protocols. 415 1. Treaty with Mexico Relating to Utilization of the Waters of Certain Rivers (Ex. A, 78-2, and Ex. H, 78-2)........... 415 2. Convention Between France and the United States as to Double Taxation and Fiscal Assistance and Supplementary Protocol (S. Ex. A, 80-1 and S. Ex. G, 80-2)............... 415 3. Tax Convention with Canada and Two Protocols (Ex. T, 96-2; Treaty Doc. 98-7; and Treaty Doc. 98-22)................... 416 4. Treaties with the U.S.S.R. on the Limitation of Underground Nuclear Weapon Tests and on Underground Nuclear Explosions for Peaceful Purposes and Protocols (Ex. N, 94- 2; and Treaty Doc. 101-19)................................. 416 8. Treaties approved by the Senate............................... 417 2000......................................................... 417 1999......................................................... 420 1998......................................................... 422 1997......................................................... 425 1996......................................................... 426 1995......................................................... 429 1994......................................................... 430 1993......................................................... 430 9. Treaties rejected by the Senate............................... 433 1999......................................................... 433 10. Letter of response from Acting Director Thomas Graham, Jr. to Senator Pell accepting the narrow interpretation of the ABM Treaty......................................................... 435 Tables II-1. Treaties and executive agreements concluded by the United States, 1789-1989.............................................. 39 II-2. Treaties and executive agreements concluded by the United States, 1930-1999.............................................. 39 X-1. Transmittal of executive agreements to Congress, 1978-1999.. 226 X-2. Agencies submitting agreements late, 1979-1999.............. 229 X-3. Statutory requirements for transmittal of agreements to Congress....................................................... 236 X-4. Required reports related to international agreements........ 239 X-5. Legislation implementing treaties........................... 241 XI-1. Human rights treaties pending on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee calendar................................... 286 A1-1. Publications providing information on U.S. treaties throughout the treatymaking process............................ 339 Charts 1. Steps in the making of a treaty............................... 8 2. Steps in the making of an executive agreement................. 10 INTRODUCTORY NOTE ---------- This study revises a report bearing the same title published in 1993. It is intended to provide a reference volume for use by the U.S. Senate in its work of advising and consenting to treaties. It summarizes international and U.S. law on treaties and other international agreements. It traces the process of making treaties through the various stages from their initiation and negotiation to ratification, entry into force, implementation and oversight, modification or termination--describing the respective senatorial and Presidential roles at each stage. The study also provides background information on issues concerning the Senate role in treaties and other international agreements through specialized discussions in individual chapters. The appendix contains, among other things, a glossary of frequently used terms, important documents related to treaties: the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (unratified by the United States); State Department Circular 175 describing treaty procedures in the executive branch; the State Department regulation, ``Coordination and Reporting of International Agreements,'' and material related to the Case-Zablocki Act on the reporting of international agreements to Congress. Also included are a list of treaties approved by the Senate from January 1993 through October 2000, examples of treaty documents, and an annotated bibliography. I. OVERVIEW OF THE TREATY PROCESS \1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Prepared by Richard F. Grimmett, Specialist in National Defense. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Treaties are a serious legal undertaking both in international and domestic law. Internationally, once in force, treaties are binding on the parties and become part of international law. Domestically, treaties to which the United States is a party are equivalent in status to Federal legislation, forming part of what the Constitution calls ``the supreme Law of the Land.'' However, the word treaty does not have the same meaning in the United States and in international law. Under international law, a ``treaty'' is any legally binding agreement between nations. In the United States, the word treaty is reserved for an agreement that is made ``by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate'' (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution). International agreements not submitted to the Senate are known as ``executive agreements'' in the United States, but they are considered treaties and therefore binding under international law. For various reasons, Presidents have increasingly concluded executive agreements. Many agreements are previously authorized or specifically approved by legislation, and such ``congressional-executive'' or statutory agreements have been treated almost interchangeably with treaties in several important court cases. Others, often referred to as ``sole executive agreements,'' are made pursuant to inherent powers claimed by the President under Article II of the Constitution. Neither the Senate nor the Congress as a whole is involved in concluding sole executive agreements, and their status in domestic law is not fully resolved. Questions on the use of treaties, congressional-executive agreements, and sole executive agreements underlie many issues. Therefore, any study of the Senate role in treaties must also deal with executive agreements. Moreover, the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives have different institutional interests at stake, a fact which periodically creates controversy. Nonetheless, the President, Senate, and House share a common interest in making international agreements that are in the national interest in the most effective and efficient manner possible. The requirement for the Senate's advice and consent gives the Senate a check over all international agreements submitted to it as treaties. The Senate may refuse to give its approval to a treaty or do so only with specified conditions, reservations, or understandings. In addition, the knowledge that a treaty must be approved by a two-thirds majority in the Senate may influence the content of the document before it is submitted. Even so, the Senate has found it must be vigilant if it wishes to maintain a meaningful role in treaties that are submitted. The main threat of erosion of the Senate treaty power comes not from the international agreements that are submitted as treaties, however, but from the many international agreements that are not submitted for its consent. In addition to concluding hundreds of executive agreements, Presidents have made important commitments that they considered politically binding but not legally binding. Maintaining the Senate role in treaties requires overseeing all international agreements to assure that agreements that should be treaties are submitted to the Senate. A. Background the evolution of the senate role \2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ See Chapters II and VI for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Constitution states that the President ``shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.'' The Convention that drafted the Constitution did not spell out more precisely what role it intended for the Senate in the treatymaking process. Most evidence suggests that it intended the sharing of the treaty power to begin early, with the Senate helping to formulate instructions to negotiators and acting as a council of advisers to the President during the negotiations, as well as approving each treaty entered into by the United States. The function of the Senate was both to protect the rights of the states and to serve as a check against the President's taking excessive or undesirable actions through treaties. The Presidential function in turn was to provide unity and efficiency in treatymaking and to represent the national interest as a whole. The treaty clause of the Constitution does not contain the word ratification, which refers to the formal act by which a nation affirms its willingness to be bound by a specific treaty. From the beginning, the formal act of ratification has been performed by the President acting ``by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.'' The President ratifies the treaty, but, only after receiving the advice and consent of the Senate. When the Constitution was drafted, the ratification of a treaty was generally considered obligatory by the nations entering into it if the negotiators stayed within their instructions. Therefore Senate participation during the negotiations stage seemed essential if the Senate was to play a meaningful constitutional role. At the time, such direct participation by the Senate also seemed feasible, since the number of treaties was not expected to be large and the original Senate contained only 26 Members. Within several years, however, problems were encountered in treatymaking and Presidents abandoned the practice of regularly getting the Senate's advice and consent on detailed questions prior to negotiations. Instead, Presidents began to submit the completed treaty after its conclusion. Since the Senate had to be able to advise changes or deny consent altogether if its role was to be meaningful, the doctrine of obligatory ratification was for all practical purposes abandoned. Although Senators sometimes play a part in the initiation or development of a treaty, the Senate role now is primarily to pass judgment on whether completed treaties should be ratified by the United States. The Senate's advice and consent is asked on the question of Presidential ratification. When the Senate considers a treaty it may approve it as written, approve it with conditions, reject and return it, or prevent its entry into force by withholding approval. In practice the Senate historically has given its advice and consent unconditionally to the vast majority of treaties submitted to it. In numerous cases, the Senate has approved treaties subject to conditions. The President has usually accepted the Senate conditions and completed the ratification process. In some cases, treaties have been approved with reservations that were unacceptable either to the President or the other party, and the treaties never entered into force.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ These include treaties on income taxation with Thailand, signed March 1965, and Brazil, signed March 13, 1967. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Only on rare occasions has the Senate formally rejected a treaty. The most famous example is the Versailles Treaty, which was defeated on March 19, 1920, although 49 Senators voted in favor and 35 against. This was a majority but not the required two-thirds majority so the treaty failed. Since then, the Senate has definitively rejected only three treaties.\4\ In addition, the Senate sometimes formally rejects treaties but keeps them technically alive by adopting or entering a motion to reconsider. This has happened, for instance, with the Optional Protocol Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes in 1960, the Montreal Aviation Protocols Nos. 3 and 4 in 1983, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in 1999. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Treaty on General Relations with Turkey, January 18, 1927; St. Lawrence Waterway Treaty with Canada, July 18, 1932 (the St. Lawrence Seaway was subsequently approved by legislation); and adherence to the Permanent Court of International Justice, January 29, 1935. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- More often the Senate has simply not voted on treaties that did not have enough support for approval, and the treaties remained pending in the Foreign Relations Committee for long periods. Eventually, unapproved treaties have been replaced by other treaties, amended by protocols and then approved, or withdrawn by or returned to the President. Thus the Senate has used its veto sparingly, but still demonstrated the necessity of its advice and consent and its power to block a treaty from entering into force. treaties under international law \5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ See Chapter III for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Under international law an international agreement is generally considered to be a treaty and binding on the parties if it meets four criteria: (1) The parties intend the agreement to be legally binding and the agreement is subject to international law; (2) The agreement deals with significant matters; (3) The agreement clearly and specifically describes the legal obligations of the parties; and (4) The form indicates an intention to conclude a treaty, although the substance of the agreement rather than the form is the governing factor. International law makes no distinction between treaties and executive agreements. Executive agreements, especially if significant enough to be reported to Congress under the Case- Zablocki Act, are to all intents and purposes binding treaties under international law.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ The Case-Zablocki Act (Public Law 92-403, as amended), is also examined in Chapter X. See Appendix 2 for text of the law. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On the other hand, many international undertakings and foreign policy statements, such as unilateral statements of intent, joint communiques, and final acts of conferences, are not intended to be legally binding and are not considered treaties. treaties under u.s. law \7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ See Chapter IV for references and additional discussion. See also Chapter X. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Under the Constitution, a treaty, like a Federal statute, is part of the ``supreme Law of the Land.'' Self-executing treaties, those that do not require implementing legislation, automatically become effective as domestic law immediately upon entry into force. Other treaties do not become effective as domestic law until implementing legislation is enacted, and then technically it is the legislation, not the treaty unless incorporated into the legislation, that is the law of the land. Sometimes it is not clear on the face of a treaty whether it is self-executing or requires implementing legislation. Some treaties expressly call for implementing legislation or deal with subjects clearly requiring congressional action, such as the appropriation of funds or enactment of domestic penal provisions. The question of whether or not a treaty requires implementing legislation or is self-executing is a matter of interpretation largely by the executive branch or, less frequently, by the courts. On occasion, the Senate includes an understanding in the resolution of ratification that certain provisions are not self-executing or that the President is to exchange or deposit the instrument of ratification only after implementation legislation has been enacted. When a treaty is deemed self-executing, it overrides any conflicting provision of the law of an individual signatory state. If a treaty is in irreconcilable conflict with a Federal law, the one executed later in time prevails, although courts generally try to harmonize domestic and international obligations whenever possible. executive agreements under u.s. law \8\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See Chapter IV for references and additional discussion. See also Chapter X. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The status in domestic law of executive agreements, that is, international agreements made by the executive branch but not submitted to the Senate for its advice and consent, is less clear. Three types of executive agreements and their domestic legal status are discussed below. (1) Congressional-executive agreements Most executive agreements are either explicitly or implicitly authorized in advance by Congress or submitted to Congress for approval. Some areas in which Congress has authorized the conclusion of international agreements are postal conventions, foreign trade, foreign military assistance, foreign economic assistance, atomic energy cooperation, and international fishery rights. Sometimes Congress has authorized conclusion of agreements but required the executive branch to submit the agreements to Congress for approval by legislation or for a specified waiting period before taking effect. Congress has also sometimes approved by joint resolution international agreements involving matters that are frequently handled by treaty, including such subjects as participation in international organizations, arms control measures, and acquisition of territory. The constitutionality of this type of agreement seems well established and Congress has authorized or approved them frequently, (2) Agreements pursuant to treaties Some executive agreements are expressly authorized by treaty or an authorization for them may be reasonably inferred from the provisions of a prior treaty. Examples include arrangements and understandings under the North Atlantic Treaty and other security treaties. The President's authority to conclude agreements pursuant to treaties seems well established, although controversy occasionally arises over whether particular agreements are within the purview of an existing treaty. (3) Presidential or sole executive agreements Some executive agreements are concluded solely on the basis of the President's independent constitutional authority and do not have an underlying explicit or implied authorization by treaty or statute. Authorities from the Constitution that Presidents claim as a basis for such agreements include: --The President's general executive authority in Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution; --His power as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1; --The treaty clause itself for agreements, which might be part of the process of negotiating a treaty in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2; --His authority to receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers in Article II, Section 3; and --His duty to ``take care that the laws be faithfully executed'' in Article II, Section 3. Courts have indicated that executive agreements based solely on the President's independent constitutional authority can supersede conflicting provisions of state law, but opinions differ regarding the extent to which they can supersede a prior act of Congress. What judicial authority exists seems to indicate that they cannot. steps in the u.s. process of making treaties and executive agreements Phases in the life of a treaty include negotiation and conclusion, consideration by the Senate, Presidential ratification, implementation, modification, and termination. Following is a discussion of the major steps and the roles of the President and the Senate in each phase. Executive agreements are negotiated and concluded in the same way as treaties, but they do not go through the procedure for advice and consent of the Senate. Some executive agreements are submitted to the Congress for approval and most are to be transmitted to Congress after their conclusion. (See charts 1 and 2.) Negotiation and conclusion \9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ See Chapter V for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The first phase of treatymaking, negotiation and conclusion, is widely considered an exclusive prerogative of the President except for making appointments which require the advice and consent of the Senate. The President chooses and instructs the negotiators and decides whether to sign an agreement after its terms have been negotiated. Nevertheless, the Senate or Congress sometimes proposes negotiations and influences them through advice and consultation. In addition, the executive branch is supposed to advise appropriate congressional leaders and committees of the intention to negotiate significant new agreements and consult them as to the form of the agreement. Steps in the negotiating phase follow. (1) Initiation.--The executive branch formally initiates the negotiations. The original concept or proposal for a treaty on a particular subject, however, may come from Congress. (2) Appointment of negotiators.--The President selects the negotiators of international agreements, but appointments may be subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. Negotiations are often conducted by ambassadors or foreign service officers in a relevant post who have already been confirmed by the Senate. (3) Issuance of full powers and instructions.--The President issues full power documents to the negotiators, authorizing them officially to represent the United States. Similarly, he issues instructions as to the objectives to be sought and positions to be taken. On occasion the Senate participates in setting the objectives during the confirmation process, or Congress contributes to defining the objectives through hearings or resolutions. (4) Negotiation.--Negotiation is the process by which representatives of the President and other governments concerned agree on the substance, terms, wording, and form of an international agreement. Members of Congress sometimes provide advice through consultations arranged either by Congress or the executive branch, and through their statements and writings. Members of Congress or their staff have served as members or advisers of delegations and as observers at international negotiations. (5) Conclusion.--The conclusion or signing marks the end of the negotiating process and indicates that the negotiators have reached agreement. In the case of a treaty the term ``conclusion'' is a misnomer in that the agreement does not enter into force until the exchange or deposit of ratifications. In the case of executive agreements, however, the signing and entry into force are frequently simultaneous. Consideration by the Senate \10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ See Chapter VI for references and additional discussion. Chapter VI also contains the text of Senate Rule XXX. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A second phase begins when the President transmits a concluded treaty to the Senate and the responsibility moves to the Senate. Following are the main steps during the Senate phase. (1) Presidential submission.--The Secretary of State formally submits treaties to the President for transmittal to the Senate. A considerable time may elapse between signature and submission to the Senate, and on rare occasions a treaty signed on behalf of the United States may never be submitted to the Senate at all and thus never enter into force for the United States. When transmitted to the Senate, treaties are accompanied by a Presidential message consisting of the text of the treaty, a letter of transmittal requesting the advice and consent of the Senate, and the earlier letter of submittal of the Secretary of State which usually contains a detailed description and analysis of the treaty. (2) Senate receipt and referral.--The Parliamentarian transmits the treaty to the Executive Clerk, who assigns it a document number. The Majority Leader then, as in executive session, asks the unanimous consent of the Senate that the injunction of secrecy be removed, that the treaty be considered as having been read the first time, and that it be referred to the Foreign Relations Committee and ordered to be printed. The Presiding Officer then refers the treaty, regardless of its subject matter, to the Foreign Relations Committee in accordance with Rule XXV of the Senate Rules. (Rule XXV makes an exception only for reciprocal trade agreements.) At this point the treaty text is printed and made available to the public. (3) Senate Foreign Relations Committee action.--The treaty is placed on the committee calendar and remains there until the committee reports it to the full Senate. While it is committee practice to allow a treaty to remain pending long enough to receive study and comments from the public, the committee usually considers a treaty within a year or two, holding a hearing and preparing a written report. The committee recommends Senate advice and consent by reporting a treaty with a proposed resolution of ratification. While most treaties have historically been reported without conditions, the committee may recommend that the Senate approve a treaty subject to conditions incorporated in the resolution of ratification. (4) Conditional approval.--The conditions traditionally have been grouped into categories described in the following way. --Amendments to a treaty change the text of the treaty and require the consent of the other party or parties. (Note that in Senate debate the term may refer to an amendment of the resolution of ratification, not the treaty itself, and therefore be comprised of some other type of condition.) [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6922.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6922.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6922.003 --Reservations change U.S. obligations without necessarily changing the text, and they require the acceptance of the other party. --Understandings are interpretive statements that clarify or elaborate provisions but do not alter them. --Declarations are statements expressing the Senate's position or opinion on matters relating to issues raised by the treaty rather than to specific provisions. --Provisos relate to issues of U.S. law or procedure and are not intended to be included in the instruments of ratification to be deposited or exchanged with other countries. Whatever name a condition is given by the Senate, if a condition alters an international obligation under the treaty, the President is expected to transmit it to the other party. In recent years, the Senate on occasion has explicitly designated that some conditions were to be transmitted to the other party or parties and, in some cases, formally agreed to by them. It has also designated that some conditions need not be formally communicated to the other party, that some conditions were binding on the President, and that some conditions expressed the intent of the Senate. (5) Action by the full Senate.--After a treaty is reported by the Foreign Relations Committee, it is placed on the Senate's Executive Calendar and the Majority Leader arranges for the Senate to consider it. In 1986 the Senate amended Rule XXX of the Senate Rules, which governs its consideration of treaties, to simplify the procedure in this step. Still, under the full procedures of the revised Rule XXX, in the first stage of consideration the treaty would be read a second time and any proposed amendments to the treaty itself would be considered and voted upon by a simple majority. Usually the Majority Leader obtains unanimous consent to abbreviate the procedures, and the Senate proceeds directly to the consideration of the resolution of ratification as recommended by the Foreign Relations Committee. The Senate then considers amendments to the resolution of ratification, which would incorporate any amendments to the treaty itself that the Senate had agreed to in the first stage, as well as conditions recommended by the Foreign Relations Committee. Senators may then offer reservations, understandings, and other conditions to be placed in the resolution of ratification. Votes on these conditions, as well as other motions, are determined by a simple majority. Finally, the Senate votes on the resolution of ratification, as it has been amended. The final vote on the resolution of ratification requires, for approval, a two-thirds majority of the Senators present. Although the number of Senators who must be present is not specified, the Senate's practice with respect to major treaties is to conduct the final treaty vote at a time when most Senators are available. After approval of a controversial treaty, a Senator may offer a motion to reconsider which is usually laid on the table (defeated). In the case of a treaty that has failed to receive a two-thirds majority, if the motion to reconsider is not taken up, the treaty is returned to the Foreign Relations Committee. Prior to the final vote on the resolution of ratification, a Senator may offer a substitute amendment, proposing that the Senate withhold its advice and consent, or offer a motion to recommit the resolution to the Foreign Relations Committee. (6) Return to committee.--Treaties reported by the committee but neither approved nor formally returned to the President by the Senate are automatically returned to the committee calendar at the end of a Congress; the committee must report them out again in order for the Senate to consider them. (7) Return to President or withdrawal.--The President may request the return of a treaty, or the Foreign Relations Committee may report and the Senate adopt a simple resolution directing the Secretary of the Senate to return a treaty to the President. Otherwise, treaties that do not receive the advice and consent of the Senate remain pending on the committee calendar indefinitely. Presidential action after Senate action \11\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ See Chapter VII for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- After the Senate gives its advice and consent to a treaty, the Senate sends it to the President. He resumes control and decides whether to take further action to complete the treaty. (1) Ratification.--The President ratifies a treaty by signing an instrument of ratification, thus declaring the consent of the United States to be bound. If the Senate has consented with reservations or conditions that the President deems unacceptable, he may at a later date resubmit the original treaty to the Senate for further consideration, or he may renegotiate it with the other parties prior to resubmission. Or the President may decide not to ratify the treaty because of the conditions or for any other reason. (2) Exchange or deposit of instruments of ratification and entry into force.--If he ratifies the treaty, the President then directs the Secretary of State to take any action necessary for the treaty to enter into force. A bilateral treaty usually enters into force when the parties exchange instruments of ratification. A multilateral treaty enters into force when the number of parties specified in the treaty deposit the instruments of ratification at a specified location. Once a treaty enters into force, it is binding in international law on the parties who have ratified it. (3) Proclamation.--When the instruments of ratification have been exchanged or the necessary number deposited, the President issues a proclamation that the treaty has entered into force. Proclamation serves as legal notice for domestic purposes and publicizes the text. Implementation \12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ See Chapter VIII for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The executive branch has the primary responsibility for carrying out treaties and ascertaining that other parties fulfill their obligations after treaties and other international agreements enter into force, but the Senate or the entire Congress share in the following phases. (1) Implementing legislation.\13\--When implementing legislation or appropriations are needed to carry out the terms of a treaty, it must go through the full legislative process including passage by both Houses and presentment to the President. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ In addition to Chapter VIII, see Chapter X. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (2) Interpretation.\14\--The executive branch interprets the requirements of an agreement as it carries out its provisions. U.S. courts may also interpret a treaty's effect as domestic law in appropriate cases. The Senate has made clear that the United States is to interpret the treaty in accordance with the common understanding of the treaty shared by the President and the Senate at the time the Senate gave its advice and consent. This common understanding is based on the text of the treaty, the provisions of the resolution of ratification, and the authoritative representations provided by the executive branch to the Senate during its consideration. The Senate has further specified that the United States is not to agree to or adopt an interpretation different from the common understanding except pursuant to Senate advice and consent or enactment of a statute. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ In addition to Chapter VIII, see Chapter VI, and discussion of INF Treaty in Chapter XI. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (3) Settlement of international disputes.--When disputes arise between parties on the interpretation of a treaty or on the facts relating to compliance with the obligations of a treaty, the executive branch usually conducts negotiations aimed at resolving differences in interpretation. Treaties sometimes provide for formal procedures or mechanisms for dispute settlement. Members of Congress have sometimes played an important role by overseeing implementation of a treaty, bringing about public discussion of compliance issues, and urging procedures to resolve international disputes. Modification, extension, suspension, or termination \15\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ See Chapter IX for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Modifying and extending an international agreement amount to the making of a new agreement that should be done by the same method as the original agreement. For treaties, this means with the advice and consent of the Senate. Practice on termination, however, has not been consistent. (1) Modification.--At the international level, treaties are amended by agreement of the parties or in accordance with their terms. In the United States, amendments to treaties are ordinarily submitted to the Senate for its advice and consent, unless the treaty provides for modification in some other way. Less formal modifications have been made by executive agreements or decisions. (2) Extension.--An agreement to extend an existing international agreement is considered a new agreement, and ordinarily would be accomplished in the same fashion as the original, with an extension of a treaty submitted to the Senate. (3) Suspension.--The President conveys notice of suspension of a treaty and makes the determination that would justify suspension, such as a fundamental change in circumstances or material breach of a treaty by another party. (4) Termination.--At the international level, treaties often contain provisions regarding duration and the method of termination, or nations may terminate treaties by mutual consent. Grounds for termination include violation of the agreement, but violation does not automatically terminate a treaty. Domestically, the Constitution does not prescribe the process for the United States to terminate a treaty, and the process continues to be controversial. Treaties have been terminated in a variety of ways, including by the President following a joint resolution of Congress, by the President following action by the Senate, by the President and with subsequent congressional or Senate approval, and by the President alone. Congressional oversight \16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ See Chapter X for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Congress has responsibility for overseeing the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements by the executive branch and the manner in which the executive branch interprets and carries out the agreements. It shares with the executive branch the responsibility for assessing the general effectiveness of international agreements at the international level and determining the course of action when agreements are not effective. (1) Hearings and reports.--Congress reviews actions under treaties and other international agreements as part of its responsibilities for overseeing executive branch activities. Senate and House rules direct committees to review the application of those laws within their jurisdiction, so the oversight function is distributed widely among the various committees of Congress. Methods for oversight include hearings, investigations, consultations, and requiring and reviewing reports. (2) Review of executive agreements.--Under the Case- Zablocki Act, all executive agreements are to be transmitted to Congress within 60 days of their entry into force, including those that are classified for security reasons. The receipt is noted in the Congressional Record, and unclassified agreements are listed in committee publications. Members of Congress may read the agreements in the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs Committee offices. trends in senate action on treaties \17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ See Chapter VI and Chapter XI for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In recent years the Senate has endeavored both to improve its efficiency in handling treaties and to assure a meaningful role. Among steps to streamline procedures, in 1986 it amended Senate Rule XXX to eliminate the requirement for consideration by the Senate as in Committee of the Whole. It has frequently approved groups of treaties with a single roll call vote, or approved treaties by a division vote. The Senate Legis computer system has made it easier for Senators to obtain current information on action on treaties before the Senate. Among steps to assure a meaningful role, the Senate has appointed observer groups to negotiations on important treaties, especially in the arms control and environmental areas. In 1987 and 1988 the Senate reviewed the constitutional principles of treaty interpretation and affirmed that the United States should not agree to or adopt an interpretation different from the common understanding shared by the President and the Senate at the time the Senate gave its advice and consent to ratification, except pursuant to Senate advice and consent or enactment of a statute. The Senate also provided a system to review the negotiating record of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. However, the Foreign Relations Committee said that Senate review of negotiating records should not become an institutionalized procedure, but that reference to the record on a case-by-case basis might sometimes be useful. Treaties and Senate action on them have begun to reflect new policy concerns since the end of the Cold War. Increased recognition has been given to the importance of economic treaties, including consular, investment, and tax agreements. The use of friendship, commerce, and navigation (FCN) treaties decreased after 1948 when the United States entered the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Since investment matters were outside the scope of GATT at that time, in 1981 the United States began to negotiate a series of bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Subsequently, the Senate has given its advice and consent to BITs with several countries. Treaties providing for cooperation in bringing suspected criminals to trial have become increasingly important with the growth of transnational criminal activity, including narcotics trafficking, terrorism, money laundering, and export control violations. The two chief types are extradition treaties and a new series called mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs). The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has supported recent supplementary extradition treaties and new MLATs, although sometimes with conditions. Treaties for conservation of certain species of wildlife and regulation of fisheries have been supplemented with broad treaties for environmental cooperation. Although supportive of environmental cooperation treaties, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has expressed concern about articles prohibiting reservations and has cautioned that consent to three multilateral environmental treaties containing such articles should not be construed as a precedent. B. Issues in Treaties Submitted for Advice and Consent Although it can prevent a treaty from being ratified or attach conditions for ratification, the Senate frequently finds it difficult to advise on treaties effectively. Several obstacles to a meaningful Senate role have developed. request for consent without opportunity for advice A major problem derives from the executive branch practice of not submitting a treaty to the Senate until it is completed. Seeing the terms of the treaty only after it has been signed, the Senate frequently has little choice in practice except to consent to a treaty exactly as it has been negotiated, or to block it entirely. The President may present a treaty as vital to good relations with a nation, relations that would be set back immeasurably if the treaty were defeated. Or he may present it as a package that has been so delicately negotiated that the slightest change in understanding by the Senate would unbalance the package and kill the treaty. Or he may present it so late in the congressional session, or so near some type of international deadline, that Senate consideration in depth is pictured as impeding the beginning of a new beneficial regime. Administrations almost always discourage significant changes that might require renegotiation of a treaty, and the Senate usually defeats attempted reservations that would actually alter treaty obligations. Rather than adding reservations or attempting to amend the treaty itself, the Senate often addresses its concerns through understandings that do not alter the obligations under the treaty and therefore do not require renegotiation. The Senate has the choice of rejecting a treaty by a public vote, or by quietly not bringing the treaty to a vote. In recent years it has almost always chosen not to conduct a vote that might embarrass the U.S. negotiators, make the United States appear divided, and impair relations with other countries. In either event, Senate defeat of a treaty entails a loss of the time, energy, and in some cases U.S. international prestige invested in the negotiations. An option for avoiding defeats is legislative-executive consultation prior to or during negotiations. The President can initiate consultation through meetings or by inviting congressional observers to negotiations. The Senate can initiate consultation through hearings and other meetings or through resolutions or legislative directives. In the past, some Senators have been concerned that participating in the formulation of a treaty could pose a conflict of interest since Senators are subsequently asked to pass judgment on the completed treaty. With the increase in multilateral treaties and other developments, this concern appears to have diminished. multilateral treaties The Senate's problem of not receiving a treaty until it is completed is particularly acute in multilateral treaties. These treaties are often negotiated by many nations in large international conferences, sometimes over a period of years. States make concessions in one area to obtain concessions from other states in other areas. The result is often an interwoven package that the Senate is called upon to take or leave in its entirety, without amendments or reservations, because renegotiation may not be feasible. Some multilateral treaties have contained an article prohibiting reservations. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has taken the position that the executive branch negotiators should not agree to this prohibition. The Senate has given its advice and consent to a few treaties containing the prohibition, but the committee has stated that approval of these treaties should not be construed as a precedent for such clauses in future treaties. It has further stated that the President's agreement to such a clause could not constrain the Senate's right and obligation to attach reservations to its advice and consent.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ See section on Environmental Treaties in Chapter XI. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A related problem arises from reservations made by other nations to a multilateral treaty. Although the reservations may modify international obligations, the Department of State has not been sending the reservations to the Senate for its advice and consent. It has been assumed that the Senate, aware of this practice, tacitly consents to the U.S. acceptance of the reservations.\19\ Without information on the reservations, however, the Senate cannot estimate the size or significance of the problem. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ See section on Amendment in Chapter IX. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The trend toward more multilateral agreements seems inevitable. The United States entered virtually no multilateral agreements until the late 1800s, but after 1900 multilateral treaties steadily increased and their subject coverage expanded. From 1980 through 1991 the United States entered 259 multilateral agreements of which 79 were treaties. For the future, with the number of sovereign nations still growing, multilateral agreements on a subject offer an efficient alternative to bilateral agreements with 100 or 200 countries. The great increase in multilateral diplomacy and multilateral agreements is introducing another new phenomenon. The United States now has bilateral international agreements with approximately 50 international organizations. It might appear that the Senate would encounter the same difficulty in proposing modifications it does in the case of multilateral agreements. Renegotiation of bilateral treaties with multilateral organizations should be more feasible, however, because the United States is one of only two negotiating partners. Moreover, the United States is in most instances also a major player in the international organization, the other negotiating partner. diminishing use of treaties for major political commitments \20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ See Chapter XI for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the end of World War II, treaties played an important part in shaping post-war U.S. foreign policy. Formal peace treaties were concluded with all belligerents except Germany. The Charters of the United Nations and the Organization of American States established a framework for international cooperation. The North Atlantic Treaty and other regional security treaties built a network of mutual security that endured throughout the Cold War. After 1955 the building of commitments through treaties appeared to halt, and many in Congress expressed concern with commitments made through executive action. In 1969 the Senate adopted the National Commitments Resolution expressing the sense that a national commitment ``results only from affirmative action taken by the executive and legislative branches of the U.S. Government by means of a treaty, statute, or concurrent resolution of both Houses of Congress specifically providing for such commitment.'' Yet for the rest of the Cold War, military and security commitments were not made as treaties but as executive agreements, non-binding political agreements, or unilateral executive branch statements and actions. Arms control treaties became the only type of agreement in the political-military field that have been concluded primarily in treaty form. In this area legislation specified that agreements be concluded as treaties or authorized by legislation, and the Senate insisted that most agreements be submitted as treaties. As a result, arms control treaties have been the main vehicle in recent years for special Senate influence on foreign policy. The end of the Cold War offers a new era in foreign policy comparable to that which existed at the end of World War II. As the agreements to provide the framework for the new era are concluded, the significance of the Senate's treaty power is again being tested. Some agreements to shape the new foreign policy already have been undertaken by executive agreement, non-binding political agreement, or unilateral executive branch statements or actions. In other cases, the Senate has insisted that agreements be concluded as treaties. Such insistence appears to have become necessary to ensure that significant political agreements are submitted as treaties. unilateral executive branch action to reinterpret, modify, and terminate treaties The Constitution is silent on procedures for modifying or terminating treaties, and agreement has not been reached between the branches on a single proper mode.\21\ The general rule is that international agreements are to be amended in the same way that they were made, thus for treaties requiring the advice and consent of the Senate. With the increase in numbers and complexity of treaties, more frequent changes and adjustments have become necessary. The Senate has again been challenged to be vigilant for unilateral executive branch action that might change a basic obligation agreed to in its advice and consent to a treaty. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ See Chapter IX for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- What portion of treaty modifications have been submitted to the Senate is unknown. Although certain changes have been routinely submitted to the Senate, such as amendments to tax treaties, others have been made solely by executive agreement or action. The most controversial unilateral action of the executive branch in recent years involved reinterpretation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty of 1972. In 1985, the Reagan Administration sought to reinterpret the ABM Treaty to permit development of mobile space-based anti-ballistic systems for the Strategic Defense Initiative. The Senate became concerned about both the future of the ABM Treaty and the failure to obtain its advice and consent for a major change in treaty obligations. It attached a condition to the INF Treaty restating the principle that the President may not adopt a treaty interpretation different from the common understanding shared by the Senate at the time it gave its advice and consent, without the advice and consent of the Senate or the enactment of a statute. In action on subsequent arms control treaties, the Senate affirmed the applicability of these principles to all treaties. In 1993 the Clinton Administration made clear it had returned to the ``narrow'' or ``traditional'' interpretation of the ABM Treaty.\22\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ See Chapters VI, VIII, and IX for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Twice in recent years the method of terminating a treaty has raised serious controversy within the United States. In 1978, President Carter terminated the defense treaty with the Republic of China without the concurrence of either the Senate or Congress when he established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China. In 1977, the new Panama Canal Treaty terminated the 1903, 1936, and 1955 treaties with Panama. Although a new treaty was approved by the Senate, some contended that the termination of the earlier treaties required an act of Congress, thus including approval by the House of Representatives as well as the Senate. difficulty in overseeing treaties \23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ See Chapter X for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Once it has given its advice and consent to a treaty, the Senate often lacks the information necessary to oversee further action under the treaty. It does not receive a copy of the resolution of ratification signed by the President, or the proclamation, to enable comparison with the resolution of ratification adopted by the Senate. It does not receive copies of reservations or conditions established by other parties, to enable a determination of whether the advice and consent of the Senate should have been required. It is not always informed when a treaty has entered into force or been modified in some way. Completion by the Department of State of a computerized information system on treaties, with Senate access, might enable the Senate to oversee some aspects of the implementation of treaties more effectively. Compliance with treaties has also become an issue on some occasions, especially in the arms control field. Oversight of compliance has been done with traditional congressional tools such as hearings, investigations, and required reports. minority power Questions are sometimes raised because of the power of a minority to block a treaty. Since a two-thirds majority of the Senators present is required to advise and consent to a treaty, a minority of one-third plus one of the Senate may reject a treaty. In some cases Senators in the minority seem to have more influence on a treaty or the substance of future policy than other Senators because those in the minority can win concessions. The President may be certain of the support of a simple majority; he must make special concessions to win the extra votes necessary for a two-thirds majority. Nevertheless, a two-thirds majority was clearly the intention of the Framers of the Constitution, and any formal change would require a constitutional amendment. the house role in treaties Because treaties become part of the law of the land, concern is sometimes expressed that the House of Representatives does not share in the treaty power. The Framers confined the treatymaking power to the President and the Senate in the belief that the latter's smaller size would enable it to be a confidential partner in the negotiations. The need for maintaining secrecy during negotiations and acting with speed were also cited as justifications for not including the House. In addition, by making the treaty power a national power and requiring the advice and consent of the Senate, the Framers gave expression to their desire to form a strong central government while affording the states ample safeguards. The Supreme Court, in INS v. Chadha, cited the Senate's power to advise and consent to treaties negotiated by the President ``as one of only four provisions in the Constitution, explicit and unambiguous, by which one House may act alone with the unreviewable force of law, not subject to the President's veto.'' \24\ In 1945 the House adopted a resolution to amend the Constitution to require the advice and consent of both Houses for treaties, but the Senate did not act on the measure.\25\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ 462 U.S. 919 (1983). \25\ H.J. Res. 60, Congressional Record (1945), pp. 4326-4368. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The House from the beginning has played a role in treaties that require implementing legislation. On occasion, as in 1796 with the Jay Treaty, problems have arisen when Presidents have completed ratification of treaties and then called upon Congress to pass implementing legislation to prevent the United States from defaulting on its international obligations. Treaties approved by the Senate have sometimes remained unfulfilled for long periods because implementing legislation was not passed. The increasing use of congressional-executive agreements has also equalized to some extent the role of the House vis-a- vis the Senate in the making of international agreements. Executive agreements authorized or approved by legislation give a majority in the House and Senate the power analogous to the Senate's advice and consent by a two-thirds majority. vienna convention on the law of treaties A pending issue for the Senate is what action to take on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a codification of the international law of treaties which is increasingly cited as a source of international law, even though the United States has not yet ratified it. The United States played a leading role in negotiating the Vienna Convention at a conference of more than 100 nations and signed it with almost 50 other countries on May 23, 1969. As in the case of many treaties, however, the executive branch conducted the negotiations without congressional observers or consultations, although the subject matter was of clear concern to the Senate. The convention was signed by the United States on May 23, 1969, and submitted to the Senate on November 7, 1971. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee ordered reported a resolution of advice and consent to ratification, subject to an understanding and an interpretation, on September 7, 1972, but the Department of State and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee could not agree on acceptable conditions and the convention remains pending on the Foreign Relations Committee calendar.\26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ See section on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in Chapter III. The text of the Vienna Convention is contained in Appendix 5. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The main dilemma is that simple ratification would leave unresolved important constitutional issues relating to executive agreements. The Vienna Convention codifies an international law definition of treaties that makes no distinction between different forms of international agreements. Article 46 permits a state to invalidate a treaty if a violation of domestic law in concluding the treaty was ``manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.'' In 1972, however, the Department of State objected to the interpretation proposed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that it was ``a rule of internal law of the United States of fundamental importance'' that no treaty as defined by the convention would be valid unless it had received the advice and consent of the Senate or its terms had been approved by law. The second problem is that, although the United States has traditionally supported the progressive codification of international law, in a few instances the Vienna Convention formally codifies rules of international law that may not have been fully accepted as customary law by the United States. In particular, the Vienna Convention provides that an international agreement is void if it conflicts with a fundamental norm of general international law ``accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted * * *.'' The United States in principle does not object to this concept known as jus cogens, but the convention does not state by whom or how such norms are established. Furthermore, the Vienna Convention provides that if a treaty dispute relating to jus cogens is not resolved within 12 months, any party may invoke the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice unless the parties agree to submit it to arbitration. While the United States has entered a number of treaties providing for submission of disputes to the International Court of Justice, unqualified Senate approval of the Vienna Convention would appear to broaden significantly U.S. acceptance of the court's jurisdiction, a matter which has long been controversial. The United States withdrew its declaration accepting the court's compulsory jurisdiction on October 7, 1985. Moreover, in approving some treaties with provisions for submission of disputes to the International Court of Justice, the Senate has added conditions. In giving its advice and consent to the Genocide Convention, the Senate added a reservation that before any dispute to which the United States was a party could be submitted to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the specific consent of the United States was required in each case. C. Issues in Agreements Not Submitted to the Senate Any problems the Senate has in influencing treaties pale in comparison with problems in influencing many other international agreements entered into by the United States. For sole executive agreements, many executive agreements entered into under the authority of a treaty, and non-legally binding or political agreements, the Senate (and Congress as a whole) often have little timely knowledge and no opportunity to change them or prevent them from taking effect. An exception is the category of congressional-executive agreements that are authorized by Congress in legislation with procedures for congressional review and approval. The problem is one of both quantity and quality. The number of agreements not submitted to the Senate as treaties has risen sharply while the number of treaties has remained steady. At the same time, the subject matter coverage of executive agreements has expanded and their significance increased. increasing use of executive agreements \27\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ See Chapter II for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As the United States became more involved in world affairs, international agreements multiplied. Most of the growth was in executive agreements. The executive branch found it was much easier to conclude an executive agreement than a treaty because it was not submitted to the Senate. (Compare charts 1 and 2 above.) The Senate, too, accepted executive agreements as an alternate method of making many international agreements, since submitting all agreements to the Senate as treaties would either overwhelm the Senate with work or force approval to become perfunctory. Of most concern to the Senate were executive agreements concluded solely on the President's own authority, without any influence from Congress. In other executive agreements, the Senate played a role anyway. In the case of executive agreements concluded under the authority of a treaty, the Senate consented to the original treaty. In the case of congressional-executive agreements, both Houses passed the legislation that authorized, required scrutiny of, or approved the agreements. oversight of executive agreements--the case-zablocki act \28\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ See Chapter X for references and additional discussion. The text of the Case-Zablocki Act is contained in Appendix 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To help in oversight of executive agreements, in 1972 the Case-Zablocki Act was enacted. This Act (1 U.S.C. 112b), usually referred to as the Case Act, requires the Secretary of State to transmit to Congress all executive agreements, including oral agreements which are to be reduced to written form, within 60 days after their entry into force. If the President deems that the immediate disclosure of an agreement would be prejudicial to national security, the agreement is to be transmitted to the Senate Foreign Relations and House International Relations Committees with a security classification. The Case Act has proved helpful in informing Congress of executive agreements and has provided machinery for additional oversight. If fully complied with by the executive branch and utilized by Members of Congress, a system exists for Congress to learn of executive agreements and to determine the adequacy of their authorization. learning of executive agreements The first problem dealt with by the Case Act was determining when executive agreements have been concluded. In the past, Presidents have entered into agreements secretly, as evidenced by the Yalta Agreement of 1945 and the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. The Case Act requires the State Department to send Congress copies of executive agreements. In most cases the agreements are submitted within the required 60 days after their entry into force, but some are submitted late. While the fact that the agreements have already entered into force means that Congress cannot prevent them from taking effect, timely knowledge does permit Congress an opportunity to consider the policy represented by the agreement and to use legislative means to modify the policy if it wishes. The Case Act has also helped the Department of State, as well as Congress, learn of and have some supervision over agreements made by agencies of the Government other than the State Department. The Case Act requires any department or agency that enters an international agreement to transmit the agreement to the Department of State within 20 days. In addition, it prohibits any international agreement from being signed or otherwise concluded on behalf of the United States without prior consultation with the Secretary of State. Such consultation may cover a class of agreements rather than each individual agreement. U.S. agencies frequently make contracts and arrangements with agencies in other countries. The Secretary of State determines for the executive branch whether an arrangement constitutes an international agreement required to be transmitted to Congress under the Case Act. Members and committees of Congress do not want to be deluged with trivia, yet they want to be sure to receive important agreements. One decision taken to this end by the Secretary of State with congressional concurrence was to exclude agreements made by the Agency for International Development to provide funds of less than $25 million for a foreign project, unless the agreement was otherwise significant. determining authority for executive agreements A basic concern of the Senate has been whether an executive agreement is properly within the authority of a treaty or statute. In 1973, in implementing the Case Act, the Department of State agreed to send with each executive agreement transmitted to Congress a background statement on the agreement that would include a precise citation of legal authority. Checking these citations could help the Senate distinguish between those agreements that are within the authority of a treaty or statute and those it would consider sole executive agreements. In recent years, however, a majority of agreements have been transmitted without such background statements. non-binding international agreements \29\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ See Chapters III and X for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some international agreements are not intended to be legally binding, and these non-binding agreements may escape regular congressional oversight procedures. Sometimes called political agreements, these agreements are not considered treaties under international law. They are not enforceable in courts, and rules concerning compliance, modification, and withdrawal from treaties do not apply. Nevertheless, these agreements may be considered morally binding by the parties, and the President may be making a type of national commitment when he enters one. Moreover such agreements are occasionally later converted into legally binding agreements. Non-binding agreements are not new. Presidents have often made mutual declarations and agreed on final acts and communiques after international meetings. Recently some non- binding agreements appear to have become quite formal, however, assuming all the characteristics of a treaty except for a statement that they are politically, not legally, binding. Agreements under the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) are an example. Since non-binding agreements are not submitted to the Senate as treaties and are not transmitted to Congress as executive agreements under the Case-Zablocki Act, Congress may need to learn of the agreements and oversee them through other methods. In the case of the CSCE agreements, Congress has carried out vigorous oversight through the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. D. Deciding Between Treaties and Executive Agreements The crux of the problem is determining when international agreements should be concluded as treaties and when they should be executive agreements. For what subjects is it essential to use the treaty process? For what subjects are executive agreements appropriate? scope of the treaty power; proper subject matter for treaties \30\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ See Chapters III and IV for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The treaty power is recognized by the courts as extending to any matter properly the subject of international negotiations. In practice the subject matter dealt with by international negotiations has steadily expanded, particularly in the last half century, with new forms of international cooperation in political, military, economic, and social fields. From time to time concern has been expressed that treaties could have adverse implications for, or the effect of changing, domestic law. For example, the negotiation of human rights treaties under the auspices of the United Nations raised concern in the 1950s that some clauses, if ratified by the United States, might be in conflict with constitutional provisions safeguarding human rights, or that matters clearly in the domestic jurisdiction of the United States could be changed into matters of international concern. Other concerns were that some national powers might be transferred to an international organization, or that powers traditionally reserved to the states could be invaded by transferring them to the Federal Government or international bodies. Despite its breadth, the treaty power has certain limitations in addition to the procedural safeguard of the requirement for the Senate's advice and consent. Chief among these is that treaties, like laws, are subject to the requirements of the Constitution. Controversial constitutional issues involving treaties include: (1) Rights reserved to the states.--While it seems settled that the unspecified reserved powers of the 10th amendment are not a bar to exercise of the treaty power, specific powers conferred on states arguably might provide restrictions. (2) Subjects in which the Constitution gave participation to the House of Representatives.--Powers delegated to Congress are not a limitation on subject matter which can be embraced by a treaty, but for many treaties, domestic effectiveness may depend on implementing legislation. (3) Authorizations of U.S. participation in proceedings before certain types of international judicial tribunals.--The Constitution's vesting of the judicial power in one Supreme Court and such inferior courts as Congress might establish provides a safeguard against infringement by treaty on the domestic judicial power. (4) Matters of domestic jurisdiction, not of international concern.--While there is no clear test of what matters are of international concern, the existence of such limitations appears to be generally accepted. (5) Separation of powers and rights under the Bill of Rights.--As a general matter, an agreement cannot alter the constitutional distribution of powers or impair constitutionally protected rights. scope of executive agreements; proper subject matter for executive agreements \31\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ See Chapter IV for references and additional discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The extent to which executive agreements can be utilized instead of treaties is perhaps the fundamental question in studying the Senate role in treaties, and is by no means wholly resolved. Congressional-executive or statutory agreements, authorized or approved by legislation, would appear to have the broadest constitutional basis. They have been used for such important subjects as joining international organizations, and the Senate in legislation has endorsed their possible use for arms control agreements and the making of national commitments. Many legal scholars consider statutory agreements interchangeable with treaties as a method of making international agreements. Some might even argue that because
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 50
|
https://www.keymilitary.com/article/dutch-vipers
|
en
|
Dutch ‘Vipers’
|
https://supersocial.fullfatthings.com/i/1/https://www.keymilitary.com/article/dutch-vipers
|
https://supersocial.fullfatthings.com/i/1/https://www.keymilitary.com/article/dutch-vipers
|
[
"https://fft-keymilitary.b-cdn.net/sites/militarykey/files/key%20military%20logo_0.png",
"https://fft-keymilitary.b-cdn.net/sites/militarykey/files/styles/listing_card/public/imported/2020-03-26/img_74-1_57.jpg?h=09fcdf23&itok=Q2PG2eRn",
"https://fft-keymilitary.b-cdn.net/sites/militarykey/files/styles/listing_card/public/imported/2020-03-26/img_16-1_63.jpg?h=c90769af&itok=Zt1XjA_G",
"https://fft-keymilitary.b-cdn.net/sites/militarykey/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/airforces-monthly.png?itok=kKDsvYrn",
"https://www.keymilitary.com/themes/custom/key_simple/images/militarykey-devices.jpg",
"https://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-9Yp58hh8HXUzM.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2020-03-26T14:43:14+00:00
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force F-16 In 1979, the first F-16 entered...
|
en
|
themes/custom/key_simple/favicons/apple-touch-icon.png
|
Key Military
|
https://www.keymilitary.com/article/dutch-vipers
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force F-16
In 1979, the first F-16 entered Royal Netherlands Air Force service as a direct replacement for the F-104G Starfighter and the type later succeeded the NF-5 Freedom Fighter. Mike Schoenmaker and Niels Hoogenboom review the many achievements of the Dutch ‘Viper’ over a remarkable 40-year career.
In 1959 the Dutch defence ministry announced selection of the F-104G as the country’s future fighter. The Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) received its first examples in 1962, and it was as sleek and fast as it was challenging to fly. The Dutch flew the Starfighter for 22 years, but as early as 1967 a hunt was under way for a successor. RNLAF chief of staff Lt Gen Bertie Wolff planned to join forces with neighbouring European air arms, seeking a collaborative solution to support the introduction of a new fighter.
The ensuing years saw the UK, Germany and Italy embracing the Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA), but the Netherlands withdrew from this project in July 1969. While the MRCA emerged as a twin-engine, two-seat strike aircraft, the Dutch sought an altogether different solution – a lightweight, single-seat, single-engine fighter that was easy and cost-effective to operate.
|
||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 11
|
https://marshallgroup.com/en-us/news-stories/marshall-celebrates-20-years-supporting-royal-netherlands-air-force
|
en
|
Marshall celebrates 20 years of supporting the Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://marshallgroup.com/media/pages/news-stories/marshall-celebrates-20-years-supporting-royal-netherlands-air-force/b985952f79-1712824427/Marshall-RNLAF-3-1.jpg",
"https://marshallgroup.com/media/pages/news-stories/marshall-celebrates-20-years-supporting-royal-netherlands-air-force/5ac1db3bbb-1712824427/D121122AS1125-1.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group is celebrating the 20th anniversary of supporting the Royal Netherlands Air Force C-130 fleet. In 1996 Marshall was …
|
en
|
Marshall Group
|
https://marshallgroup.com/en-us/news-stories/marshall-celebrates-20-years-supporting-royal-netherlands-air-force
|
Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group is celebrating the 20th anniversary of supporting the Royal Netherlands Air Force C-130 fleet.
In 1996 Marshall was awarded the contract to support the Royal Netherlands Air Force fleet of C-130H’s and throughout the development of the C-130 fleet Marshall has continued to support the Royal Netherlands Air Force.
Marshall completed the CUP (Cockpit Upgrade Programme) in 2005 which was followed by the groundbreaking TACAMO contract where two ex-US Navy EC-130Qs were converted to C-130Hs which included the CUP configuration. 2006 also marked the establishment of the engineering office in Leiden, the Netherlands.
Further capability insertion, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance and technical support agreements were put in place to sustain and increase the availability and capability of the fleet of four aircraft.
Rupert Dix, Managing Director of Military Aerospace at Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group commented: “We are incredibly proud to support the Royal Netherlands Air Force fleet of C-130 aircraft and over the last twenty years, we have jointly focussed upon improving availability and affordability through innovation.”
Major General Sotthewes, Deputy Commander of the Royal Netherlands Air Force, commented: "Throughout the years we have transformed the relationship into one of cooperation and partnering. The Royal Netherlands Air Force provides the operational input, while Marshall delivers the engineering solutions. A proven and rock solid combination. If technical problems arise, Marshall is immediately around to support the Royal Netherlands Air Force. This focus on customer's true needs really distinguishes Marshall in the aerospace industry."
Steve Fitz-Gerald, CEO of Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group commented: “I am immensely proud of this milestone; it is testament to the spirit and partnership of everyone involved over the last two decades and I look forward to what we can achieve in the future”.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 0
|
https://english.defensie.nl/organisation/air-force
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/content/gallery/defence/channel-afbeeldingen/logos/logo-klucht-eng.svg",
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/defence/hero-afbeeldingen/air-force/d190912jd0001.jpg",
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/defence/hero-afbeeldingen/air-force/46405490151_085afc5d0b_o.jpg",
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/defence/hero-afbeeldingen/air-force/d130327jh10771.jpg",
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/defence/hero-afbeeldingen/air-force/46063609394_282780710f_o-1.jpg",
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/defence/hero-afbeeldingen/air-force/d180122jd0046-a.jpg",
"https://english.defensie.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/defence/hero-afbeeldingen/air-force/d130322jr1098_hero.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Royal Netherlands Air Force is a modern, high-tech armed forces Service that contributes to peace and security on a global basis. For this purpose, it has highly-qualified personnel, aircraft, helicopters and other weapon systems at its disposal.
|
en
|
/binaries/content/assets/defence/iconen/favicon.ico
|
https://english.defensie.nl/organisation/air-force
|
The Royal Netherlands Air Force is a modern, high-tech armed forces Service that contributes to peace and security on a global basis. For this purpose, it has highly-qualified personnel, aircraft, helicopters and other weapon systems at its disposal.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 46
|
https://defence-industry.eu/boeing-delivers-first-upgraded-ah-64e-apache-to-royal-netherlands-air-force/
|
en
|
Boeing delivers first upgraded AH-64E Apache to Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2307861_04GSOF_Media_Partners_Digital_Banner_2024_7082024.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2307861_04GSOF_Media_Partners_Digital_Banner_2024_70820243.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/01b-600x50.png",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/DIE_2022_bkg-1.png",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Boeing-delivers-first-upgraded-AH-64E-Apache-to-Royal-Netherlands-Air-Force.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2307861_04GSOF_Media_Partners_Digital_Banner_2024_7082024.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2307861_04GSOF_Media_Partners_Digital_Banner_2024_70820243.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Jiri-Sedivy-Chief-Executive-of-the-European-Defence-Agency.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Poland-selects-GEs-CT7-engines-for-its-Leonardo-AW149-fleet.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Boeing-and-Nammo-completes-long-range-ramjet-artillery-test.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Euronaval_Gif_300x250px_8imgs.gif",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Dutch-Armed-Forces-take-command-of-NATO-enhanced-Forward-Presence-in-Lithuania.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Ancilia-revolutionizing-Royal-Navys-missile-defence-with-advanced-decoy-systems.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/HENSOLDT-receives-further-fire-control-sight-order-for-the-German-Armed-Forces.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Clavister-receives-SEK-5-million-license-order-from-European-defence-contractor.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Polish-defence-industry-to-produce-48-launchers-for-Patriot-system.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/British-Army-completes-first-firing-on-the-move-exercise-with-Ajax-vehicle-VIDEO.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Euronaval_Gif_300x250px_8imgs.gif",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Dutch-Armed-Forces-take-command-of-NATO-enhanced-Forward-Presence-in-Lithuania.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Ancilia-revolutionizing-Royal-Navys-missile-defence-with-advanced-decoy-systems.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/HENSOLDT-receives-further-fire-control-sight-order-for-the-German-Armed-Forces.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/U.S.-Air-Force-demonstrates-low-cost-capability-to-defeat-surface-vessels-from-the-air.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Aeronautics-secures-major-contract-with-NATO-member-for-Orbiter-3-drones.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Luftwaffe-carries-out-exercises-in-India-for-the-first-time.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/infodas-EN-9100-certified-for-the-aerospace-and-defense-industry.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/New-EDA-project-seeks-to-enhance-NGVA-NATO-Generic-Vehicle-Architecture-safety.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Raytheon-signs-over-billion-dollar-contract-for-AMRAAM-missiles.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/L3Harris-prototype-demonstrates-cutting-edge-capabilities-for-autonomous-air-defence.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Nokia-and-Swisscom-Broadcast-to-deploy-largest-Drones-as-a-Service-network.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Germany-bolsters-Ukraines-front-line-medical-capabilities-with-advanced-mobile-surgical-units.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/230421_VIN_Content_Assets_30_Vincorion_Banner_TAS_1.jpg",
"https://defence-industry.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/DIE_2022_bkg-1-300x138.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Defence Industry Europe"
] |
2022-10-25T22:28:15+01:00
|
Boeing has delivered the first AH-64E Version 6, or v6, Apache helicopter featuring improved performance, sensors and software to the Royal Netherlands Air Force.
|
en
|
Defence Industry Europe
|
https://defence-industry.eu/boeing-delivers-first-upgraded-ah-64e-apache-to-royal-netherlands-air-force/
|
As part of a Foreign Military Sale through the U.S. Department of Defense, Boeing received a contract in 2019 to remanufacture 28 RNLAF AH-64 D-model Apaches to the advanced AH-64E v6. Delivery for the final E-model Apache to the country is targeted for 2025.
“The Apache is the most advanced and proven attack helicopter, and demand for it continues to increase worldwide,” said Kathleen Jolivette, vice president of Attack Helicopter Programs and Senior Mesa Site Executive at Boeing. “By upgrading from the D-model to the E-model Apache, the Royal Netherlands Air Force will gain a significant increase in attack power, versatility and situational awareness for decades to come.”
The Dutch have operated D-model Apaches since 1998. Deliveries of remanufactured E-model Apaches represents the next step in the long-term partnership between Boeing and the country. Apaches continue to be an important element of European defense, and are currently operated by several European allied nations.
“It is an honor to receive the first remanufactured Apache Echo. This updated attack helicopter is a great improvement and gives the Royal Netherlands Air Force more combat power and situational awareness. This first delivery is an important step in modernizing our entire Apache fleet,” said Vice Admiral Arie Jan de Waard, the Director of the Defence Materiel Organisation.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 31
|
https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/netherlands/
|
en
|
The World Factbook
|
[
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/62be84e722a3367cf9c9b83f65ba114f/18869/NL_001_large.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/62be84e722a3367cf9c9b83f65ba114f/18869/NL_001_large.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/5c43f5bf65fb2d64d0fd074d3128845f/28380/NL-flag.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/5c43f5bf65fb2d64d0fd074d3128845f/28380/NL-flag.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/e66c318d2da144cfa272445986bf4a07/1e712/NL-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/e66c318d2da144cfa272445986bf4a07/1e712/NL-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/c841cbfd60ca7e89f34cff9d8726d885/5da0f/NL-locator-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/c841cbfd60ca7e89f34cff9d8726d885/5da0f/NL-locator-map.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/6f6267707379fe0d57b15dcc2eefee0b/7afa1/NL_area.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/6f6267707379fe0d57b15dcc2eefee0b/7afa1/NL_area.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/78e2ac207fc4767e4fdaa459b51b6468/15d60/NL_popgraph2023.jpg",
"https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/static/78e2ac207fc4767e4fdaa459b51b6468/15d60/NL_popgraph2023.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
/the-world-factbook/favicon-32x32.png?v=c3853bf09f084a8b1f66c6c2685054a1
| null |
People and Society
Population
total: 17,772,378
male: 8,844,100
female: 8,928,278 (2024 est.)
comparison rankings : female 71; male 70; total 71
Nationality
noun: Dutchman(men), Dutchwoman(women)
adjective: Dutch
Ethnic groups
Dutch 75.4%, EU (excluding Dutch) 6.4%, Turkish 2.4%, Moroccan 2.4%, Surinamese 2.1%, Indonesian 2%, other 9.3% (2021 est.)
Languages
Dutch (official), Frisian (official in Fryslan province)
major-language sample(s): Het Wereld Feitenboek, een onmisbare bron van informatie. (Dutch)
The World Factbook, the indispensable source for basic information.
note: Frisian, Low Saxon, Limburgish, Romani, and Yiddish have protected status; Dutch is the official language of the three special municipalities of the Caribbean Netherlands; English is a recognized regional language on Sint Eustatius and Saba; Papiamento is a recognized regional language on Bonaire
Religions
Roman Catholic 20.1%, Protestant 14.8% (includes Dutch Reformed, Protestant Church of The Netherlands, Calvinist), Muslim 5%, other 5.9% (includes Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish), none 54.1% (2019 est.)
Age structure
0-14 years: 15.2% (male 1,384,142/female 1,312,455)
15-64 years: 64.1% (male 5,750,034/female 5,640,691)
65 years and over: 20.7% (2024 est.) (male 1,709,924/female 1,975,132)
2023 population pyramid :
Dependency ratios
total dependency ratio: 54.9
youth dependency ratio: 24
elderly dependency ratio: 30.9
potential support ratio: 3.2 (2021 est.)
Median age
total: 42.2 years (2024 est.)
male: 40.9 years
female: 43.5 years
comparison ranking : total 44
Population growth rate
0.39% (2024 est.)
comparison ranking : 160
Birth rate
10.6 births/1,000 population (2024 est.)
comparison ranking : 175
Death rate
9.7 deaths/1,000 population (2024 est.)
comparison ranking : 38
Net migration rate
3 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2024 est.)
comparison ranking : 37
Population distribution
an area known as the Randstad, anchored by the cities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, the Hague, and Utrecht, is the most densely populated region; the north tends to be less dense, though sizeable communities can be found throughout the entire country
Urbanization
urban population: 93.2% of total population (2023)
rate of urbanization: 0.59% annual rate of change (2020-25 est.)
total population growth rate v. urban population growth rate, 2000-2030
Major urban areas - population
1.174 million AMSTERDAM (capital), 1.018 million Rotterdam (2023)
Sex ratio
at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female
0-14 years: 1.05 male(s)/female
15-64 years: 1.02 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.87 male(s)/female
total population: 0.99 male(s)/female (2024 est.)
Mother's mean age at first birth
30.2 years (2020 est.)
Maternal mortality ratio
4 deaths/100,000 live births (2020 est.)
comparison ranking : 174
Infant mortality rate
total: 3.6 deaths/1,000 live births (2024 est.)
male: 3.9 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 3.3 deaths/1,000 live births
comparison ranking : total 194
Life expectancy at birth
total population: 81.9 years (2024 est.)
male: 80.3 years
female: 83.5 years
comparison ranking : total population 39
Total fertility rate
1.61 children born/woman (2024 est.)
comparison ranking : 180
Gross reproduction rate
0.78 (2024 est.)
Contraceptive prevalence rate
73% (2013)
note: percent of women aged 18-45
Drinking water source
improved: urban: 100% of population
rural: 100% of population
total: 100% of population
unimproved: urban: 0% of population
rural: 0% of population
total: 0% of population (2020 est.)
Current health expenditure
11.1% of GDP (2020)
Physician density
4.08 physicians/1,000 population (2020)
Hospital bed density
3.2 beds/1,000 population (2018)
Sanitation facility access
improved: urban: 100% of population
rural: 100% of population
total: 100% of population
unimproved: urban: 0% of population
rural: 0% of population
total: 0% of population (2020 est.)
Obesity - adult prevalence rate
20.4% (2016)
comparison ranking : 99
Alcohol consumption per capita
total: 8.23 liters of pure alcohol (2019 est.)
beer: 3.95 liters of pure alcohol (2019 est.)
wine: 2.92 liters of pure alcohol (2019 est.)
spirits: 1.36 liters of pure alcohol (2019 est.)
other alcohols: 0 liters of pure alcohol (2019 est.)
comparison ranking : total 40
Tobacco use
total: 22.2% (2020 est.)
male: 24.4% (2020 est.)
female: 19.9% (2020 est.)
comparison ranking : total 70
Children under the age of 5 years underweight
NA
Currently married women (ages 15-49)
53.7% (2023 est.)
Education expenditures
5.3% of GDP (2020 est.)
comparison ranking : 64
Literacy
total population: NA
male: NA
female: NA
School life expectancy (primary to tertiary education)
total: 19 years
male: 18 years
female: 19 years (2020)
Government
Country name
conventional long form: Kingdom of the Netherlands
conventional short form: Netherlands
local long form: Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
local short form: Nederland
abbreviation: NL
etymology: the country name literally means "the lowlands" and refers to the geographic features of the land being both flat and down river from higher areas (i.e., at the estuaries of the Scheldt, Meuse, and Rhine Rivers; only about half of the Netherlands is more than 1 meter above sea level)
Government type
parliamentary constitutional monarchy; part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Capital
name: Amsterdam; note - The Hague is the seat of government
geographic coordinates: 52 21 N, 4 55 E
time difference: UTC+1 (6 hours ahead of Washington, DC, during Standard Time)
daylight saving time: +1hr, begins last Sunday in March; ends last Sunday in October
time zone note: time descriptions apply to the continental Netherlands only, for the constituent countries in the Caribbean, the time difference is UTC-4
etymology: the original Dutch name, Amstellerdam, meaning "a dam on the Amstel River," dates to the 13th century; over time the name simplified to Amsterdam
Administrative divisions
12 provinces (provincies, singular - provincie), 3 public entities* (openbare lichamen, singular - openbaar lichaam (Dutch); entidatnan publiko, singular - entidat publiko (Papiamento)); Bonaire*, Drenthe, Flevoland, Fryslan (Friesland), Gelderland, Groningen, Limburg, Noord-Brabant (North Brabant), Noord-Holland (North Holland), Overijssel, Saba*, Sint Eustatius*, Utrecht, Zeeland (Zealand), Zuid-Holland (South Holland)
note 1: the Netherlands is one of four constituent countries of the Kingdom of the Netherlands; the other three, Aruba, Curacao, and Sint Maarten, are all islands in the Caribbean; while all four parts are considered equal partners, in practice, most of the Kingdom's affairs are administered by the Netherlands, which makes up about 98% of the Kingdom's total land area and population
note 2: although Bonaire, Saba, and Sint Eustatius are officially incorporated into the country of the Netherlands under the broad designation of "public entities," Dutch Government sources regularly apply to them the more descriptive term of "special municipalities"; Bonaire, Saba, and Sint Eustatius are collectively referred to as the Caribbean Netherlands
Independence
26 July 1581 (the northern provinces of the Low Countries formally declared their independence with an Act of Abjuration; however, it was not until 30 January 1648 and the Peace of Westphalia that Spain recognized this independence)
National holiday
King's Day (birthday of King WILLEM-ALEXANDER), 27 April (1967); note - King's or Queen's Day is observed on the ruling monarch's birthday; currently celebrated on 26 April if 27 April is a Sunday
Legal system
civil law system based on the French system; constitution does not permit judicial review of acts of the States General
Constitution
history: many previous to adoption of the "Basic Law of the Kingdom of the Netherlands" on 24 August 1815; revised 8 times, the latest in 1983
amendments: proposed as an Act of Parliament by or on behalf of the king or by the Second Chamber of the States General; the Second Chamber is dissolved after its first reading of the Act; passage requires a second reading by both the First Chamber and the newly elected Second Chamber, followed by at least two-thirds majority vote of both chambers, and ratification by the king; amended many times, last in 2023
International law organization participation
accepts compulsory ICJ jurisdiction with reservations; accepts ICCt jurisdiction
Citizenship
citizenship by birth: no
citizenship by descent only: at least one parent must be a citizen of the Netherlands
dual citizenship recognized: no
residency requirement for naturalization: 5 years
Suffrage
18 years of age; universal
Executive branch
chief of state: King WILLEM-ALEXANDER (since 30 April 2013)
head of government: Prime Minister Dick SCHOOF (since 2 July 2024)
cabinet: Council of Ministers appointed by the monarch
elections/appointments: the monarchy is hereditary; following Second Chamber elections, the leader of the majority party or majority coalition is usually appointed prime minister by the monarch; deputy prime ministers are appointed by the monarch
note: Mark RUTTE's ruling coalition collapsed on 8 July 2023; he is serving as prime minister in a caretaker status until a new prime minister is sworn into office
Legislative branch
description: bicameral States General or Staten Generaal consists of:
Senate or Eerste Kamer (75 seats; members indirectly elected by the country's 12 provincial council members by proportional representation vote; members serve 4-year terms)
House of Representatives or Tweede Kamer (150 seats; members directly elected in multi-seat constituencies by open-list proportional representation vote to serve up to 4-year terms)
elections: Senate - last held on 30 May 2023 (next to be held in May 2027)
House of Representatives - last held on 22 November 2023 (next to be held on 30 November 2027)
election results: Senate - percent of vote by party - BBB 21.3%, VVD 13.3%, GL 9.3%, PvdA 9.3%, CDA 8.0%, D66 6.7%, PVV 5.3%, SP 4%, CU 4%, PvdD 4%, JA21 4%, Volt 2.7%, SGP 2.7%, FvD 2.7%, other 2.6%; seats by party - BBB 16, VVD 10, GL 7, PvdA 7, CDA 6, D66 5, PVV 4, SP 3, CU 3, PvdD 3, JA21 3, Volt 2, SGP 2, FvD 2 other 2; composition - men 45, women 30, percentage women 40%
House of Representatives - percent of vote by party - PVV 23.6%, GL/PvdA 15.5%, VVD 15.2%, NSC 12.8%, D66 6.2%, BBB 4.7%, CDA 3.3%, SP 3.1%, Denk 2.4%, FvD 2.2%, PvdD 2.3%, CU 2.1%, SGP 2.2%, other 6.4%; seats by party - PVV 37, GL/PvdA 25, VVD 24, NSC 20, D66 9, BBB 7, CDA 5, SP 5, Denk 3, PvdD 3, CU 3, FvD 3, SGP 3, other 6; composition - men 91, women 58, percentage women 38.7%; total States General percentage women 39.3%
Judicial branch
highest court(s): Supreme Court or Hoge Raad (consists of 41 judges: the president, 6 vice presidents, 31 justices or raadsheren, and 3 justices in exceptional service, referred to as buitengewone dienst); the court is divided into criminal, civil, tax, and ombuds chambers
judge selection and term of office: justices appointed by the monarch from a list provided by the House of Representatives of the States General; justices appointed for life or until mandatory retirement at age 70
subordinate courts: courts of appeal; district courts, each with up to 5 subdistrict courts; Netherlands Commercial Court
Political parties
Christian Democratic Appeal or CDAÂ
Christian Union or CU
Correct Answer 2021 or JA21
Democrats 66 or D66Â
DenkÂ
Farmer-Citizen Movement or BBBÂ
50PlusÂ
Forum for Democracy or FvDÂ
Green Left (GroenLinks) or GLÂ
Labor Party or PvdAÂ
New Social Contract or NSCÂ
Party for Freedom or PVVÂ
Party for the Animals or PvdDÂ
People's Party for Freedom and Democracy or VVDÂ
Reformed Political Party or SGPÂ
Socialist Party or SPÂ
Together or BIJ1Â
Volt Netherlands or VoltÂ
International organization participation
ADB (nonregional member), AfDB (nonregional member), Arctic Council (observer), Australia Group, Benelux, BIS, CBSS (observer), CD, CE, CERN, EAPC, EBRD, ECB, EIB, EITI (implementing country), EMU, ESA, EU, FAO, FATF, G-10, IADB, IAEA, IBRD, ICAO, ICC (national committees), ICCt, ICRM, IDA, IEA, IFAD, IFC, IFRCS, IGAD (partners), IHO, ILO, IMF, IMO, IMSO, Interpol, IOC, IOM, IPU, ISO, ITSO, ITU, ITUC (NGOs), MIGA, NATO, NEA, NSG, OAS (observer), OECD, OPCW, OSCE, Pacific Alliance (observer), Paris Club, PCA, Schengen Convention, SELEC (observer), UN, UNCTAD, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNHRC, UNIDO, UNMISS, UNOOSA, UNRWA, UN Security Council (temporary), UNTSO, UNWTO, UPU, Wassenaar Arrangement, WCO, WHO, WIPO, WMO, WTO, ZC
Diplomatic representation in the US
chief of mission: Ambassador Birgitta TAZELAAR (since 15 September 2023)
chancery: 4200 Linnean Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20008
telephone: [1] (202) 244-5300
FAX: [1] (202) 362-3430
email address and website:
was@minbuza.nl
https://www.netherlandsworldwide.nl/countries/united-states/about-us/embassy-in-washington-dc
consulate(s) general: Atlanta, Chicago, Miami, New York, San Francisco
Diplomatic representation from the US
chief of mission: Ambassador Shefali RAZDAN DUGGAL (since 19 October 2022)
embassy: John Adams Park 1, 2244 BZ Wassenaar
mailing address: 5780 Amsterdam Place, Washington DCÂ 20521-5780
telephone: [31] (70) 310-2209
FAX: [31] (70) 310-2207
email address and website: AmsterdamUSC@state.gov
https://nl.usembassy.gov/
consulate(s) general: Amsterdam
Flag description
three equal horizontal bands of red (bright vermilion; top), white, and blue (cobalt); similar to the flag of Luxembourg, which uses a lighter blue and is longer; the colors were derived from those of WILLIAM I, Prince of Orange, who led the Dutch Revolt against Spanish sovereignty in the latter half of the 16th century; originally the upper band was orange, but because its dye tended to turn red over time, the red shade was eventually made the permanent color; the banner is perhaps the oldest tricolor in continuous use
National symbol(s)
lion, tulip; national color: orange
National anthem
name: "Het Wilhelmus" (The William)
lyrics/music: Philips VAN MARNIX van Sint Aldegonde (presumed)/unknown
note: adopted 1932, in use since the 17th century, making it the oldest national anthem in the world; also known as "Wilhelmus van Nassouwe" (William of Nassau), it is in the form of an acrostic, where the first letter of each stanza spells the name of the leader of the Dutch Revolt
National heritage
total World Heritage Sites: 13 (12 cultural, 1 natural); note - includes one site in Curacao
selected World Heritage Site locales: Schokland and Surroundings (c); Dutch Water Defense Lines (c); Van Nellefabriek (c); Mill Network at Kinderdijk-Elshout (c); Droogmakerij de Beemster (Beemster Polder) (c); Rietveld Schröderhuis (Rietveld Schröder House) (c); Wadden Sea (n); Seventeenth Century Canal Ring Area of Amsterdam inside the Singelgracht (c); Colonies of Benevolence (c); Frontiers of the Roman Empire - The Lower German Limes (c)
Economy
Economic overview
high-income, core EU- and eurozone-member economy; trade-oriented with strong services, logistics, and high tech sectors; exiting mild recession triggered by inflation and weak export demand; tight labor market; low deficits and manageable public debt; strong ratings for innovation, competitiveness, and business climate
Real GDP (purchasing power parity)
$1.24 trillion (2023 est.)
$1.238 trillion (2022 est.)
$1.187 trillion (2021 est.)
note: data in 2021 dollars
comparison ranking : 27
Real GDP growth rate
0.12% (2023 est.)
4.33% (2022 est.)
6.19% (2021 est.)
note: annual GDP % growth based on constant local currency
comparison ranking : 186
Real GDP per capita
$69,300 (2023 est.)
$70,000 (2022 est.)
$67,700 (2021 est.)
note: data in 2021 dollars
comparison ranking : 18
GDP (official exchange rate)
$1.118 trillion (2023 est.)
note: data in current dollars at official exchange rate
Inflation rate (consumer prices)
3.84% (2023 est.)
10% (2022 est.)
2.68% (2021 est.)
note: annual % change based on consumer prices
comparison ranking : 77
Credit ratings
Fitch rating: AAA (1994)
Moody's rating: Aaa (1986)
Standard & Poors rating: AAA (2015)
note: The year refers to the year in which the current credit rating was first obtained.
GDP - composition, by sector of origin
agriculture: 1.6% (2017 est.)
industry: 17.9% (2017 est.)
services: 70.2% (2017 est.)
comparison rankings : services 67; industry 163; agriculture 185
GDP - composition, by end use
household consumption: 44.3% (2017 est.)
government consumption: 24.2% (2017 est.)
investment in fixed capital: 20.5% (2017 est.)
investment in inventories: 0.2% (2017 est.)
exports of goods and services: 83% (2017 est.)
imports of goods and services: -72.3% (2017 est.)
Agricultural products
milk, sugar beets, potatoes, pork, onions, wheat, chicken, tomatoes, carrots/turnips, goat milk (2022)
note: top ten agricultural products based on tonnage
Industries
agroindustries, metal and engineering products, electrical machinery and equipment, chemicals, petroleum, construction, microelectronics, fishing
Industrial production growth rate
-2.02% (2023 est.)
note: annual % change in industrial value added based on constant local currency
comparison ranking : 182
Labor force
9.999 million (2023 est.)
note: number of people ages 15 or older who are employed or seeking work
comparison ranking : 55
Unemployment rate
3.56% (2023 est.)
3.52% (2022 est.)
4.21% (2021 est.)
note: % of labor force seeking employment
comparison ranking : 63
Youth unemployment rate (ages 15-24)
total: 8.9% (2023 est.)
male: 9.4% (2023 est.)
female: 8.5% (2023 est.)
note: % of labor force ages 15-24 seeking employment
comparison ranking : total 144
Population below poverty line
14.5% (2021 est.)
note: % of population with income below national poverty line
Gini Index coefficient - distribution of family income
25.7 (2021 est.)
note: index (0-100) of income distribution; higher values represent greater inequality
comparison ranking : 148
Average household expenditures
on food: 12.1% of household expenditures (2021 est.)
on alcohol and tobacco: 3.3% of household expenditures (2021 est.)
Household income or consumption by percentage share
lowest 10%: 3.6% (2021 est.)
highest 10%: 21.4% (2021 est.)
note: % share of income accruing to lowest and highest 10% of population
Remittances
0.24% of GDP (2023 est.)
0.23% of GDP (2022 est.)
0.22% of GDP (2021 est.)
note: personal transfers and compensation between resident and non-resident individuals/households/entities
Budget
revenues: $396.687 billion (2019 est.)
expenditures: $374.166 billion (2019 est.)
Public debt
56.5% of GDP (2017 est.)
note: data cover general government debt and include debt instruments issued (or owned) by government entities other than the treasury; the data include treasury debt held by foreign entities; the data include debt issued by subnational entities, as well as intragovernmental debt; intragovernmental debt consists of treasury borrowings from surpluses in the social funds, such as for retirement, medical care, and unemployment, debt instruments for the social funds are not sold at public auctions
comparison ranking : 87
Taxes and other revenues
24.11% (of GDP) (2022 est.)
note: central government tax revenue as a % of GDP
comparison ranking : 54
Current account balance
$112.952 billion (2023 est.)
$93.836 billion (2022 est.)
$124.924 billion (2021 est.)
note: balance of payments - net trade and primary/secondary income in current dollars
comparison ranking : 4
Exports
$949.983 billion (2023 est.)
$944.421 billion (2022 est.)
$865.094 billion (2021 est.)
note: balance of payments - exports of goods and services in current dollars
comparison ranking : 6
Exports - partners
Germany 19%, Belgium 14%, France 9%, UK 6%, Italy 5% (2022)
note: top five export partners based on percentage share of exports
Exports - commodities
refined petroleum, broadcasting equipment, machinery, packaged medicine, crude petroleum (2022)
note: top five export commodities based on value in dollars
Imports
$825.799 billion (2023 est.)
$835.47 billion (2022 est.)
$749.324 billion (2021 est.)
note: balance of payments - imports of goods and services in current dollars
comparison ranking : 8
Imports - partners
Germany 14%, China 12%, US 9%, Belgium 9%, UK 5% (2022)
note: top five import partners based on percentage share of imports
Imports - commodities
crude petroleum, refined petroleum, natural gas, broadcasting equipment, computers (2022)
note: top five import commodities based on value in dollars
Reserves of foreign exchange and gold
$69.83 billion (2023 est.)
$63.353 billion (2022 est.)
$64.469 billion (2021 est.)
note: holdings of gold (year-end prices)/foreign exchange/special drawing rights in current dollars
comparison ranking : 45
Debt - external
$4,345,413,000,000 (2019 est.)
$4,625,016,000,000 (2018 est.)
comparison ranking : 5
Exchange rates
euros (EUR) per US dollar -
Exchange rates:
0.925 (2023 est.)
0.95 (2022 est.)
0.845 (2021 est.)
0.876 (2020 est.)
0.893 (2019 est.)
Military and Security
Military and security forces
Netherlands (Dutch) Armed Forces (Nederlandse Krijgsmacht): Royal Netherlands Army, Royal Netherlands Navy (includes Marine Corps), Royal Netherlands Air Force, Royal Netherlands Marechaussee (Military Constabulary) (2024)
note 1: the Netherlands Coast Guard and the Dutch Caribbean Coast Guard are civilian in nature but managed by the Royal Netherlands Navy
note 2: the core missions of the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee are border security, security and surveillance, and international and military police tasks; it has 21 brigades based in eight Dutch provinces, plus Curaçao in the Caribbean, a special missions security brigade, and separate security platoons to guard and protect domestic sites that are most likely to be the targets of attacks, such as government buildings
note 3: the national police maintain internal security in the Netherlands and report to the Ministry of Justice and Security, which oversees law enforcement organizations, as do the justice ministries in Aruba, Curacao, and Sint Maarten
Military expenditures
2.1% of GDP (2024 est.)
1.6% of GDP (2023)
1.5% of GDP (2022)
1.4% of GDP (2021)
1.4% of GDP (2020)
comparison ranking : 64
Military and security service personnel strengths
approximately 45,000 active-duty personnel (19,000 Army; 8,000 Navy; 8,000 Air Force; 6,000 Constabulary; 4,000 other) (2024)
note: the total figures include about 6,000 reservists on active duty; the Navy has about 2,300 marines
Military equipment inventories and acquisitions
the military's inventory consists of a mix of domestically produced and modern European- and US-sourced equipment; in recent years, the US has been the leading supplier of weapons systems; the Netherlands has an advanced domestic defense industry that focuses on armored vehicles, naval ships, and air defense systems; it also participates with the US and other European countries on joint development and production of advanced weapons systems (2023)
Military service age and obligation
17 years of age for voluntary service for men and women; the military is an all-volunteer force; conscription remains in place, but the requirement to show up for compulsory military service was suspended in 1997; must be a citizen of the Netherlands (2024)
note: in 2023, women made up about 14% of the military's full-time personnel
Military deployments
350 Lithuania (NATO); 200 Romania (NATO) (2024)
Military - note
the Dutch military is charged with the three core tasks of defending the countryâs national territory and that of its allies, enforcing the national and international rule of law, and providing assistance during disasters and other crises; it also has some domestic security duties, including in the Dutch Caribbean territories; the military operates globally but rarely carries out military operations independently and focuses on cooperating with the armed forces of other countries, particularly with Belgium, Denmark, Germany, and the UKÂ
the Netherlands has been a member of NATO since its founding in 1949, and the Dutch military is heavily involved in NATO missions and operations with air, ground, and naval forces, including air policing missions over the Benelux countries and Eastern Europe, NATOâs Enhanced Forward Presence initiative in the Baltic States and Eastern Europe, and several NATO naval flotillas, as well as standby units for NATOâs rapid response force; the military has previously deployed forces to NATO-led operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kosovo and also regularly contributes to EU- and UN-led missions; Royal Netherlands Marechaussee detachments have been included in international police units deployed by NATO
the Dutch Army has especially close ties with the German Army, including having its air mobile and mechanized brigades assigned to German divisional headquarters; in addition, the Army shares with the Germans command of a NATO high-readiness corps-level headquarters, which can be ready for deployment inside or outside NATO territory within 20 days; in 2020, Belgium, Denmark, and the Netherlands formed a joint composite special operations component command
founded in the late 1400s, the Royal Netherlands Navy is one of the oldest naval forces in the World and conducts a variety of missions worldwide; in addition to its close ties with NATO, the Navy cooperates closely with the Belgian Navy, including a joint staff known as the Admiralty Benelux; it has a command responsible for the activities of Dutch naval units in the Caribbean, which includes combating drug trafficking, environmental crime, and illegal fishing, as well as providing search and rescue and disaster relief capabilities; the Netherlands has naval bases on Curaçao and Aruba; since 1973, the Dutch Marine Corps has worked closely with the British Royal Marines, including jointly in the UK-Netherlands amphibious landing force
the Dutch military is also part of the UK-led Joint Expeditionary Force, a defense framework of 10 Northern European nations designed to provide security to the High North, North Atlantic, and the Baltic Sea Region in response to a crisis (2023)
|
|||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 89
|
https://nj.gov/nj/about/history/short_history.html
|
en
|
The Official Web Site for The State of New Jersey
|
[
"https://nj.gov/nj/design/images/state_seal_white.png",
"https://nj.gov/nj/assets/slices/nj-logo-blue.jpg",
"https://nj.gov/nj/assets/slices/digital_NJ_logo_white_transparent.png",
"https://nj.gov/nj/assets/slices/opra.png",
"https://nj.gov/nj/assets/slices/myNJ.png",
"https://nj.gov/nj/assets/slices/njoit.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"New Jersey",
"NJ",
"state",
"History. Lenape"
] | null |
[] | null |
You can find New Jersey on the east coast of the United States, between New York and Pennsylvania. Its location is remarkably accessible and indispensable. While millions call it home, many more millions visit, work, or pass through it each year. Connections to the Garden State include those with longstanding family ties to newcomers arriving to at
|
en
| null |
A Reflection of America: New Jersey History in Brief
You can find New Jersey on the east coast of the United States, between New York and Pennsylvania. Its location is remarkably accessible and indispensable. While millions call it home, many more millions visit, work, or pass through it each year. Connections to the Garden State include those with longstanding family ties to newcomers arriving to attend one of our renowned colleges or universities, work, or raise a family. In fact, wherever you are in the U.S., you’re likely to find someone with Jersey roots.
New Jersey is also a microcosm of the United States of America. In its past are stories that reveal the complexity of the American experience, reflecting the people, places, beliefs, and events that shaped who we are today. By understanding the experiences of Indigenous people, immigrants, free and enslaved African Americans, workers, soldiers, farmers, elected officials, teachers, scholars, activists, social reformers, inventors, and scientists, we hold a mirror up to America, exploring the foundational questions of who we are and where we came from. This brief history provides a general overview of the rich tapestry that constitutes the history of New Jersey.
Homeland of the Lenape
The land now known as New Jersey has been inhabited by Indigenous peoples for over 10,000 years. The ancestors of the Lenape, often referred to as the Delaware, were a network of individual nations whose traditional homelands once covered a vast area along the Eastern seaboard, including parts of present-day New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New York. They lived in thriving communities with rich cultural beliefs. A visitor to New Jersey in the 1600s would have found a land populated by approximately 8,000 Indigenous people, with myriad histories and social relationships
New Jersey’s complex settler and colonial past began in the seventeenth century. The first Europeans were the Dutch, who established their New Netherlands colony along the Hudson, Raritan, and Passaic rivers. In 1609, Henry Hudson became one of the first European explorers to chart the land that became New Jersey. The Swedes later established a colony along the southern banks of the Delaware River.
Europeans brought enslaved and free Africans to the territory, beginning a long and painful history of slavery and discrimination. Imported enslaved people were primarily subject to work in agriculture. As the colony’s population grew, so did its ethnic and religious diversity. African Americans – consisting mostly of enslaved peoples – accounted for 12% of the colony’s population by 1776.
In 1664, Charles II of England granted his brother James, Duke of York, a large tract of land along the eastern seaboard of North America. Weeks later, James gave a large portion of this land to his two friends, Lord John Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, proclaiming it “New Caeserea or New Jersey,” after the Isle of Jersey in the English Channel. A decade later, New Jersey was divided into two separate colonies: East and West Jersey. Each colony had its own proprietors, government, and laws. East Jersey’s capital was Perth Amboy and West Jersey’s capital was Burlington. In 1702, the proprietors of East and West Jersey surrendered their civil authority to the Crown, creating one colony under a royal governor. The English encouraged slavery through legislation that rewarded enslavers with grants of land through an agreement that offered 60 acres of land for every enslaved person imported during 1664, 45 acres for each imported the following year, and 30 acres for each in 1666. As the new English Settlers expanded, the enslaved population grew from just 50 in 1664 to hundreds and eventually thousands from 1625-1763.
Quakers played a significant role in New Jersey’s early colonial history, serving as proprietors in both East and West Jersey and accounting for a large portion of West Jersey’s population. The Dutch, English, and Swedes also set their sights on the land, resulting in a colony that, much like New Jersey today, was noteworthy for its diversity. They were joined by French Huguenots, Walloons, Germans, Finns, Welsh, Scots, and Scots-Irish settlers.
Early Dutch and English colonists engaged in trade with the Lenape people, exchanging European goods for furs. However, conflict between Lenape Nations and the colonists, as well as disease, posed threats to Indigenous people. As other immigrant groups grew, the state’s Indigenous population declined, largely due to forced migration. New Jersey’s changing demographics reflected a diverse population as forced migrations of enslaved people, willing and displaced migrants, and the continual forced displacement of Indigenous people created a shifting landscape. New Jersey’s colonial settlement patterns also left important and lasting legacies: diversity in faith, gender, race, ethnicity, and a tradition of representative self-government.
A Growing Colony Joins the Revolution
In 1746, the College of New Jersey, now known as Princeton University, began in Elizabeth with six students, then moved to Newark and ultimately Princeton. Twenty years later it was joined by Queen’s College, now Rutgers University. These pioneering schools began a long and distinguished tradition of higher education in New Jersey, making it the only North American colony with two chartered colleges at that time.
As ideas around inalienable rights gained popularity, so did the movement for American independence from Britain. After the passage of the Stamp and Townshend Acts, New Jerseyans signed non-importation agreements which increased the demand for domestic goods. In response, women across New Jersey established spinning bees to produce thread for homespun cloth, turning a domestic task into a public and radical act.
During the War for Independence, New Jersey’s unique location between the British stronghold in New York and the rebel capital in Philadelphia made it quite literally the crossroads of the American Revolution. By the War’s conclusion, more than 600 battles and skirmishes were fought on New Jersey soil, more than anywhere else in the former British colonies. Political divisions ran deep among New Jerseyans as the state was repeatedly occupied by both British and Continental armies.
As military actions continued through the War, General George Washington spent more time in New Jersey than in any other colony. Some historians describe Washington’s victory at Trenton in 1776 as the most important American military victory ever, as it revived the nation’s conscience, spirits, and determination. Throughout the winters of 1776 – 1777 and 1779 – 1780, Washington maintained his headquarters in Morristown where the Continental Army, alongside the women who tended to the troops, contended with harsh weather, disease, and mutiny. Without Washington and the Continental Army’s successes in New Jersey, the fledgling nation might have failed in its fight for independence
Immigration and Invention
In 1791, Alexander Hamilton and his associates selected an area along the Passaic River for Paterson, the first planned industrial city, where the rushing water over the Great Falls powered the new city's textile factories. This was the first step in New Jersey's transition into a powerhouse of the Industrial Revolution. While the state was predominantly agricultural at the end of the eighteenth century, the state became increasingly industrial in the centuries that followed.
Industrialization continued to expand throughout the century. Trenton was known as the “Staffordshire of America” because of its unrivaled production of ceramics. South Jersey was home to a vibrant glass-making industry. North Jersey excelled in the production of electronics, chemicals, and plastics. Today, the state has a strong advanced manufacturing sector and remains a leader in many industries, including telecommunications, biotech, and pharmaceuticals.
Situated midway between the northern and southern regions of the country, New Jersey embraced the expansion of canals and roads. Several members of the Stevens family played key roles in the state’s development as a transportation hub, building steamboats, steam ferries, and the Camden and Amboy Railroad. The Delaware and Raritan Canal operated from 1834 to 1932, connecting Philadelphia with New York and moving a variety of goods ranging from anthracite coal to cornmeal. John Roebling’s wire rope factory in Trenton supplied material to major bridge projects around the country, most notably the Brooklyn Bridge.
In 1876, Thomas Edison established a pioneering research and development enterprise in Menlo Park, where the light bulb, sound recordings, commercial electric service, and other innovations were created or improved. Edison opened a new, larger laboratory in West Orange in 1887. There he continued to develop the electric light, and the cylinder phonograph, but also expanded into work on motion picture photography and production.
In the nineteenth century, New Jersey’s status as a state of diversity continued. Immigration from northern and western European countries, including Ireland, Germany, and Scandinavia, brought thousands of people to New Jersey in search of work. Following the building of the Transcontinental Railroad, the 1870s would see Belleville, New Jersey become home to the first Chinese American settlement on the East Coast, pre-dating the Chinatowns that would form later in Newark and Manhattan. In the 1880s, Hooghly merchants from West Bengal, India traded on the shores of New Jersey, creating the foundations for South Asian communities along the East Coast.
By the turn of the twentieth century, immigration trends had shifted to southern and eastern European countries. Italians, Hungarians, Poles, Russians, and other Slavic peoples came to New Jersey by the thousands. Located just off the coast of New Jersey, Ellis Island served as the first point of entry for millions of immigrants seeking a better life in America. Those who chose to settle in New Jersey brought rich cultural traditions – including religious customs, languages, and foodways – to the state, many of which persist to the present day. African, Asian, South American, and Caribbean communities were always present in the state but continued to amplify and grow stronger in the twentieth century.
New Jersey and the Civil War
New Jersey served as a passageway on the Underground Railroad and home to a large population of free Black people. While some people utilized the Underground Railroad in New Jersey to travel further north, others, such as Levin and Sidney Still, escaped slavery in Maryland and made the state their new home. The Still family would go on to make numerous contributions to New Jersey and beyond, with notable figures such as Dr. James Still a prominent herbalist in Medford. He became the third largest landowner in Burlington County at the time of his death in 1882. William Still, who aided self-emancipated slaves in Philadelphia, eventually wrote The Underground Railroad in 1872 which is still an important record used by historians to understand the clandestine resistance movement. Other free Blacks, such as John S. Rock, a Black physician and lawyer from Salem, New Jersey, held prominent roles in the Underground Railroad by tending to the health and legal needs of self-emancipated slaves.
The state, however, was divided over the Civil War. Political infighting, fueled by long-standing regional rivalries, led New Jersey to be the only state remaining in the Union that Lincoln lost twice. Nevertheless, New Jersey supported the Union war effort, recording over 88,000 enlistments. New Jersey regiments fought throughout the war including at the key battles of Second Bull Run, Gettysburg, and Vicksburg as well as in the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign.
African Americans from New Jersey supported the Union war effort in invaluable ways. Of the 88,000 New Jersey enlistments, some 2,900 were Black soldiers serving in the U.S. Colored Infantry. In addition to military service, African Americans provided instrumental support to the Union forces as scouts, spies, nurses, cooks, teamsters, carpenters, and laborers.
During the War, Clara Barton – the future founder of the American Red Cross – was a strong supporter of the Union cause. She risked her life on the battlefields of Maryland and Virginia to deliver supplies to Union troops and tend to the wounded. Though not a New Jersey native, Barton made a significant impact on the state as a champion of free education during her years teaching in Bordentown.
While New Jersey provided a large number of troops for the Union cause, the state cannot point to a strong legacy of championing the rights of African Americans during this era. The state legislature initially refused to ratify the Thirteenth Amendment. In 1866, New Jersey became the last northern state to abolish slavery and even revoked its ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. African Americans, however, stood up for themselves in the courts, streets, and workplace, in addition to petitioning local and state governments for their deserved rights. They created associations and political groups and built churches as well as other institutions to advocate for their communities.
The Fifteenth Amendment was ratified nationally in 1870 but did not pass in New Jersey until 1871. Nevertheless, on March 31, 1870, Thomas Mundy Peterson of Perth Amboy became the first African American in the nation to exercise the right to vote under the authority of this new amendment – a historic day for constitutional equality, but only the beginning of a new struggle for African American civil rights.
Embracing the Twentieth Century
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, progressive reform movements sprung up around the state. As the nation’s most industrial, urban, and ethnically diverse state, New Jersey was considered the prototype for progressive economic, political, and social agendas. A strong union presence and labor organizing resulted in worker strikes in Paterson, Passaic, and Seabrook.
In 1919, both houses of Congress passed the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote. New Jersey was the 29th state to ratify the amendment, passing the State Legislature by a vote of 34-24. While in some ways the battle for suffrage had been won, Alice Paul, a native of Moorestown, was not satisfied. A prominent advocate and vocal leader in the fight for the Nineteenth Amendment, Paul began a new push for a federal constitutional amendment that would guarantee equality, regardless of sex.
World War I, the Great Depression, and World War II played pivotal roles in transforming and modernizing New Jersey. When the United States entered World War I in 1917, New Jersey contributed significantly to the war effort. The state was home to munitions factories and shipbuilding companies. Hoboken operated as a major point of embarkation during the war. Camp Dix in Burlington County, part of today’s Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, was founded as a World War I training ground. Over 140,000 residents served in the armed forces, about 3,400 of whom died fighting for their country. Among those who perished was the poet Joyce Kilmer, known for his poem “Trees,” who posthumously received the French Croix de Guerre for his bravery.
At the start of the War, African Americans continued migrating to New Jersey from the South to seek better opportunities and escape the oppression of Jim Crow laws and race-based violence. Needham Roberts, an African American man from Trenton, served in the 369th Infantry Regiment, also known as the Harlem Hellfighters. For his valor fighting alongside French forces, Roberts was one of the first two Americans to receive the Croix de Guerre.
Throughout the 1930s, New Jersey and the rest of the nation weathered the Great Depression. By 1936, over 120,000 New Jerseyans were working for the Works Progress Administration, a cornerstone of the New Deal. The Civilian Conservation Corps recruited 91,500 New Jerseyans and left an enduring mark on the landscape of the state, erecting 199 bridges, building 47 dams, and planting more than 21 million trees.
During World War II, more than 560,000 New Jerseyans served in branches of the armed services. The state’s economy boomed during the war years, with its agricultural and industrial sectors playing a critical role in the war effort. Over 200 New Jersey companies won the patriotic Army-Navy “E” Award for excellence in the production of vital wartime materials. The industrial workforce increased to nearly a million workers, and unemployment nearly vanished.
The war presented new employment opportunities to women, African American men, and New Jersey’s growing Hispanic and Latino/a communities. During this time, Puerto Ricans and African Americans from the south moved to New Jersey to meet the high demand for agricultural laborers. However, racial discrimination in the workplace persisted. During the 1940s, Seabrook Farms, the site of one of the largest producers of the nations’ produce, hired Japanese labor from WWII incarceration camps, replacing long-time African American laborers who were seeking unionization. Consequently in 1945, New Jersey became the second state in the country to pass a statewide fair employment act barring discrimination by employers on the basis of race, ethnicity, and religion.
In 1947, New Jersey adopted a new constitution that strengthened the office of the governor and streamlined the convoluted judicial system. The constitution ordered desegregation in New Jersey’s schools and National Guard – progressive steps years before the civil rights revolution. It also guaranteed the right of labor to organize and bargain collectively.
Following World War II, the state experienced unprecedented prosperity for some. New Jersey witnessed a massive expansion of its suburbs, made possible by affordable housing developments, federally backed mortgages, and a cutting-edge transportation system that eventually led to the creation of the Garden State Parkway and the New Jersey Turnpike. Despite these advancements, the differential treatment of African American war veterans when it came to accessing GI Bill benefits, in addition to restrictive covenants and redlining practices, created a landscape of inequality that persists to this day.
New Jersey innovation exploded during the twentieth century. African-American newspapers established themselves after emancipation, with Alfred R. Smith of Saddle River being, perhaps, the best New Jersey journalist of this time. Fort Lee was the birthplace of the motion picture industry in 1907, with early stars like Pearl White and Theda Bara appearing in popular studio productions. Elizabeth White and Dr. Frederick Coville cultivated the first domesticated blueberry crop in 1916. The Johnson & Johnson Company expanded its successful line of healthcare products with the introduction of the Band-Aid. Sara Spencer Washington founded Apex News and Hair Company, providing a variety of cosmetic products targeting African-American women.
Bell Labs established its headquarters in Murray Hill in 1941. The groundbreaking research conducted there eventually garnered seven Nobel prizes, culminating in the invention of the transistor in 1947. The arrival of the transistor was transformative, providing the foundation for modern communications technology. In 1946, Dr. Walter McAfee conducted Project Diana, which bounced an electronic echo from the moon’s surface and back to the Evans Signal Laboratory in Wall Township. This experiment was regarded as the beginning of the space age.
New Jersey Today
Known as a haven for immigrants since the colonial period, New Jersey has become even more diverse since the 1960s. While earlier immigrants primarily came from Europe, today’s arrivals now come from countries in Central and South America, Asia, the Caribbean, and Africa. New Jerseyans of Hispanic and Latino/a descent form the state’s largest ethnic minority group representing 18% of the state’s population. New Jersey’s Asian American population continues to grow as well with suburbs including Fort Lee, Palisades Park, and Edison. Immigrants of all backgrounds represent an estimated 20% of New Jersey’s current population, reinforcing the state’s stature as a bastion of cultural diversity.
New Jersey ranks 47th in size and 11th in population, making it the most densely populated state in the nation. Even so, it has preserved hundreds of thousands of acres of open space, including the Pinelands National Reserve, designated in 1978 to preserve the unique ecosystem of the state’s Pine Barrens. Nine million people may call New Jersey home, but 42% of the state is still covered by forest. Scientists continue to marvel at the variety of soil types and plant and animal species found in this relatively small area. Despite its dense population, the “Garden State” still has thousands of acres of farmland and continues its historical legacy as a producer of a wide array of agricultural products. Jersey tomatoes, blueberries, and corn are loved and anticipated by residents and visitors alike.
Through its resort communities along the state’s 130 miles of ocean shoreline, New Jersey has also been a pioneer in recreation and tourism. Cape May was reportedly the nation’s most famous seaside resort in 1850, and consistently ranks among the nation’s top resort towns today. Atlantic City, the “Queen of Resorts,” was home to the first boardwalk and the Miss America Pageant. At present, New Jersey is a destination, – not only for travelers, – but for all people to come for those seeking an exceptional quality of life, abundant work opportunities, a first-rate education, and a chance to improve their prospects for a better tomorrow.
This is a brief overview of New Jersey’s history; you can find more information at history.nj.gov and www.discovernjhistory.org.
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 27
|
https://www.stratcom.mil/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/1647946/us-strategic-command-and-royal-netherlands-air-force-sign-agreement-to-share-sp/
|
en
|
U.S. Strategic Command and Royal Netherlands Air Force sign agreement to share space services data
|
[
"https://www.stratcom.mil/Portals/8/usstratcom_seal32.png?ver=gglk15yMG4giWAZEKdaZ7Q%3d%3d",
"https://media.defense.gov/2018/Sep/28/2002045860/1920/1080/0/180921-N-YC845-036.JPG",
"https://media.defense.gov/2018/Sep/28/2002045859/1920/1080/0/180822-O-ZZ999-001.JPG",
"https://www.stratcom.mil/DesktopModules/SharedLibrary/Images/VCL 988_Hoz_CMYK.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2018-09-28T00:00:00
|
Both U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) and The Royal Netherlands Air Force signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to share space situational awareness. In the transit to a 5th Generation Air
|
en
|
/Portals/8/favicon.ico?ver=w74b6cEwT9IC7fV-jO-v4A%3d%3d
|
U.S. Strategic Command
|
https://www.stratcom.mil/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stratcom.mil%2FMedia%2FNews%2FNews-Article-View%2FArticle%2F1647946%2Fus-strategic-command-and-royal-netherlands-air-force-sign-agreement-to-share-sp%2F
|
Both U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) and The Royal Netherlands Air Force signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to share space situational awareness. In the transit to a 5th Generation Air Force, the Dutch Air Force relies even more on space-based systems. To ensure that the operational commander has the best Situational Awareness and Situational Understanding possible, it is imperative to include information about and from the Space domain. Cooperation throughout the Coalition is the key in creating an accurate and actual image of the influences of the Space domain and as such, we are looking forward to sharing data with USSTRATCOM and helping to enhance this picture.
“Partnerships such as these provide a foundation toward establishing international norms in the space domain, similar to air, ground, maritime and cyberspace domains,” said Rear Admiral Correll, USSTRATCOM. “Uniting with other space-faring nations promotes the responsible, peaceful, and safe use of space.”
The Royal Netherlands Air Force joins 15 nations (the United Kingdom, the Republic of Korea, France, Canada, Italy, Japan, Israel, Spain, Germany, Australia and the United Arab Emirates), two intergovernmental organizations (the European Space Agency and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites) and more than 70 commercial satellite owner/operator/launchers already participating in SSA data-sharing agreements with USSTRATCOM. SSA data-sharing agreements enhance multinational space cooperation and will streamline the process of requesting specific information gathered by USSTRATCOM’s Joint Space Operations Center at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The information is crucial for (inter)national operational mission planning purposes.
“Our societies, economies and, equally important, our military operations largely depend on space-based assets. Vulnerable assets that require protection. To safeguard operations in this rather congested domain and to allow for safe access to and from space, Space Situational Awareness is of utmost importance. Together we will be better equipped to accomplish that mission, by seeking transparency throughout the Coalition and sharing data as much as possible. In that regard the space-domain is no different than any of the other domains. One team, One mission!”, said Director of Operations RNLAF, Air Commodore Steur.
“Data-sharing arrangements such as these strengthen our shared space situational awareness,” Correll said. “Enhancing space situational awareness, which serves as the foundation for all our space operations, is vital in this congested domain.”
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 84
|
https://www.airfranceklm.com/en
|
en
|
Welcome to the Air France-KLM Group's website
|
[
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/logo.svg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/logo_mobile.svg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/styles/quote/public/2022-09/20220722%20BEN%20SMITH%2003-Modifier%20%28choix%20Ben%29.jpg?itok=eqHXLnrV",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/AF%20KLM%20SKYTEAM.jpg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/SAS.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/assets/img/Icon-external-link.svg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/styles/date_home/public/2024-01/AdobeStock_282084895.jpeg?itok=V2xsqVew",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/air_france_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/klm_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/transavia_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/air_france-klm_em_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/air_france-klm_martinair_cargo_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/flying_blue_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/assets/img/picto_partage_tw.svg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/assets/img/picto_partage_lkn.svg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/logo.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/air_france_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/klm_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/transavia_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/air_france-klm_em_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/air_france-klm_martinair_cargo_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/flying_blue_couleur_rgb2.png",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/assets/img/picto_partage_tw.svg",
"https://www.airfranceklm.com/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/assets/img/picto_partage_lkn.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/themes/custom/afklm_subtheme/favicon.png
|
https://www.airfranceklm.com/en
|
Image
Air France-KLM in 2023
January 27
March 15
March 17
April 18
April 19
June 14
June 22
June 28
July 4
July 14
September 7
September 14
September 25
October 3
October 10
October 19
October 26
November 10
November 27
November 30
December 7
December 11
December 13
December 19
December 21
Follow us
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 10
|
https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_history.htm
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmacht) History
|
[
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/_img/v5/rnlaf_h.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/_img/v5/rnlaf_l.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his1.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his2.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his3.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his4.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his5.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his6.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his7.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his8.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his9.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his10.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his11.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his12.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his13.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his14.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his15.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his16.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his17.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his18.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_his19.jpg",
"https://www.milavia.net/design/v5/img/prev.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/design/v5/img/up.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/links/banners/avitop2.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/links/banners/bas1.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"netherlands",
"airforce",
"rnlaf",
"koninklijke luchtmacht",
"klu",
"nederlandse",
"f-16",
"f-16mlu",
"fokker",
"kdc-10",
"dhc",
"defensie",
"luchtstrijdkracht",
"luchtvaart afdeling",
"dutch",
"air arm",
"armed",
"forces",
"history",
"timeline",
"historical"
] | null |
[
"Niels Hillebrand"
] | null |
Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmacht) history.
|
//www.milavia.net/favicon.ico
| null |
Royal Netherlands Air Force History
History 1913-1945
1913 - Foundation Dutch Army Aviation Department
On 16 April 1913 Her Majesty Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands signed Koninklijk Besluit nummer 29 (Royal Decision number 29) that a Luchtvaartafdeling (LVA - Aviation department) was to be founded within the Koninklijke Landmacht (Royal Army) on first of July 1913. Captain H. Walaardt Sacré would be the commander of the LVA, its four pilots and an sergeant-major-administrator. The LVA started with one car and one rented aircraft de Brik, which was an improved Farman biplane design by Marinus van Meel. Soon afterwards the aircraft was bought and became the first military owned aircraft in the Netherlands. The LVA was based at Soesterberg near Utrecht, the Vliegkamp Soesterberg airfield consisted of an area of heath as runway and a couple of wooden sheds.
On 30 May 1914 Proefvliegafdeling Militaire Luchtvaart (Trail aviation department Military Aviation) was founded as part of the Koninklijk Nederlands Indisch Leger (KNIL - Royal Dutch Indian Army) based in the Dutch Indies. (independent Indonesia of today used to be part of the Dutch empire)
1914-1918 - First World War
When on 14 August 1914 the first World War began consisted the LVA of 10 officers and 31 other personnel. The fleet consisted of nine aircraft, seven Farman biplanes and two Van Meels biplanes. Although the Netherlands was neutral during the war, after mobilisation of the Army the LVA flew many sorties patrolling the country borders. The aircraft production was effected by the war, and two aircraft on order could not be delivered. However a total of 107 forein airplanes were captured after they made emergency landings in the Netherlands.
1918-1939 - LVA between wars
At the end of World War One, the LVA consisted of 110 aircraft and 300 personnel. The department was reduced to a 'peace organisation' heavily reduced in number and limited to the reconnaissance mission.
However in 1930s the fear of war increased because of Hitler, German re-arming and general restless feel in Europe. The government dediced the rise the defense budget starting in 1935. The LVA fleet of reconnaissance aircraft was soon strengthened by Fokker G-I and D-XXI fighter/escorts, Fokker T-V bombers and the American Douglas DB-8A-3N light bomber/recce airplane.
On 1 July 1939 the LVA was renamed Wapen der Militaire Luchtvaart (Weapon of Military Aviation) and transformed into an aviation brigade, which consisted of three aviation regiments. Earlier on 30 March 1939 the aviation department of the KNIL was converted into an independent air arm designated ML/KNIL (ML standing for Militaire Luchtvaart or Military Aviation)
1939-1945 - Second World War
At the start of World War Two on 1 September 1939, only 125 combat-ready aircraft were available to the Netherlands. Although the Netherlands was hoping to remain neutral, it was attack by Germany on 10 mei 1940. Germany deployed about 1000 aircraft of the Luftwaffe and gained air superiority on the first day. The Luftwaffe lost about 350 aircraft, the Netherlands 94. When on 14 May 1940 Germany heavily bombed the major Dutch city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands surrendered.
However the fight was not over, like the government and royal family, many Dutch young man succeeded in fleeing to the United Kingdom. In June 1940 the first Dutch squadron was formed, 320 Squadrons Royal Naval Air Service was formed and its fleet consisted of Fokker T-VIIIW, then the Lockheed Hudson, and finally the North American B-25 Mitchell.
When the Casteltown based RAF 167 Squadron with several Dutch pilots was transferred to airfield Woodvale near Liverpook, it was renamed 322 (Dutch) Squadron RAF. Equipped with Spitfires, the squadrons was deployed for air defense of the British airspace, especially against V-1 rockets. The squadron also carried out ground attacks supporting allied troops in their advance, following the landings in Normandy.
On 26 juli 1944 the Netherlands government based in Londen founded the Directoraat der Nederlandse Luchtstrijdkrachten (DNLSK - Dutch Air Force Command). It consisted of the Militaire Luchtvaart and the ML/KNIL as well as the Marineluchtvaartdienst (MLD - Naval Aviation Serivce). The DNLSK gained command over the Dutch personnel in the RAF and signed agreements with the British Air Ministry for the training, organisation and equipment of the Dutch air forces.
History 1945-1989
1945-1950 - Entering the Jet Age
After the war a lot of effort was spent to build up the Dutch military. It was not until 1946 that the first airfields were available for use again, and only in 1947 pilot training restarted.
On 28 June 1948 the first three Gloster Meteor jet fighters were entered Dutch military service at Twenthe AB. Soon air defense squadron Nr.1 Squadron was formed, later renamed to 323 Squadron. On 28 January 1949 the first eight Meteors flew to Leeuwarden AB when the squadrons moved there. Leeuwarden AB became the first real jet airbase of the Netherlands.
On 17 March 1948 the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France and the United Kingdom sign the Treaty of Brussels to organise a collective defense in the form of the Western Defense Union, which was succeeded by the West-European Union (WEU). On 4 April 1949 the Netherlands signed the North-Atlantic Treaty, which would form the bases for the NATO.
1950-1953 - NATO and RNLAF
At the end of 1950 NATO top decided that the Netherlands would need to be equipped with tactical air arms. This was realised in 1952 with the creating of the Commando Tactische Luchtstrijdmachten (CTL - Tactical Air Force Command). It was also decided that the training of Dutch pilots would take place in the United States. On 11 March 1953 Her Majesty Queen Juliana signed the Royal decision, which would give the Koninklijk (Royal) title to the air force, the Koninklijke Luchmacht (KLu - Royal Netherlands Air Force) was born. The KLu would be equal and independent armed force aside the Royal Army and Royal Navy.
1953-1989 - Cold War Era
During the Cold War the RNLAF tactical squadrons would operate in the NATO Second Allied Tactical Air Force (2ATAF). The weapon systems of the RNLAF were integrated in the European defense against the forces of the Warchau Pact. Dutch Nike surface-to-air missile were deployed in Germany and Dutch fighters intercepted Tupolev bombers on a few occasions.
The RNLAF took part in major exercises with other NATO countries to train skills and cooperation, for example Red Flag at Nellis AFB in Nevada, USA. Because of the increasing densely populated Europe, it was neccessary to conduct low flying training outside Europe. For this, the RNLAF annually deployed a number of fighters to Goose Bay, Canada. Also the Groep Geleide Wapens (GGW - Group Guided Weapons) annually deployed to the NAMFI Range on Crete, Greece to practise its air defense skills using the Nike Hercules and Hawk missile systems.
The RNLAF also deployed for operations outside NATO command. In the 1960s the air force deployed to the crises situation around Dutch New-Guinea. 322 Squadrons embarked on the HMS Karel Doorman carrier which took the aircraft to the island of Biak where 322 would be based to provide air defense.
Another operation during this period, was the intervention of six F-104 Starfighters from Leeuwarden AB during the train hi-jack at De Punt in 1977. The noise produced by the low passes of the F-104 Starfighters, made the hi-jackers panic. This enabled Royal Navy Marines and police personnel to supprise attack the hi-jackers and end the drama for the hostages.
336 Squadrons deployed to airfield Hato on Curaçao with two Fokker F-27M Maritime Patrol aircraft to assist civil and military surveillance, transport and search and rescue missions.
History 1989-2004
1989-2001 - Peace Keeping & Enforcing
After the fall of the Berlin wall in November 1989 and the subsequent fall of the Soviet Union, the threat of a communist attack dissappeared. The RNLAF was reformed for the many new tasks it would have to perform besides air defense. NATO transformed into an organisation to solve over the world conflicts and assisting the UN. 'Air Power' became an instrument for international politics. 'Out of Area' operations, deployability, flexibility and mobility replaced the static defense strategy.
The transport fleet of Fokker F-27 aircraft was modernised by replacing them with modern Fokker 60 military transport and Fokker 50 VIP planes. The tactical range of the RNLAF was greatly improved with the arrival of two C-130H-30 Hercules medium transports. Later in the 1990s the KLu also received two ex-Martinair DC-10 airliner, which were converted to tanker retaining a part of their passenger and cargo carrying capability.
The Groep Geleide Wapens (GGW) returned to the Netherlands and was permanently based at De Peel AB in the south-east region of the country. In 1991 the RNLAF deployed the 3rd and 5th GGW with Patriot and Hawk missiles to Turkey to protect Diyarbakir against attack by Iraqi SCUD missiles. Patriot missiles were also deployed to Israel to defend Jerusalem against SCUD attacks. In 2003 the Patriots were again deployed to Turkey.
In 1993 the Dutch army helicopters were now officially part of the RNLAF. The RNLAF would maintain and operate the helicopters is support of army operations. The Tactische Helicopter Groep (THG - Tactical Helicopter Group) was formed and new transport helicopters (Chinook, Cougar) as well as the AH-64 Apache were acquired in the second part of the 1990s. Together with the Lucht Mobiele Brigade (Air Mobile Brigade) of the Royal Army the THG forms the 11 Air Manoeuvre Brigade.
From 12 April 1993 until 20 December 1995 RNLAF F-16s were part of the NATO fleet for operation Deny Flight. Operation Deny Flight enforced the no-fly zone above Bosnia-Herzegovina as imposed by the United Nations. Besides air defense missions, the Dutch F-16 would also take part in missions in the Balkan region delivering close air support to UN troops and aerial reconnaissance missions. Several F-16s also took part in operation Deliberate Force, a NATO-led air campaign in end summer 1995 which resulted in the signing of the Dayton treaties in December 1995.
In 1999, the RNLAF participated in operation Allied Force in Kosovo, which was also the operational debut for the upgraded F-16AM. Just a few hours into the operation a Dutch F-16AM from 322 Squadron successfully engaged a Serbian MiG-29 'Fulcrum' with a medium range AIM-120 AMRAAM. Besides the CAP mission, also offensive bombing and photo reconnaissance missions were flown. The KDC-10 tankers refuelled allied fighter over the Adriatic Sea. C-130 Hercules transports flew daily sorties from Eindhoven AB to logistical support the operation. RNLAF aircraft flew 1.194 sorties during operation Allied Force, which is about 7.5% of the total 37.000 sorties flown.
2001-2004 - Terrorist Threat
RNLAF supported Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, which was initiated by the United States following the terrorists attacks on the World Trade Center. Six F-16s, one KDC-10 tanker and some 440 personnel were deployed to Manas airport in Kirgyzstan as part of the European Participating Air Force (EPAF) together six Danish and six Norwegian F-16s. Starting 1 October 2002, the deployment was prolonged on 1 April 2003 to 1 October 2003, although the KDC-10 left in March. On several occasions LGBs were dropped in action against Al Qaeda and Taliban forces.
In 2003 after the US/UK invasion of Iraq, the RNLAF has deployed four CH-47D Chinook helicopters to support the Dutch marines currently based in the country for security. They will continue to be based here in 2004. In 2004 a Fokker 60 military transport has been deployed to Jordan as requested by the United Nations Humanitarian Air Service. The aircraft will provide the UN World Food Program (WFP) transport capacity flying between Amman in Jordan and the Iraqi cities of Basra, Erbil and Bagdad.
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 7
|
https://ronaldderoij.photo/history-of-the-royal-netherlands-air-force/service-history-of-the-f-84f-with-the-rnlaf/
|
en
|
Service history of the F-84F with the RNLAF
|
[
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/cropped-cropped-3371.jpg",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-169_f-84f_315-sqn_rnlaf.jpg",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-255_f-84f_315-sqn_rnlaf.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-238_f-84f_315-sqn_rnlaf.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/p-231_f-84f_314-sqn_01-07-1968_soeterberg_rnlaf.jpg?w=150",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2018-09-09T17:43:43+00:00
|
The Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was introduced in 1949, as a competitor to North American Aviation's F-86 "Sabre". The "F" model differs from the other models in that its wings are swept back forty degrees; its tail and elevator are swept back and it has a smaller canopy and redesigned windscreen. Although the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak …
|
en
|
https://s1.wp.com/i/favicon.ico
|
Ronald's photo site
|
https://ronaldderoij.photo/history-of-the-royal-netherlands-air-force/service-history-of-the-f-84f-with-the-rnlaf/
|
The Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was introduced in 1949, as a competitor to North American Aviation’s F-86 “Sabre”. The “F” model differs from the other models in that its wings are swept back forty degrees; its tail and elevator are swept back and it has a smaller canopy and redesigned windscreen. Although the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was a modified Republic F-84E Thunderjet, it only utilized fifteen percent of its ancestor’s airframe. With the addition of swept wings and tail, and improved engines, the new aircraft matched anything flying in 1954.
The Republic F-84F Thunderstreak became the front line fighter bomber of NATO throughout the 1950’s. The original production schedule for the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak that was prepared in August of 1950 called for the first deliveries to be made by the autumn of 1951. But serious production problems with the airframe and the engine delayed the delivery so badly that a straight-winged Republic F-84G Thunderjet was developed as a stop-gap measure, the first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was delivered to the USAF at the end of 1952.
Delivery to the Royal Netherlands Air Force
The delivery to the Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmachtor KLu) was a direct result of a decision that was made during a NATO meeting in in Lisbon in 1951 where it was decided that the Royal Netherlands Air Force would create two tactical air wings operating the Republic F-84 at first with the E and G model Thunderjet and on a later date with the Republic F-84 F Thunderstreak. The wings would eventually be created at Volkel and Eindhoven air base, with the aircraft being delivered via the Mutual Defence Assistance Program (MDAP).
The Royal Netherlands Air Force received onehundred and eighty Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks via the MDAP with the first arriving in the Merwehaven at Rotterdam on the sixth of November 1955. These planes were transported by road to Avio-Diepen at air base Ypenburg for reassembly and flight testing. These transport occurred by night over the highway to minimise the impact on the traffic. A hundred and three were delivered by cargo ships and aircraft carriers; the other seventy seven were flown from the USA to the airbases of Volkel and Eindhoven via the so called “High Flight”route.
In the first years of their operational life the Royal Netherlands Air Force Republic F-84F Thunderstreak were painted silver. They all got a registration, beginning with P-. As the Republic RF-84F Thunderflash were registered as P-1 to P-24, the Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks started with P-101. It seems to be logical that the last registration had to be P-280, but due to a mistake the registration were P-101 to P-277 and P-298 to P-300.
In the fifties the Royal Netherlands Air Force used the British system of squadron codes; eachsquadron within the West European Union had its own unique code. Forexample, 311 squadron at Volkel used PP-, so the second delivered Republic F-84F Thunderstreak got the code PP-2 on the nose and the registration (P-121)and USAF serial number (52-7189) on the tail. When an aircraft changed squadron, the squadron code had too be changed as a result, so most of the Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks have used several different squadron codes.
The First squadron to resave the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was 311 squadron in November 1953.
Operational history
311 squadron was the first to be operational with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak. The first Aircraft, registered P-103, was delivered November 29, 1955; the last and 25th Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, registered P-239, was delivered June 20, 1956. In March 1956 the first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were delivered to 312 and 313 squadron. 312 squadron received the last Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, registered P-235, on June 12, 1956. March 9, 1955 313 squadron received the first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, P-214. Because of delay of the delivery of the rest of the aircraft, eight examples were loaned from 312 squadron, so the Thunderjet could be withdrawn from use.
At the end of 1956 the last Republic F-84F Thunderstreak for 313 squadron were delivered, so its strength was 25 aircraft. 314 squadron received its first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, registered P-212, on May 1, 1956; its last example, P-161, was delivered just three months later. 314 squadron was part of the so called Allied Command Europe Mobile Forces (ACEMF) and was on a regular basis detached in Denmark and Norway. April 28, 1956 the first Streak, P-205 for 315 squadron arrived. In September the squadron received its 27th and last Republic F-84F Thunderstreak.
In the meantime two Streaks were written off due to accidents. May 1970 315 squadron was moved to air base Twenthe for the conversion to the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter. The remaining Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were handed over to 314 squadron. On July 27, 1956 the first three Streaks, P-157, P-166 and P-186 were delivered to 316 squadron and the last one was delivered in 1957. Strangely in January 1958 the squadron was abolished again, because due to accidents twenty-two Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s had been written of and over thirty aircraft were in maintenance. The aircraft of the squadron were handed over to the other squadrons.
June 1958, 313 squadron was merged with the Jacht Vlieg School. Its Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were handed over to the other four CTL squadrons (Commando Tactische Luchtstrijdkrachten = Tactical Command). Squadrons 311 and 312 squadron converted to the Lockheed F-104G Starfighter in 1964 – 1965. One hundred and fifteen Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were left for two squadrons.
These Republic F-84F Thunderstreak were of different modification standards, so it was decided to withdraw the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak 60-RE and earlier. On demand of the US twenty of these aircraft were handed over to Turkey. In 1970 both squadrons exchanged their Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s for the Northrop Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter.
Show aircraft.
Despite its poor flying capabilities the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak was used by several display teams, such as the famous US team ‘Thunderbirds’. Also in the Netherlands several display teams used the Republic F-84FThunderstreak, such as the “Dash Four” team of 1956 and the “Red Noses-team.
In 1963 there was a team of 315 squadron “Sandbag Diamond” with four Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s plus one solo. Very little is known about this team.
A well-known team, which never flew an official display, was the “Whiskey Four 67″ of squadron 314. Seven aircraft had the special scheme applied. Because of an accident killing the pilot during a training flight the team was dismissed shortly before its first official display.
In 1970 314 squadron raised a team, called “The Rascals” which displayed several times. In 1971 the team flew with the successor of the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak, the Northrop Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter.
Squadrons equipped with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak
311 squadron
In preparation for the arrival of MDAP Thunder-jets, the airfield at Volkel, which had been constructed during the war to house Luftwaffe units, was rebuilt during 1950 and handed over to the Luchtstrijdkrachten (LSK) on 3 April 1951. At this time, four F-84E Thunderjets were on strength, and on 1 May these formed 311 Squadron, with ‘PP- ‘ codes. Deliveries progressed slowly, and by September 18 had been delivered. Seven transferred to 312 Squadron in January 1952, but between April and June 311 Squadron re-equipped with the F-84G (serialsK-22 to K-40), and their remaining E variants were withdrawn for conversion to reconnaissance configuration.
Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s began to arrive in Holland in mid-1955, and once they had been assembled the first batch was handed over by the US Ambassador on December 9th , with 311 Squadron as the recipient. In the days of the Thunderjet, 311 Squadron had flown an aerobatic team, the ‘Skyblazers’, only a few months after receiving their first aircraft, and this precedent was followed by the ‘Dash 4’ team, established early in 1956.The four aircraft gave their first public display at an open day at Soesterberg, and later in the year went on to win an aerobatic competition at Las Vegas, Nevada.
With the exception of the British and American air forces, the remainder of NATO’s aircraft strength was restricted to operations in the conventional role. However, on 1 July 1960, 311 Squadron became the first tactical nuclear strike unit outside of these two air arms, carrying the atomic weapon in place of one external fuel tank for release in a LABS manoeuvre. Retirement for the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s was signalled by the arrival of the first Starfighters at Volkel in June 1964. On September the 18th 1965 the last four Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s of 311 squadron were transferred to Eindhoven AB, marking the end of this type with 311 Squadron.
312 Squadron
The second Thunderjet squadron in the Luchtstrijdkrachten, 312 formed on1 December 1951 and its first seven aircraft transferred from 311Squadron, also at Volkel, the next month. The code letters ‘DU- ‘ were allocated to the new equipment, together with the radio call sign ‘Bonzo’. The G versions of the Thunderjet soon arrived with 312 Squadron and remained in use until 1956.
In January of 1955 the squadron started its conversion to the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak . On April 3th 1956, the squadron made its first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak flight and returned its ‘Jets to the USAF. Together with its sister squadron,311 it formed a joint aerobatic team which existed until 1958.
Following the absorption of 313 Squadron into the Jachtvliegeropleiding(JVO), the F-84F Operationele Conversie Curses (Operational Conversion Course) was transferred to 312 Squadron in January 1959, where it remained until October 1961, when 315 Squadron took on the task.
Having previously been one of the first squadrons to accept any new equipment, 312 was the last Royal Netherlands Air Force unit to convert to the Starfighter(mostly second-hand examples from other units), and transferred its last Streaks to Eindhoven on 1 December 1965.
313 squadron
The history of 313 squadron traces back to 1952 when the first T-33 T-birds where delivered to Volkel AB. At first as a base flight but as the number of aircraft being used grew the flight was transformed in 311squadron on the first of December 1953 at Volkel AB.
In the first period the squadron operated a mix of aircraft consisting off, the T-33 T-bird , Harvard and some F-84G Thunderjets. As more Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s come available 313 squadron exchanged its Republic F-84G Thunderjets for the newer type in1956. With the centralisation of the jet training at Woensdrecht AB the squadrons also makes the move to Woensdrecht AB in 1958, during this transition the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s are transferred to 312Squadron. At the end of the year when the squadron has transferred its remaining aircraft to the “Jachtvliegopleiding” it is dissolved at the first of January 1959
The squadron was re-established at Twenthe AB on 12-10-72, flying the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter in the training role it took over, from the 315 Squadron. This made the squadron responsibility for the operational conversion of pilots returning from advanced training in the USA and Canada with Theatre Operational Conversions Courses (TOCC) followed by Advanced Operational Courses (AOC)to adjust to European operations (weather) and weapons usage.
314 Squadron
Created in 1952 at Eindhoven AB the squadron started on the F-84G Thunderjet with four aircraft in the beginning the strength steadily grew as more aircraft where delivered till the squadron was on strength with twenty-five aircraft in 1953.
The first Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s where delivered to the squadron in 1956at the moment the squadron started its transition to the new type. In this year the squadron delivered many of its F-84G Thunderjet to NATO allies like Portugal and Turkey , the last flight of a F-84GThunderjet was made on August the 23th 1956 during a flight to Ypenburg AB.
During 1956 the last of the twenty-five Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s for the squadron was delivered and the squadron was full operational on the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s. In de following years the squadron would become part of the Allied Command Europe Mobile Force resulting in the first rotation to Norway in 1959 with many to follow.
At the moment of the introduction of the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter the squadron was part of the NATO Allied Mobile Force and deployed with the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak ‘s for the last time in January 1970.
The arrival of the Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter started the withdrawal off the RepublicF-84F’s witch was officially withdrawn from service on the 21th of December 1970.
315 Squadron
Formed at Eindhoven on 25 June 1952 as the second of three Thunderjet squadrons in the local wing, with 25 aircraft coded ‘TB- ‘. In 1956 the squadron followed the lead set by 314 Squadron and re-equipped with Thunderstreaks, disposing of its last Thunderjet on 23 August 1956.
The unit took up a training role on 1 October 1961, when a joint intake of Belgian and Dutch pilots heralded the commencement of a unified training scheme, whereupon 315 Squadron took over the five-month Operational Conversion Course (OCC) from 312 Squadron. Under the mutual scheme (see VVS, ‘Belgian Military Aviation’ page 37), basic training was given at Gilze-Rijen (NL) and Goetsenhoven (B), after which the two streams merged to pass through Brustem (B), Woensdrecht (NL), and ultimately Eindhoven. Types used were the Fokker S.1 1, Stampe SVAB/C,Fouga Magister, T-33A and F-84F.
Large-scale use of the Thunderstreak ensured a rapid flow of pupils through Eindhoven, one new course every five months.
When in 1965 311 and 312 Squadrons at Volkel received Starfighters, the Thunderstreaks of 314 and 315 Squadrons (all 1952 vintage) were returned to the USAF for the use of other NATO countries, and the newer (1953)Volkel examples went to 315 and 316 in their stead.
Replacement came at last in December 1969, when the first Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter arrived at Twenthe, and 315 left its Thunderstreaks at Eindhoven on 1 May 1970 to take up residence at its new home. The squadron was given the responsibility of being the F-5A training unit, prior to 313 Squadron at the same base adopting the task.
316 squadron
With the establishment of 316 squadron in 1953 at Eindhoven AB the local wing was completed , operating twenty-five F-84G Thunderjets coded from’TC-1′ upwards, and functioning as a “maandvlieg” reserve squadron, tasked with keeping former pilots “airworthy”.
Although disbanded in March 1955, 316 Squadron was reactivated on 1August 1956, this time as a regular unit with the F-84F Thunderflash, which it flew until deactivated on 15 January 1958. This premature disbandment was in order to keep the other units flying the F-84FThunderflash up to strength, as twenty of the type had already been written off.
In May 1971, 314 Squadron and its Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter As left Eindhoven for Gilze-Rijen, where on 1 June it was split to form a new 316 Squadron. After transferring to Eindhoven, the squadron continued to work up on its allocation of twenty-two NF-5A and six Canadair NF-5B Freedom Fighter, but made a permanent move back to Gilze-Rijen on 27 April 1972, becoming operational there the next year.
The F-84Fs were phased out of Dutch services in two batches. The first half involved the Streaks of 311 and312 squadron at Volkel. From October 1964 onwards these squadrons started converting to the Starfighter and this was completed by the end of 1965. Their Republic F-84F Thunderstreak s were either returned to the USAF (and subsequently sent to Greece and Turkey), taken in use for spare parts or decoy purposes or transferred to 314 and 315 squadrons at Eindhoven.
At Eindhoven the type remained in service till 1970, when the conversion to the Northrop Canadair NF-5 Freedom Fighter was completed. The majority of the Republic F-84FThunderstreak where scrapped. A number of them was allowed to stay in Holland mainly for decoy and museum purposes, and some 20 aircraft were transferred to Greece where they soldiered on till the early 1980
The last operational flight with a Dutch F-84F was December 21, 1970.
Because of accidents 75 aircraft were written off during the fourteen years the Streak had been used. This is almost 42 % of the total amount of Republic F-84F Thunderstreaks used in Dutch service.
After their operational service about 30 Streaks were temporarily used as eye-catchers (“decoys”) at air-bases of the Royal Netherlands Air Force: about 4 aircraft were present at each airfield. They were removed and scrapped in 1980. A few Dutch F-84F’s still survive today as gate-guards, monuments, instructional airframes or museum aircraft
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 51
|
https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-01-30-Lockheed-Martin-and-Royal-Netherlands-Air-Force-Celebrate-Rollout-of-the-First-Dutch-Operational-F-35
|
en
|
Lockheed Martin and Royal Netherlands Air Force Celebrate Rollout of the First Dutch Operational F-35
|
[
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/lm-logo.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/lm-logo.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/search.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/general/template/images/ryan169.jpg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/rms/photo/joint-all-domain-operations/JADO-JADC2-F35-Blackhawk-1920.jpg.pc-adaptive.480.medium.jpg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/custom-close.svg",
"https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/815693/Lockheed_Martin_Aeronautics_5033.jpg?w=600",
"https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/815692/Lockheed_Martin_Aeronautics_5031.jpg?w=600",
"https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/815693/Lockheed_Martin_Aeronautics_5033.jpg",
"https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/815692/Lockheed_Martin_Aeronautics_5031.jpg",
"https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/331919/Lockheed_Martin_Logo.jpg",
"https://rt.prnewswire.com/rt.gif?NewsItemId=DA38059&Transmission_Id=201901301328PR_NEWS_USPR_____DA38059&DateId=20190130",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/lm-logo.svg",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/footerIconFacebook.png",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/twitter-x-logo-20.png",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/footerIconYouTube.png",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/footerIconLinkedIn.png",
"https://news.lockheedmartin.com/images/footerIconInstagram.png",
"https://stats.drivetheweb.com/piwik.php?idsite=3661&rec=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2019-01-30T00:00:00
|
Dutch and American officials celebrated the roll out of the first operational F-35A Lightning II for the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) at Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) in Fort Worth, Texas,...
|
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/favicon.ico
|
Media - Lockheed Martin
|
https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-01-30-Lockheed-Martin-and-Royal-Netherlands-Air-Force-Celebrate-Rollout-of-the-First-Dutch-Operational-F-35
|
FORT WORTH, Texas, Jan. 30, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Dutch and American officials celebrated the roll out of the first operational F-35A Lightning II for the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) at Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) in Fort Worth, Texas, commemorating a transformational leap in capability for the future of the Netherlands' national defense.
"Receiving this F-35 at Leeuwarden Air Base later this year is going to be a huge driver for change for our Air Force and will have tremendous impact on the relevance of our Air Force as part of the coalition," said Lt. Gen. Dennis Luyt, Commander, RNLAF. "We want to be among the best air forces of the world, and the platform of F-35 allows us to do that."
Various distinguished government, military and industry guests joined Luyt in attendance at the ceremony including Lockheed Martin Chairman, President and CEO Marillyn Hewson; State Secretary, the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs Mona Keijzer; and Special Envoy F-35, the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs Maxime Verhagen.
"From the very beginning of the F-35 program, the Netherlands has been a key partner in developing, testing, improving, and maintaining this remarkable aircraft," said Hewson. "Dutch suppliers have provided high-volume production, structural-design support, and advanced technologies, and Dutch aircraft and personnel continue to support ongoing testing and operations for the worldwide F-35 fleet. As we look to the future, the Netherlands will serve as a sustainment hub in the European region for maintenance, repair, overhaul, and upgrade projects."
Following the ceremony, the aircraft is scheduled to ferry to Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, where F-35A pilot training takes place. The aircraft is the first operational F-35 and the third Netherlands jet delivered to date. The first two Dutch F-35s were delivered in 2013 and are at Edwards AFB, California, supporting operational testing. The RNLAF plans to acquire 37 F-35As.
F-35 Program Economic Impact in the Netherlands
Dutch industry, including 25 suppliers to date, have benefitted from the F-35 program with contracts awarded for high technology work. As estimated by the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs, the F-35 program has already generated more than $1 billion USD in contracts for Netherlands industry, creating thousands of direct and indirect jobs for the Netherlands over the life of the program.
To date, more than 360 F-35s have been delivered and are now operating from 16 bases worldwide. Ten nations are flying the F-35, seven countries have F-35s operating from a base on their home soil, five services have declared Initial Operating Capability, and two services have announced their F-35s have been used in combat operations.
With stealth technology, supersonic speed, advanced sensors, weapons capacity and increased range, the F-35 is the most advanced, survivable and connected aircraft in the world. More than a fighter jet, the F-35's ability to collect, analyze and share data, is a powerful force multiplier that enhances all airborne, surface and ground-based assets in the battlespace enabling men and women in uniform to execute their mission and return home safely.
For additional information, visit our website: www.f35.com/netherlands.
About Lockheed Martin
Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 105,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services.
SOURCE Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 53
|
https://www.veterans.gc.ca/en/remembrance/classroom/nato-sheet
|
en
|
Veterans Affairs Canada
|
[
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/GCWeb/assets/2018-redesign/sig-blk-en.svg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/images/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/nato/CF-104-Starfighter.jpg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/images/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/nato/CF-104-Starfighter.jpg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/images/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/nato/IS2011-1033-10.jpg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/images/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/nato/IS2011-1033-10.jpg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/images/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/nato/HMCS-Charlottetown.jpg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/images/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/nato/HMCS-Charlottetown.jpg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/GCWeb/assets/2018-redesign/Canada_wordmark.svg",
"https://www.veterans.gc.ca/GCWeb/assets/2018-redesign/Canada_wordmark.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Remember Canada’s Veterans
|
en
|
/assets/leaf-favicon.png
| null |
One of the Canadian military’s central roles over the years has been to stand side-by-side with our allies to help defend international peace and security. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established in 1949, and this important partnership has endured for decades in a world that has undergone many significant changes.
The Cold War
The origins of NATO date back to the tumultuous years that followed the end of the Second World War in 1945. While the Soviet Union had been a major Allied power during the conflict, tensions quickly arose between the communist Soviet regime—which sought to widen its global influence—and democratic nations of the west like the United States, United Kingdom, France and Canada.
The “iron curtain” soon descended across Central Europe as the nations that had been freed from German occupation by Soviet forces saw communist governments take power. The clashing ideologies of east and west uneasily faced one another across a heavily armed frontier. The development of highly destructive nuclear weapons during this period caused the stakes of a future conflict to rise exponentially. This decades-long international standoff spawned in the latter half of the 1940s came to be known as the Cold War.
The birth of NATO
The United Nations was established in 1945 but, despite the important role it would play in the international community, its power to curb the escalating Cold War was limited. Dramatic episodes, like the Berlin Blockade of 1948–1949, helped stoke the fires of distrust and the countries of Western Europe and North America increasingly felt the need to band together to try to counterbalance the communist threat.
NATO was established on April 4, 1949, with the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty in Washington, D.C. This political and military alliance was formed to protect the freedom of its citizens and uphold the principles of democracy and the rule of law. Canada played a prominent role in NATO’s creation and was one of its 12 charter members, along with the United States, United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Portugal.
Canada responds
Canada had greatly downsized its military immediately after the Second World War. However, the emergence of the Cold War and the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 (which saw the communist forces of the north invade the democratic south) alarmed our government. Canada would soon recruit thousands of new soldiers, sailors and airmen to defend our own borders and also serve in Europe and on the Atlantic Ocean as part of NATO forces. Ultimately, hundreds of thousands of Canadians would take part in our country’s Cold War efforts between the late 1940s and the early 1990s.
On land
Our army’s first major Cold War deployment to Europe came in 1951 when the 27th Canadian Infantry Brigade was sent to Hanover, West Germany (relocating to the Soest region in 1953). An expanded Canadian brigade group was established later in the 1950s with additional armoured forces. Tanks played a central role in the NATO war plans and the Fulda Gap (lowlands between East and West Germany which were the likely route of a Soviet attack) would become familiar ground for Canadian troops. By the mid-1960s, the Canadian brigade group included three mechanized infantry battalions, a reconnaissance squadron equipped with both armoured vehicles and helicopters, artillery, and extensive logistical support capabilities.
The headquarters of Canada’s land forces in Western Europe moved to Lahr, West Germany, in the late 1960s, and there would be variations in our army’s size and capabilities overseas during the remainder of the Cold War. Through it all, though, our soldiers would bravely continue to serve until the end of the Cold War resulted in the Canadian brigade group being disbanded in 1993 and brought home.
In the air
The No. 1 Air Division Royal Canadian Air Force was established in Western Europe in the early 1950s. It initially consisted of 12 squadrons stationed at two bases in France (RCAF Station Marville and RCAF Station Grostenquin) and two bases in West Germany (RCAF Station Zweibrücken and RCAF Station Baden-Soellingen). Canadian warplanes there patrolled the skies with NATO forces, ready to intercept enemy bombers and fighters and to support ground forces in the event of active fighting breaking out. Canadian squadrons would be transferred out of France in the 1960s and our country’s air force presence in Europe soon concentrated at the newly constructed Canadian base in Lahr.
During the course of more than 40 years of NATO service, the organization and capabilities of our country’s overseas air power evolved, but iconic Cold War-era Canadian warplanes like the F-86 Sabre, CF-104 Starfighter and CF-18 Hornet became familiar sights in the skies over Europe.
Canada would also contribute in other ways to NATO air capabilities as our country was used for decades as a training ground for the air forces of our allies. With many European NATO member countries being relatively densely populated, Canada’s wide-open spaces were an attractive alternative.
At sea
The Canadian navy’s central responsibility during the Cold War was to patrol the Atlantic Ocean and defend against enemy naval forces. It was serious business as Soviet nuclear submarines could potentially use their stealth to reach the coast of North America and launch devastating missile attacks with little warning.
To hone their skills, Canadian warships joined the NATO fleet for regular exercises in the waters of the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. At times the constant threat of war would escalate even higher, such as during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962. This Cold War confrontation over the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba was perhaps the closest the world has come to an actual nuclear war. Canadian warships and aircraft would tirelessly patrol the Atlantic looking for Soviet naval activity during this tense episode.
Many Canadian naval Veterans recall their years of service at sea on such Cold War stalwarts as our Tribal-class destroyers and St. Laurent-class frigates, and aircraft carriers like HMCS Magnificent and Bonaventure. In the skies above, Sea King helicopters and long-range patrol aircraft, such as the Tracker, Argus and Aurora, patrolled the oceans on the watch for Soviet vessels probing our defences.
Post-Cold War efforts
The collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 was rapidly followed by the fall of communist regimes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the early 1990s. While the original purpose for NATO receded with the end of the Cold War, it would soon prove its continued relevance to international stability in new ways. NATO would coordinate a multinational security force in the Balkans in the aftermath of the strife that erupted following the break-up of Yugoslavia. Thousands of Canadian Armed Forces members would help restore peace and aid in the recovery there as part of NATO’s Implementation Force (IFOR) and Stabilization Force (SFOR) missions beginning in the mid-1990s.
NATO would assume a leading role in the international military efforts in Afghanistan in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. More than 40,000 Canadian Armed Forces members served in the Afghanistan theatre of operations between 2001 and 2014 and most would do so as part of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Canada’s navy and air force also took part in the NATO campaign to help the Libyan people depose dictator Muammar Gadhafi in 2011.
More recently, in a callback to the alliance’s original purpose, NATO has been resolute in standing up for peace and security in the face of new threats in Central and Eastern Europe. Canada’s army, navy and air force have taken part in NATO exercises as part of Operation Reassurance in places such as Poland, Latvia, Romania and the Black Sea. Our men and women in uniform are also active in important NATO initiatives elsewhere, such as playing a leading role in a training mission in Iraq to help the country transition to lasting peace and security.
Despite the many changes that have happened in the world since 1949, the principles underlying NATO are still strong and the size of the alliance has expanded greatly. Today there are 30 member nations, and Canada remains a key contributor even seven decades later.
Canada Remembers Program
The Canada Remembers Program of Veterans Affairs Canada encourages all Canadians to learn about the sacrifices and achievements made by those who have served—and continue to serve—during times of war and peace. As well, it invites Canadians to become involved in remembrance activities that will help preserve their legacy for future generations.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 91
|
https://www.asdnews.com/news/defense/2024/08/05/pacific-skies-24-how-airbus-serves-air-forces-around-world
|
en
|
Pacific Skies 24: How Airbus Serves Air Forces Around the Wo
|
[
"https://www.asdnews.com/media/1012/asdnews-logo-200.png",
"https://www.asdnews.com/media/1011/asdnews-logo-navbar.png",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90012_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90013_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90014_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90015_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90016_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90017_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/NewsImages/b/84130/90018_W300.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/marketforecastImages/1106/cover_100.png",
"https://www.asdnews.com/eventsImages/logo/E025043_logotmb.jpg",
"https://www.asdnews.com/eventsImages/logo/E024999_logotmb.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"ASDNews"
] |
2024-08-05T00:00:00
|
--40+ Airbus aircraft across 58,000 km and four continents. Discover the support behind the global Pacific Skies exercises.
|
en
|
/webicons/asdnews/apple-icon-57x57.png
|
https://www.asdnews.com/news/defense/2024/08/05/pacific-skies-24-how-airbus-serves-air-forces-around-world
|
Pacific Skies began months ago, long before the jets took to the skies. Airbus teams have been coordinating with customers, helping to assemble mission kits and ensuring aircraft readiness through preventive maintenance at air force bases. In addition, Airbus has established a network of experts and has placed more than 50 suppliers on alert, should technical support or unplanned material be needed during the exercise.
“We need to ensure that resources are available throughout the northern hemisphere summer, on the other side of the world and across time zones. We have a dedicated maintenance, repair and overhaul team on standby to travel in case an aircraft needs to be recovered and our customers require support,” explains Manjarres.
The A330 MRTT: from air-to-air refuelling to the largest Pitch Black exercise
Based in the Netherlands, Airbus field service representative (FSR) Víctor Anton Meñica supports NATO's Multinational A330 MRTT Unit (MMU). The Unit provides air-to-air refuelling, medical evacuations, transport of military personnel and cargo in support of participating nations' missions. “Working closely with the European Air Transport Command*, we have put our heart and soul into ensuring that the fleet is in the best possible condition,” Meñica says.
Meñica was based at Amberley Air Base in Queensland, Australia, supporting the A330 MRTTs from Australia, Singapore, France, the UK and the MMU fleet deployed during Pitch Black, which ran from 12 July to 2 August. “This was a remarkable display of air power,” he says. This year's exercise brought together 20 countries, more than 140 aircraft and over 4,400 military personnel. Large aircraft formations, day and night flying – these are things that air forces cannot practice during routine operations in Europe.
“The A330 MRTTs flew everyday and my role was to support the customers to avoid any operational disruption. Being deployed on the field and having direct access to the fleet, I can coordinate the most suitable solution with the Airbus technical support teams,” Meñica explains. What is the key to being a good field representative? “Knowing what questions to ask so the issues are properly understood and prioritised. This is key so we can provide quick and accurate advice to the operators.”
A400M: Supporting customers “from within”, from Australia to India
Around 3,000 km from Amberley, Queensland, at Darwin Air Base, Northern Territory, Australia, Menica's FSR colleague Eduardo Tijeras assisted the French, German and Spanish air forces in bringing the A400M to Pitch Black, with the French using the airlifter for tactical operations during Darwin exercises. The A400M is being primarily used to transport material and improve logistical operations throughout the Pacific Skies deployment, while one French A400M is available for search and rescue missions in the Asia Pacific region if required.
“Evidently, aircraft are complex, many different issues can arise,” says Tijeras. “My role during Pitch Black was to take the burden off the customer and address technical issues by talking to Airbus engineering teams to get answers quickly. We had to be flexible and understand our customers’ constraints.”
Deployed since 2020 with the Royal Malaysian Air Force A400M fleet in Kuala Lumpur, Tijeras is an aircraft mechanic by trade. He’s been in the maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) as well as the services field for the last 12 years and has worked with most Airbus military aircraft. “We are the eyes of Airbus at the customer, and the voice of the customer at Airbus,” he says.
Eurofighter: defence commitment from Alaska to Japan and Hawaii
In parallel with Pitch Black, FSR Frank Fust supported the German Air Force during the Nippon Skies exercise in Japan, where he was on duty from 17 to 25 July, and Rimpac in Hawaii, from 27 to 30 July. He is part of the System Support Center Eurofighter (SSC EF), a civil-military cooperation between Airbus and the German Air Force, based in Manching, Germany.
During Nippon Skies, three German Eurofighter trained alongside Japanese Air Self-Defence Force fighters. Rimpac focused on protecting naval forces from air attack, and interoperability between the various branches. In between, the German Air Force even set the record for the longest non-stop Eurofighter flight, covering the 8,600-kilometre distance from Japan to Hawaii in 10 hours and 31 minutes, including several in-flight refuelling operations.
“We provide first-hand support by making sure the performance of the Eurofighter's radar and defensive aids sub-systems are stable,” Fust says. “We listen to the pilots' debriefing and analyse what the weapon system is telling us.” The main challenges during the exercises were to effectively manage the spares inventory and to react quickly in the short time between missions. “In the end, it is about providing more operational capability together with the customer, so that the pilot can fly the missions as planned,” Fust stresses.
Throughout, he was able to rely on both his Airbus and his military colleagues at the SSC EF in Manching. Their close support was also on full display during Arctic Defender, the first leg of the global Pacific Skies deployment, which took place in Fairbanks, Alaska, in early July 2024.
Last stop India: strengthening multinational cooperation
The last major Pacific Skies stop will be Tarang Shakti in early August, when the Indian Air Force will host its first multinational exercise.
“We structured Pacific Skies months in advance and we are executing it as planned, communicating very closely with our customers and suppliers,” concludes Géraldine Thiercelin, Head of Services, Air Power, Airbus Defence and Space. “We are responsive to the air forces’ needs at all times during the exercise. I am really proud of Team Airbus and what we are doing.”
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 88
|
https://www.unhcr.org/publications/question-diplomatic-asylum-report-secretary-general-0
|
en
|
Question of Diplomatic Asylum. Report of the Secretary-General
|
[
"https://www.unhcr.org/themes/custom/project/images/icons/top-icons-arrow-down.svg",
"https://www.unhcr.org/themes/custom/project/logo.svg",
"https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2022-12/cta-data1.png",
"https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/rf1301228_20230827.jpg",
"https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2022-12/cta-made51.png",
"https://www.unhcr.org/themes/custom/project/logo-print.png",
"https://www.unhcr.org/themes/custom/project/images/icons/close.svg",
"https://www.unhcr.org/themes/custom/project/images/logo/EN-UNHCR-White.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Thirtieth sessionAgenda item 1111 PART II. REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL PREPARED PURSUANT TO OPERATIVE PARAGRAPH 2 OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 3321 (XXIX) BACKGROUND 1. Terminology
|
en
|
/themes/contrib/unhcr/favicon.svg
|
UNHCR
|
https://www.unhcr.org/publications/question-diplomatic-asylum-report-secretary-general-0
|
Thirtieth session
Agenda item 1111
PART II. REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL PREPARED PURSUANT TO OPERATIVE PARAGRAPH 2 OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 3321 (XXIX)
BACKGROUND
1. Terminology
1. The term "diplomatic asylum" in the broad sense is used to denote asylum granted by a State outside its territory, particularly in its diplomatic missions (diplomatic asylum in the strict sense), in its consulates, on board its ships in the territorial waters of another State (naval asylum), and also on board its aircraft and of its military or para-military installations in foreign territory. The other form of asylum granted to individuals, namely, that which is granted by the State within its borders, is generally given the name "territorial asylum". The terminology employed in this entire field lacks uniformity. The terms "internal asylum", "external asylum"' and "political asylum" are used by some to denote diplomatic asylum and by others to refer to territorial asylum. The State in whose territory diplomatic asylum is sought is know as the "local" or "territorial" State - or even, as will be seen from footnote 75 below, the "State" of refuge" - while the person granted asylum may be called either a "refugee" or an "asylee". As a general rule, this report respects the terminology employed in the documents studied because the meaning of the different terms referred to above is usually apparent from the context.
2. Historical evolution
(a) Diplomatic asylum in diplomatic missions and consulates
(i) Asylum in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
2. Diplomatic asylum came into being at the same time as permanent diplomacy. It was unknown as long as ambassadors were assigned only temporary missions. But with the transformation - begun in the fifteenth century in the Italian States and sanctioned at the Congress of Westphalia in 1648 - of temporary embassies into permanent ones, it was felt necessary to add inviolability of the ambassador's dwelling to the personal inviolability that he had traditionally enjoyed in order to remove him from the influence of the receiving State. Their places of residence being thus protected from intrusion, ambassadors acquired the habit of receiving persons sought by the authorities of the territorial State. This practice seems to have grown considerably in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, as is attested to by the fact that the inviolability of embassy premises, at first restricted to the ambassador's dwelling, was in turn claimed in respect of his carriage, the buildings situated in the same quarter of the city, and later the entire quarter (hence the expression franchise des quartiers or freedom of the ward or quarter). It was recognized by law and by custom, as is demonstrated, for example, by a Venetian statute of 1554, which provides that "he who has taken refuge in the house of a diplomat shall not be followed there, and his pursuers are to feign ignorance of his presence ... ",2 and by a statement of Charles the Fifth couched in the following terms:
"May the houses of ambassadors provide inviolable asylum, as did formerly the temples of the gods, and may no one be permitted to violate this asylum on any pretext whatever."3
The institution was also to receive approval in the form of an arbitral award delivered by Pope Clement VIII in 1601 on the occasion of a conflict between the King of France and the King of Spain, as will be seen further on. Finally, the principle of diplomatic asylum was almost unanimously recognized by the legal writers.4 They even strove, as the notion of sovereignty developed, to find for this principle a basis which would make it acceptable to the sovereigns of receiving States, who were growing increasingly jealous of their prerogatives. That is how the fiction of extraterritoriality came about, which was described by Grotius in the following terms:
"I am fully persuaded, therefore, that nations have seen fit, in the case of the person of ambassadors, to make an exception to the universally accepted custom of regarding all foreigners who are present in the territory under the jurisdiction of a State as subject to the laws of the country. Hence, according to the law of nations, since an ambassador represents by some kind of fiction the actual person of his master, he is regarded, by a similar fiction, as being outside the territory of the Power to which he has been assigned to discharge his functions."5
3. Although firmly established in law and in fact, diplomatic asylum nevertheless gave rise to controversy in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In the first place, it was barely tolerated in the case of offenders who had acted against the sovereign or the public welfare. The Venetian statute referred to above made exemption from prosecution specifically subject to the condition that the person concerned had committed a common crime, and European diplomatic history of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries abounds in incidents in which the local authorities disregarded the inviolability of the embassy and seized political offenders. Thus, in 1540 the Republic of Venice used threats to demand the surrender of some magistrates of the Republic who were accused of high treason and who had found refuge in the French Embassy in Venice; it maintained that asylum could not be granted for the crime of treason, and, to the fury of the King of France, Francis I, its demand was met.6 Invoking this precedent, England in 1609 secured the surrender of a chaplain accused of high treason who had taken refuge with the Venetian Ambassador to London.7
4. Even in the case of offences which were apparently devoid of any political character, the territorial authorities did, at times, enter embassy premises to seize the offender. Revealing in this regard is the incident which gave rise to the arbitral award delivered by Pope Clement VIII, to which reference was made earlier.8 Some Frenchmen, considering themselves insulted by a group of Spanish soldiers, killed two of the soldiers and wounded several others. They then fled to the French Embassy in Madrid. As an indignant mob was threatening to set fire to the Embassy, the Spanish authorities arrested the offenders despite the protests of the Ambassador. The Court of Spain apologized for the violation of the Embassy but kept the prisoners. Pope Clement VIII was invited to arbitrate the dispute and found for the King of France, censuring the violation of asylum. The prisoners were handed over to the Pope, who, in turn, surrendered them to the French Ambassador at Rome.
(ii) Subsequent evolution of diplomatic asylum in Europe and in Latin America
5. At the end of the seventeenth century the practice of asylum began to fall into disrepute. This was because the franchise des quartiers referred to above was being grossly abused. When an ambassador raised his sovereign's flag over the houses of a quarter of the city, the entire quarter became exempt from local jurisdiction and the representatives of the territorial authorities were denied access until they had received the ambassador's permission to enter. As a result, the quarter quite naturally became the haunt of criminals and the threat that this posed to public safety was bound to induce the territorial State to react. It is also possible that, as the modern conception of the State developed, the local authorities found it increasingly difficult to tolerate a practice which they probably regarded as threatening their sovereignty.
6. The first blow at the franchise des quartiers was dealt by the King of Spain, who, at the end of the seventeenth century, prevailed upon most of the ambassadors resident in Madrid to agree that exclusion from Spanish jurisdiction should henceforth be restricted to their dwellings. Likewise, Pope Innocent XI, following up the unavailing efforts of his predecessors, succeeded in persuading England, the Republic of Venice, Poland, Spain and Austria to agree to the abolition of the franchise des quartiers which their ambassadors had hitherto enjoyed at Rome. The less conciliatory attitude of the Court of France gave rise to a dispute. At the height of the quarrel, King Louis XIV seized the Comtat Venaissin, and the Pope countered by excommunicating the Parliament of Paris, which had sided with the King. After the death of Innocent XI, the conflict died down, and in 1693 the Court of France finally abandoned the principle of franchise des quartiers at Rome.9
7. Throughout the eighteenth century, however, ambassadors continued to grant asylum in their dwellings, as is demonstrated by two famous episodes in diplomatic history. One concerns the Duke of Ripperda, Minister for Finance and Foreign Affairs to Philip V of Spain, who, accused of betraying the trust of his office, was apprehended in 1726 at the residence of the British Ambassador at Madrid. The other, which dates from 1747, involves one Christopher Springer, a merchant born in Russia and domiciled at Stockholm, who, having been found guilty of complicity in an act of high treason, took refuge with the British Ambassador at Stockholm, but was finally handed over by the Ambassador to the Swedish authorities.10
8. At least some of the legal writers of the period disputed the principle of asylum. In his treatise De foro legatorum tam in causa civili quam in criminali, Cornelius van Bynkershoek wrote:
"Certainly, if reason be the arbiter, I doubt whether anything more preposterous than this right of asylum attached. to ambassadors' houses has ever been invented. Few institutions are so absurd as not to have been created for one or two ostensibly sound reasons at least; but, in this instance, can any such reason be advanced?.... All the privileges of ambassadors, which they enjoy by virtue of the tacit consent of nations, have the sole aim of ensuring that they may discharge the functions of their office in full security without restraint or impediment on the part of any person. But nothing prevents them from so doing even if they are not permitted to shelter or hide criminals, thus exempting them from the jurisdiction of the sovereign in whose territory they reside, and this not on account of themselves or their peoples, but to help a third party who has no connexion with them. All that is so obvious that there is hardly any point in demonstrating it seriously."11
Likewise, Wicquefort stated that "an ambassador cannot shield subjects from the justice of their sovereign or prevent the sovereign from imposing his Justice upon them without wronging him and interfering with the rights of the crown".12
9. Vattel's position is less categorical. While proclaiming the inviolability of the ambassador's dwelling, he considers that "a sovereign is not obliged to permit a foreign ambassador to turn his house into an asylum to which he admits the enemies of the Prince and the State and all manner of criminals and shields them from the punishment they deserve.... In case of Certain common crimes committed by persons who are often more unfortunate than guilty or whose - punishment is not of great importance to the tranquillity of society, an ambassador's dwelling may well serve as asylum, and it is better to permit this kind of offender to escape than to expose ministers to frequent molestations on the ground that a search must be made.... But in the case of an offender whose detention or punishment is of great importance to the State, the Prince must not be deterred by respect for a privilege which was never meant to be used to harm and destroy States.... Accordingly, it is the who must decide in each case, to what extent the right of asylum attributed by an ambassador to his dwelling should be respected."13
10. From the nineteenth century onwards, diplomatic asylum almost ceased to be granted in Europe except during political disturbances. In Greece, for example, during the Revolution of 1862, refuge was given in legations and consulates to persons whose lives were in danger. In Spain, in 1841 and again in 1843, Chevalier d'Alborgo, chargé d'affaires of Denmark, received into his dwelling a number of Spaniards who were being sought for political reasons, including the Marquis of Casa-Irujo, who later became the Duke of Sotomayor. This led to the Chevalier becoming a grandee of Spain, with the title of Barón del Asilo, but did not prevent the Duke of Sotomayor, then Minister for Foreign Affairs, from ordering the authorities to enter the house of his former benefactor during the insurrection of 26 March 1848 in order to seize some political opponents.14 In Portugal during the Revolution of 1910, which brought down the monarchy, a few legations granted asylum to supporters of the ancien régime. Various instances of asylum in China, Persia, Morocco and Turkey could also be cited.15
11. At a time when diplomatic asylum was on the decline in Europe and elsewhere it was making major advances in Latin America.16 The reasons for this have been summarized as follows in the pleading submitted by the Government of Colombia, to the International Court of Justice in the asylum case:
"The American institution of asylum, with the special characteristics which it assumes on the continent, is, in short, the result of two coexisting phenomena deriving from law and politics respectively and in evidence throughout the history of this group of States: on the one hand, the power of democratic principles, respect for the individual and for freedom of thought; on the other hand, the unusual frequency of revolutions and armed struggles which, after each internal conflict, have often endangered the safety and life of persons on the losing side."17
12. The following are some instances of the application of the principle of asylum in Latin America:
- In 1850, the former President of the Republic of Ecuador took refuge in the Consulate of Colombia (then called New Grenada) in Quito and then in that of the United States.18
- In 1865, the President of the Republic of Peru and his ministers took refuge in the Legation of France in Lima.19
- In May 1870, the Minister of Great Britain to Guatemala granted asylum to a Guatemalan politician.
- In 1874, the Minister of the United States in Bolivia granted asylum to two persons sought by the Bolivian Government.20
- On a number of occasions, including one case in 1875, political refugees found asylum in the Legation of the United in Haiti.21
- In 1885, the President of the Republic of Ecuador and his Minister of the Interior were granted asylum in the Legation of Colombia.
- In 1891, the conflict between the President and Congress of Chile led to the granting of asylum to two persons in the Legation of the United States in Santiago. On 21 August of the same year, two other groups of persons, respectively 5 and 19 in number, took refuge in the legations of Spain and the United States.22
Of course this list is purely illustrative. Many other examples are mentioned in the records in the asylum case23 and in various publications.24
13. The development of the doctrine of diplomatic asylum in the nineteenth century will be dealt with only briefly here because the same trends recur in twentieth-century doctrine, which will be analysed in detail in chapter IV (Studies by non-governmental organizations concerned with international law) and in chapter V (Qualified authorities on international law). Nineteenth-century authors are unanimous in denying the right of diplomatic asylum to criminal law offenders, but such unanimity does not exist with regard to perpetrators of political crimes. Certain writers reject the fiction of extraterritoriality and hold that diplomatic asylum, which is thus deprived of any juridical basis, is - whatever the nature of the crime underlying the request for asylum - simply an infringement of the sovereignty of the territorial State. Faustin-Hélie writes:
"There would be no more sovereignty if within each State there was an independent territory which could serve as a refuge for all criminals and a hotbed for all kinds of conspiracies, and which could oppose its own law to the law of the country. The independent authority of ambassadors would completely absorb that of Governments."25
G. F. de Martens observes that the universal law of nations does not recognize the fiction of extraterritoriality and concludes:
"The Minister has no legitimate grounds for harbouring from justice an individual over whom he has no jurisdiction. The right of asylum may therefore be denied or limited."26
Blüntschli expresses himself as follows:
"The residence of a person enjoying the right of extraterritoriality may not serve as an asylum for individuals sought by the judicial authorities. Such a person is obliged to deny entry to his residence to fugitives of every kind or, if they have entered, to surrender them to the competent authorities.... No right of asylum is attached to the residence of an envoy. On the contrary, the latter is obliged to surrender a person sought by the national police or judicial authorities who has taken refuge with him or to authorize a house search for the fugitive.";27
De Heyking writes:
"The extraterritoriality of the embassy may in no case be regarded as implying a right of asylum.... Surrender of the culprit may be demanded where the Ambassador considers himself entitled to halt the processes of justice by giving refuge to criminals (indiscriminately), and, if such extradition is denied, the Embassy may be entered."28
Finally, Pinheiro-Ferreira makes the following observations:
"Time and the good sense of the general public have already made short work of these exaggerated claims of the diplomats. Nevertheless, relying or the fiction of extraterritoriality with which the Romanism of their publicists has imbued them, they insist on this presumed right of asylum of their embassies whenever, as representatives of a powerful court to a weak government, they believe they can assert what they pompously call the prerogatives of the diplomatic corps.
"If the foreign Minister presumed to arrogate to himself the absurd prerogative of affording offenders freedom from punishment in his embassy by granting them asylum there and if he denied a request to make the offender leave, he would in essence be failing to show the respect due to the constituted authorities; and if the case in question was so serious that tile authorities could not limit themselves to taking measures to prevent the criminal's escape outside of the embassy, they would have no alternative but to advise the envoy, out of consideration for his official capacity, to secure his papers properly and to take all other measures he deemed fitting so that the embassy might be inspected wherever the offender might be hiding, without exposing the envoy's archives, his person or his staff to the slightest danger.
"If the envoy should again refuse this request and leave the authorities no choice but to use force, he would have placed himself in the position of not being able to remain in the country. He would therefore have to be ordered out, with due consideration for his official position but with all necessary precautions to ensure that the criminal was apprehended. Once the legation has left, after being given every facility needed in order to remove all articles of importance to the mission, the embassy no longer enjoys any immunity."29
14. Other authors, however, favour maintaining the right of asylum for political refugees. Pradier-Fodéré, for example, after stating that nothing, even the presence of a criminal, can justify violation of the embassy's immunity, considers the hypothetical case of local authorities demanding the surrender of the refugee. He feels that here it is necessary to distinguish between ordinary crimes and political ones and offers the following opinion:
"If the competent authorities request the extradition of individuals accused of ordinary crimes, I do not believe that it is possible to justify a refusal. Abolition of the right of asylum as applied to such offenders is no longer in question today. The Minister will surrender the culprit. But if a political refugee is sought by a victorious party ... who would then seriously maintain that the representative of a civilized nation must cold-bloodedly surrender him to the fury of his would-be murderers?.... The verdict must be for diplomatic asylum in political matters, but an asylum which is restricted, controlled and purged of all abuses which infringe on the sovereignty of States."30
Calvo expresses himself in the following terms:
"It would be desirable for each Government to determine precisely to what extent it intends to recognize what is known as the right of asylum. Until a definite rule has been laid down in this matter, however, we can be guided only by general humanitarian considerations and the sense of fairness which nations should have towards each other. We therefore grant that when a country is embroiled in civil strife, the residence of a legation can and even must guarantee shelter to politicians forced by a threat to their life to take temporary refuge there."31
15. In the twentieth century the institution continues to be widely upheld in Latin America, as indicated in the records of the asylum case.32
elsewhere the most striking example that can be cited for the period before the second world war is that of the spanish civil war, which will be treated in chapter iii of this report (see paras. 142-150 below).33 the cases of diplomatic asylum after the second world war are too well-known to require recapitulation here.34
(b) Asylum on ships
16. Since the beginning of the nineteenth century, this form of asylum has been practised fairly frequently by the major naval Powers. The doctrinal controversies regarding its juridical basis to which it has given rise will be considered in chapters IV and V. We will confine ourselves here to giving some historical examples.
(i) Asylum on warships
17. In Naples during the troubles of 1848 the Duke of Parma found asylum on the Hecate, a ship flying the British flag. The following year, Lord Palmerston declared that it was not proper for a British warship to accept a person who was being prosecuted under criminal law or was seeking to avoid execution of a sentence but that a British warship had always been recognized as a place of refuge for any person fleeing political persecution, "whether the refugee was seeking to escape from the arbitrary acts of a monarchical government or from the unbridled violence of a revolutionary committee".35
During the revolution of 1862, the Greek royal couple found asylum on the British frigate Scylla and other persons took refuge on the French warship Zénobie. United States warships granted asylum on a number of occasions to Latin American politicians. In April 1831, for example, the Vice-President of Peru and General Miller were received on board the St. Louis with the agreement of the Peruvian Government on the understanding that they would remain on board only long enough to escape mob violence.36
18. Other Latin American politicians (including Chileans in 1892,37 Salvadorians in 1894 and Guatemalans in 1895) also found refuge on warships of the United States.38
19. In 1862, when the city of New Orleans was occupied by United States forces, three Spanish warships took on board a large number of passengers, including American citizens who were not permitted to leave the city without authorization. An incident resulted between the countries concerned which gave the United States Government occasion to declare, in response to the Spanish Government's claim that asylum could be granted on warships at least to political offenders, that no warship of any nation could discharge or take on board, in a United States port held by American forces or in the hands of insurgents, any person not belonging to the civilian, military or naval personnel of the country whose flag the ship was flying.39
20. Another famous case concerning the American continent is that of the ships Mindello and Alfonso Albuquerque. These two Portuguese ships had given asylum in March 1894 to mutinous Brazilian sailors. The Brazilian Government claimed that the mutineers had been guilty of piracy and therefore, as common criminals, had no right to the protection granted them. The Portuguese Government regarded them as rebels, that is, as political offenders to whom asylum could be granted.40
21. Among twentieth-century cases, the dispute between Argentina and Paraguay after the revolution which broke out in the latter country in 1911 may be mentioned. After the revolutionaries were routed, many of them found refuge on Argentine vessels. Paraguay protested against this, contending inter alia (1) that asylum should not have been granted in this particular case because the persons concerned were not political refugees but common criminals or deserters - categories excluded from the privilege of asylum by the 1889 Treaty of Montevideo, and (2) that the Argentine naval authorities had fraudulently turned an Argentine merchant vessel, the Lambaré, into a military transport in order to be able to make it a place of asylum. The incident led to the breaking off of diplomatic relations between Argentina and Paraguay.41
(ii) Asylum on commercial vessels
22. Here we may cite the case of a former Spanish minister who in 1840 took refuge aboard a French cargo ship, the Ocean, while it was anchored in a port in the Spanish province of Valencia. In the course of a customs and police check at the next port of call, he was recognized and brought back on shore and imprisoned. Also worthy of mention is the case of the Chili, a British merchant ship, which after an unsuccessful military revolt in Ecuador took a number of refugees on board, giving rise to a protest from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ecuador.42 In addition to the case of the Honduras, which will be treated in chapter II of this report (para. 88 below), the famous example of the Acapulco may be mentioned. This American postal ship transported a Guatemalan statesman, General Barrundia, from Mexico to Salvador. During a stop at a Guatemalan port, the local authorities requested and obtained authorization from the American charge d'affaires to apprehend the political refugee. General Barrundia refused to surrender and was killed on the bridge. The last example is that of the French ship Panama, which in 1885 received a Haitian revolutionary on board. The local authorities requested the surrender of the refugee but yielded in the face of the French authorities' refusal to grant the request.43
23. The preceding summary shows that diplomatic exile has in fact been granted not only in embassies and on warships but also in consulates and even on commercial vessels, that it has been granted not only to political offenders but also to common criminals, and that it has been granted under the most varied circumstances in order to save human beings from popular wrath, from factional retribution, from prosecution tainted with partiality and from the threat of normal prosecution. The varied nature of the relevant cases is accompanied by a lack of consistency in the attitude of States, which not only developed historically but also shows variations as between States within a given period and even for a given State depending on whether it is a State of asylum or a territorial State and depending on the circumstances in each case; what is more, the official position of a State regarding diplomatic asylum may not necessarily coincide with its actual attitude. We shall see further on in this report whether the efforts made by States in this field in the twentieth century and the prevailing doctrine make it possible today to define more precisely the concept of diplomatic asylum as a legal institution.
CHAPTER I
RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS44
24. The origins of the conventional law of diplomatic asylum may be traced to the turbulent period following the establishment of independence by the Latin American States in the early part of the nineteenth century. Diplomatic correspondence of the period reveals a fairly widespread though far from constant practice of granting asylum in embassies and legations in Latin America based on an amalgam of political, legal and humanitarian considerations. In one of the earliest recorded cases, the United States Department of State advised the American Minister to Venezuela that "the extent ... to which this protection may be justly carried out must be determined by the Minister himself, under the exigencies of each particular case, and with reference to the established principles of the law of nations".45
25. The lack of anything more precise than "the established principles of the law of nations" prompted a number of Governments to attempt to achieve greater precision as to the specific legal content of the doctrine of diplomatic asylum.
26. Before studying the relevant treaties, it is worth recalling that on a number of occasions diplomatic representatives of Latin American countries and others accredited to Latin American Governments have been led by events to try to define some principles relevant to the subject. Thus, the Rules of Lima were formulated in 1865, the Rules of La Paz in 1898 and the Rules of Asunción in 1922.
27. The Rules of Lima arose out of a case in which asylum was granted to the Peruvian general Canseco in May 1865 by the United States Minister in Peru. Serious difficulties developed and the diplomatic corps accredited to the Peruvian Government met and drew up on 19 May 1865 the following points: (1) that apart from inhibitions in their instructions or in conventional stipulations, there were limits to the privilege of asylum which the prudence of diplomatic agents ought to counsel; (2) that the diplomatic corps adopted the instructions given by Brazil to its minister, according to which asylum was to be conceded with the greatest reserve, and only for such time as was necessary in order that the fugitive should secure his safety in another manner - an end which it was the duty of the diplomatic agent to do all in his power to accomplish.46 These principles, which were intended to apply only to political offences, were provisionally adopted subject to approval by the accrediting Governments.
28. Less than a year later, several Peruvians found asylum with the acting chargé d'affaires of the French Legation in Lima, who refused to comply with a request by the Peruvian Government for their surrender. The French chargé d'affaires suggested shortly afterwards to the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs that the diplomatic corps should be called together to establish definite rules governing such matters. Meetings were accordingly held in January 1867 under the chairmanship of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Peru. They were unsuccessful and on several occasions even led to the assumption of negative stances. The Minister for Foreign affairs of Peru in particular stated that his Government would henceforth not recognize diplomatic asylum as it had been practised up to that time. It would be recognized only within those limits established by international law, which permited the solution of any questions arising in exceptional cases of asylum. Inasmuch as the right of asylum existed in the other Latin American countries and Peru was permitted to exercise it through its legations, it renounced that privilege for its part since it did not concede it to the legations of those States in its own territory.47
29. The Rules of La Paz were drawn up by mutual agreement in December 1898 by the heads of the legations of Brazil, the United States and France in Bolivia. They established the following rules governing not only the conditions for granting asylum but also the obligations of the asylee:
"Every person asking asylum must be received first in the outer or waiting room of the legation, and there state his name, official capacity, if any, residence, and reasons for demanding refuge; also if his life is threatened by mob violence or is in active danger from any attack.
"If, according to the joint rules laid down by the committee composed of the Brazilian, American, and French ministers, he shall be adjudged eligible for protection, he must subscribe to the following rules in writing:
"First. To agree that the authorities shall be at once notified of his place of refuge.
"Second. To hold no communication with any outside person, and to receive no visitors except by permission of the authority quoted above.
"Third. To agree not to leave the legation without permission of the resident minister.
"Fourth. To hold himself as virtually the prisoner-guest of the minister in whose legation he is.
"Fifth. To agree to peaceably yield himself to the proper authorities when so demanded by them and requested by his host.
"Sixth. To quietly depart when so requested by the minister, should the authorities not demand his person after a reasonable time has elapsed."48
30. The Rules of Asunción were established in 1922 by the diplomatic missions to Paraguay of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, France, Germany, Peru, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States and Uruguay. They read as follows:49
"Any person who, invoking reasons of a political character, seeks asylum in the residence of a foreign legation, shall set forth the facts which have led him to ask for this asylum; and the chief of the legation shall be the one to judge such facts.
"Once asylum is granted, the person to whom it is granted shall promise, in writing, upon his word of honour:
"1. To refrain from all participation in political questions.
"2. To receive no visits without prior consent of the foreign representative, who will reserve the right to be present in the conversations.
"3. To maintain no written communications without prior censure of the chief of the legation.
"4. Not to leave the legation without the consent and authorization of the head of the same; failure to keep this promise will mean the loss of the right to renewed refuge within the legation.
"5. To submit to the decisions of the head of the mission, concerning the termination of the asylum or leaving the country, with the guarantees which he may deem proper.
"These principles shall be observed provided they are not contradicted by instructions received by each head of mission."
31. These rules show a certain similarity to those of La Paz, but they reflect in a more explicit way the concern of the diplomatic agents to isolate the refugees from the outside world and to avoid any political activity on their part; they also provide for penalties if the person concerned should leave the legation without being authorized to do so.
32. The various treaties on asylum in force between Latin American countries are considered below in chronological order. The Treaty of Peace and Friendship, concluded on 20 December 1907 at the Conference on Peace held in Washington by Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua50 with a view to maintaining peace in their mutual relations and strengthening their ties at the diplomatic, economic, commercial, cultural and legal levels, contains a provision concerning asylum but is no longer in force and is therefore mentioned here only for the record.51 This very unusual provision, under which the signatory States undertook to respect the right of asylum on board merchant vessels of any nationality in respect of political and related crimes, reads as follows:
"Article X
"The Governments of the contracting Republics bind themselves to respect the inviolability of the right of asylum aboard the merchant vessels of whatsoever nationality anchored in their ports. Therefore, only persons accused of common crimes can be taken from them after due legal procedure and by order of the competent judge. Those prosecuted on account of political crimes or common crimes in connexion with political ones can only be taken therefrom in case they have embarked in a port of the State which claims them, during their stay in its jurisdictional waters, and after the requirements hereinbefore set forth in the case of common crimes have been fulfilled."
1. The Treaty on International Penal Law signed at Montevideo in 188952
33. At the first South American Congress on International Law, held at Montevideo in 1888-1889, a number of instruments were adopted, among them a Treaty on International Penal Law53 concluded on 23 January 1889, which includes, in addition to the final clauses entitled "General provisions, the five following titles:
Title I. On jurisdiction (arts. 1-14)
Title II. On asylum (arts. 15-18)
Title III. Extradition (arts. 19-29)
Title IV. Proceedings for extradition (arts. 30-43)
Title V. Of the precautionary arrest (arts. 44-46).
34. Title II covers territorial asylum in articles 15, 16 and 18 and diplomatic asylum in article 17, which reads as follows:
"Such persons as may be charged with non-political offences and seek refuge in a legation shall be surrendered to the local authorities by the head of the said legation, at the request of the Ministry of Foreign Relations, or of his own motion.
"Said asylum shall be respected with regard to political offenders, but the head of the legation shall be bound to give immediate notice to the Government of the State to which he is accredited; and the said Government shall have the power to demand that the offender be sent away from the national territory in the shortest possible time.
"The head of the legation shall, in his turn, have the right to require proper guarantees for the exit of the refugee without any injury to the inviolability of his person.
"The same rule shall be applicable to the refugees on board a man-of-war anchored in the territorial waters of the State."
35. By requiring heads of legations to hand those guilty of ordinary offences over to the local authorities upon demand and by restricting the enjoyment of diplomatic asylum to political offenders, this text merely confirmed the generally accepted position of Latin American countries. However, it specified the rights and obligations of the State of asylum and of the territorial State, the State of asylum being required to notify the territorial State of the asylum and the territorial State being entitled to demand the asylee's removal from its territory.
36. It should be noted that, in the asylum case, Colombia invoked article 23 of the above-mentioned Treaty, which is part of title III (Extradition) and which reads as follows:
"Political offences, offences subversive of the internal or external safety of a State, or common offences connected with these, shall not warrant extradition.
"The determination of the character of the offence is incumbent upon the nation upon which the demand for extradition is made; and its decision shall be made under and according to the provisions of the law which shall prove to be most favourable to the accused."54
37. Peru asserted, however, that it was apparent from mere examination of the treaty that the American legal experts who had drawn up, discussed it and approved it did not regard the institutions of asylum and extradition as identical but rather as completely independent in the system of international law and the structure of the treaty, since they had laid down appropriate rules for each of them.55
38. The Court simply stated that the treaty "did not contain any provision concerning an alleged rule of unilateral and definitive qualification" whose existence in American international law Colombia sought to demonstrate.
2. The Bolivarian Agreement on Extradition signed at Caracas in 191156
39. On 18 July 1911, at a congress held at Caracas, the Bolivarian countries57 - Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela - concluded the Bolivarian Agreement on extradition.58 In view of the disputes arising out of this Agreement which were before the International Court of Justice during the asylum case, it seems useful - even though the Agreement, as its title indicates, deals essentially with extradition - to make a brief analysis of its content.
40. In article 1 the contracting States agree mutually to deliver up, in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, persons who have been charged or convicted by the judicial authorities of any one of the contracting States of one or more of the crimes or offences specified in article 2. Article 3 deals with the case in which the crime or offence giving rise to the request for extradition was committed outside the requesting State. Articles 4 and 5 specify the cases in which extradition will not be granted, namely, political offences or related acts (except for attempts upon the life of a chief of state), minor offences, existence of a previous judgement, prescription, amnesty, pardon and so forth, and it is laid down in article 4 that should any question arise as to whether an act is a political offence or related act, the decision of the authorities of the requested State shall be final. Articles 6, 7, 8, 15 and 16 contain procedural rules. Article 9 lays down the conditions for provisional arrest of the fugitive. Articles 10, 11 and 14 lay down certain guarantees for the extradited person. Article 12 deals with the surrender of evidence and article 13 with the case in which more than one request for extradition is made. Article 17 deals with the duration of the agreement. Article 18, on asylum, reads as follows:
"Except as provided in the present Agreement, the signatory States recognize the institution of asylum, in accordance with principles of international law."
Finally, article 19 deals with cases in which transit through a third State is necessary.
41. In the Memorial it submitted to the International Court of Justice in the asylum case, Colombia pointed out that article 4 of the Bolivarian Agreement had laid down the rule that the State receiving a request for extradition had unilateral competence to qualify the offence. It maintained that the same solution should be applied in disputes concerning asylum, which is the subject of article 18. Colombia stated:
"The fact that those who concluded the Bolivarian Agreement made no mention of the said rule cannot be interpreted as meaning that a system other than unilateral qualification should apply to asylum. Such a divergence of systems would be inadmissible in itself, that is to say, if it were to require the application of a different method for the qualification of an offence in the operation of two institutions - extradition and asylum - having the identical purpose of protecting the human person."59
In the view of the Peruvian Government, on the other hand, the régime of diplomatic asylum could not be assimilated to that of extradition:
"Asylum in a legation, once the obsolete fiction of extraterritoriality is rejected, has no basis other than humanity or equity and constitutes an obvious exception to that same principle of territorial sovereignty of which the regime of extradition constitutes a recognition. Accordingly, no argument can be based on the fact that extradition gives rise in principle to a qualification of the offence by the State of Refuge."60
This divergence of interpretation gave the Court the opportunity to define, in a frequently quoted passage, the difference between territorial asylum and diplomatic asylum (see para. 96 below).
42. On the subject of article 18, Peru stated that the use of the preposition "except" (fuera) indicated that, in the opinion of those who drafted the Agreement, that article was alien, not belonging to the provisions of the Agreement on Extradition. In its view, the article was included in the Agreement only in a desire to obviate the disadvantages of an arbitrary refusal to grant asylum; moreover, it was probable that "the purpose of introducing that anomalous provision was to provide another milestone on the way towards codification".61 Colombia, however, considered the word "fuera" to be the equivalent of "moreover" or "in addition", meaning that the Bolivarian Agreement included, in addition to provisions concerning extradition, an obligation with regard to internal asylum. In that connexion, it pointed out that the main object of the Caracas Congress had been to establish legal rules which would reduce the friction arising from civil wars and that it had been intended to cover all problems associated with the consequences of civil war: extradition, asylum and neutrality.62 That, in Colombia's view, was the raison d'être of article 18.
43. Colombia also pointed out that article 18 had "recognized" the existence of the "institution of asylum", thereby indicating that at the time of signature of the Agreement there was already a set of established concepts and rules for its application. It stated:
"Thus we find ourselves confronted with the classic phenomenon of the transformation of a customary right into a series of rules of affirmative law. In other words, the status juris in the matter of asylum to which we have referred existed in Latin America in 1911 and its historical development had even attained such a degree of consolidation that it could be considered as a continental institution.... the Bolivarian Agreement did not result in the creation ex novo of a State's power to grant asylum to political refugees but was merely the recognition of a rule of customary law established by precedents and cases known to or furnished by the signatory countries."63
After explaining the difference between a contract or treaty, instruments in the case of which any modification was dependent on the will of the parties, and the institutional legal act, which did not need such consent since it had its own force, Colombia asserted that by using the word "institution" the signatories of the Bolivarian Agreement had intended to indicate that asylum was not an isolated fact but an established system, rules for the application of which had been laid down as it evolved over time. Colombia added that article 18 contained a rule whose flexibility was intended to permit the institution of asylum to be adapted to new methods of application which the development of American international law might necessitate in future.64
On that point Peru stated, inter alia:
"The expression 'institution' is a generic term ... there are legal institutions and there are non-legal institutions: moral and religious institutions, styles, conventions are institutions.... Hauriou was defining the legal institution, and in particular the State institution, when he said that the institution was 'an ideal working process or enterprise which takes concrete form and continues in legal existence in a social environment'. But the concept of growth implicit in that definition does not show at what time the institution ceases to be an ideal working process or enterprise and takes concrete legal form in a social environment. We think that asylum, precisely because of its humanitarian nature, is indeed an ideal working process but that, even in the Americas, the circumstances necessary to give it concrete legal form are still absent."65
44. As will be seen in chapter II (para. 95 below), the Court confined itself to affirming, on the subject of the expression "in accordance with the principles of international law" in article 18 of the Bolivarian Agreement, that the principles of international law did not recognize any rule of universal and definitive qualification by the State granting diplomatic asylum.
3. The Convention on Asylum signed at Havana in 192866
45. This Convention was adopted on 20 February 1928 by the Sixth International Conference of American States, held at Havana. It was signed by all States which were then members of the Pan-American Union.6768
46. The Convention was very important in the asylum case because it was at the time the only treaty instrument on asylum ratified by both parties to the dispute. It has four articles of which two are provisions of substance.69 Article 1 deals with persons accused or condemned for common crimes70 and article 2 with political offenders, although the Convention gives no definition of these two terms.
47. Article 1 reads as follows:
"It is not permissible for States to grant asylum in legations, warships, military camps or military aircraft, to persons accused or condemned for common crimes, or to deserters from the army or navy.
"Persons accused of or condemned for common crimes taking refuge in any of the places mentioned in the preceding paragraph, shall be surrendered upon request of the local government.
"Should said persons take refuge in foreign territory, surrender shall be brought about through extradition, but only in such cases and in the form established by the respective treaties and conventions or by the constitution and laws of the country of refuge."
48. It will be noted that although the article deals essentially with diplomatic asylum, it also refers, in the third paragraph, to the question of extradition. This technique of combining provisions dealing with two separate institutions has been criticized and it should be noted that in the Montevideo Convention of 1933 (see para. 59 below) article 1 of the Havana Convention was replaced by a new text which does not include this third paragraph.
49. At the International Court of Justice the Colombian Government maintained that the negative and prohibitory form of words used in article 1 with regard to persons accused or condemned for common crimes made it possible to affirm a contrario sensu that the States which had ratified the Convention had every latitude to grant asylum to political refugees.71 The Government of Peru, however, stated that the intention of those who drafted the Convention had been to put an end to abuses and, to that end, to impose upon States a minimum course of action, which was defined in article 2.72
50. Article 2 of the Convention reads as follows:
"Asylum granted to political offenders in legations, warships, military camps or military aircraft, shall be respected to the extent in which allowed, as a right or through humanitarian toleration, by the usages, the conventions or the laws of the country in which granted and in accordance with the following provisions:
"First: Asylum may not be granted except in urgent cases and for the period of time strictly indispensable for the person who has sought asylum to ensure in some other way his safety.
"Second: Immediately upon granting asylum, the diplomatic agent, commander of a warship, or military camp or aircraft, shall report the fact to the Minister of Foreign Relations of the State of the person who has secured asylum, or to the local administrative authority, if the act occurred outside the capital.
"Third: The Government of the State may require that the refugee be sent out of the national territory within the shortest time possible; and the diplomatic agent of the country who has granted asylum may in turn require the guarantees necessary for the departure of the refugee with due regard to the inviolability of his person, from the country.
"Fourth: Refugees shall not be landed in any point of the national territory nor in any place too near thereto.
"Fifth: While enjoying asylum, refugees shall not be allowed to perform acts contrary to the public peace.
"Sixth: States are under no obligation to defray expenses incurred by one granting asylum."
51. The first part of the first paragraph is virtually identical with the first part of the second paragraph of article 17 of the 1889 Montevideo Treaty (see para. 34 above). The end of the paragraph, on the other hand, is entirely new. In that connexion, Peru pointed out in the Counter-Memorial it submitted in the asylum case that this provision contained "no general or unconditional recognition of asylum", the grant of which was still conditional upon the existence of "the usages,73 the conventions or the laws of the country in which granted".74 Colombia interpreted this phrase as applying to its own usages, laws and international obligations.75 Peru, however, considered that such an interpretation was tantamount to admitting that a convention that was binding on the country of asylum could be invoked even against countries that were not bound by that convention and to ignoring the basic rule of international law that States have no obligations to each other beyond those they have signed jointly.76 Chapter II (para. 98 below) gives the Court's interpretation of 'he phrase in question.
52. The conditions listed in paragraphs "First" to "Sixth" of article 2 - which, according to the Court, were all designed "to give guarantees to the territorial State and appear, in the final analysis, as the consideration for the obligation which that State assumes to respect asylum"77 - reproduce some of the rules enunciated in the 1889 Montevideo Treaty or in the rules of Asunción. However, they contain one innovation, namely, the reference to "urgent cases" in the paragraph "First". The interpretation of this expression gave rise to considerable difficulties in the International Court of Justice, and the arguments of the Court on this point were disputed in several dissenting opinions (see paras. 113-115).
53. The wording of article 2, "Third" was interpreted differently by Colombia and Peru. Colombia maintained that once the State granting asylum had exercised the power to grant asylum, the obligation of the territorial State stated in paragraph "Third" became peremptory and, it could be said, automatic. Any other interpretation "would have the effect of depriving the institution of asylum of all content and transforming diplomatic asylum - which is temporary by nature - into indefinite refuge".78 Peru, on the other hand, considered that it was only when the Government of the territorial State required that the refugee should leave its territory that the diplomatic agent might in turn require the necessary guarantees. As long as the Government of the territorial State had not availed itself of the right to require that the refugee should leave its territory, the request for guarantees had no legal basis.79
54. It may be noted that the Havana Convention contains no express provision on the qualification of the offence giving rise to the request for asylum, an omission which, in conjunction with the absence of definitions of an offence under common law and a political offence, was bound to lead to difficulties in application. The question of the right of qualification occupied a central place in the asylum case and will be considered in chapter II in connexion with the summary of the judgement of the Court of 20 November 1950 (paras. 94-99 below) and the summary of the dissenting opinions of some of the judges (para. 112 below).80
55. The Havana Convention has another lacuna: it does not state the penalty to be applied when asylum is granted to a political offender in violation of the conditions laid down in article 2. This lacuna gave rise to the Haya de la Torre case, in which the International Court of Justice, as will be seen in chapter II (para. 134 below), declared that, by remaining silent on the point under consideration, the authors of the Convention had intended to leave the adjustment of the consequences of the situation to considerations of convenience or of simple political expediency.
4. The Convention on Political Asylum signed at Montevideo in 193381
56. Pursuant to a resolution on the future codification of international law adopted by the Sixth International Conference of American States on 18 February 1928, the American Institute of International Law was instructed by the Council of the Pan-American Union to prepare for submission to the Seventh International Conference of American States draft instruments with a view to the codification of various subjects, including political asylum.
57. The American Institute of International Law therefore prepared a draft instrument on this subject, which was transmitted to the Seventh International Conference of American States, which met at Montevideo at the end of 1933. On the basis of the draft, the Conference on 26 December 1933 adopted the Convention on Political Asylum, which was signed by Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic,82 Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti,83 Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. It was not Signed by the United States delegation, which made the following declaration:
"Since the United States of America does not recognize or subscribe to, as part of international law, the doctrine of asylum, the delegation of the United States of America refrains from signing the present Convention on Political Asylum".84
58. The Convention has nine articles, four of them substantive provisions.85 In the words of the preamble, it aims to "conclude a Convention on Political Asylum to the define the terms of the one signed in Havana" (i.e. the 1928 Convention on Asylum).
59. Article 1 is designed to replace article 1 of the Havana Convention by a new text. The main difference lies, as was shown above (para. 48), in the deletion of the third paragraph of article 1 of the Havana Convention. Another important difference concerns the definition of the concept of the accused person. Under the terms of article 1 of the Montevideo Convention, only persons who have been duly prosecuted or sentenced by ordinary courts are deemed to be accused persons.
60. Article 2 - a key provision - provides that the qualification of the offence as political is the right of the State granting asylum.
61. Article 3 reads as follows:
"Political asylum, as an institution of humanitarian character, is not subject to reciprocity. Any man may resort to its protection, whatever his nationality, without prejudice to the obligations accepted by the State to which he belongs; however, the States that do not recognize political asylum, except with limitations and peculiarities, can exercise it in foreign countries only in the manner and within the limits recognized by said countries."86
62. Article 4 is designed to limit the consequences of possible disputes between the State of Asylum and the territorial State. When the withdrawal of a diplomatic agent is requested by the territorial State because of the discussions that may have arisen in some case of political asylum, he shall be replaced without a 'breach of diplomatic relations and consequently without breaking the continuity of the protection accorded to the refugee.
5. The Treaty on Political Asylum and Refuge, signed at Montevideo in 193987
63. As will be shown in chapter III below (paras. 142-150), the question of diplomatic asylum arose in a new form and with particular acuteness in connexion with the Spanish civil war. The result was a renewal of interest in the whole question of asylum; one way in which this renewed interest was expressed was the formulation of a draft convention on the right of asylum, inspired by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Argentina, Mr. Saavedra Lamas, which dealt with both diplomatic and territorial asylum. The draft convention was put before the Assembly of the League of Nations (see footnote 155 below). It was also transmitted to the foreign ministries of Latin American countries, but the question was not included on the agenda of the Eighth International Conference of American States, which met at Lima in 1938. The draft convention none the less served as a basis for the Treaty on Political Asylum and Refuge which was signed on 4 August 1939 by Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay during the Second South American Congress on Private International Law, which met at Montevideo to review the 1889 Treaties (see paras. 33-38 above).88
64. The Treaty, longer and more detailed than the earlier one, has a preamble in which the signatory States state that the "principles governing asylum which were established by the Treaty on International Penal Law signed at Montevideo on January 23, 1889 require amplification in order that they may cover the new situations which have arisen and may serve to confirm the doctrines already sanctioned in America". It contains a Chapter I, entitled "On Political Asylum" (arts. 1-10), a Chapter II entitled "On asylum in Foreign Territory" (arts. 11-15), "General Provisions", including an article on the settlement of disputes (art. 16), and final clauses (arts. 17-19). Only the provisions of chapter I will be discussed.
65. Under article 1, diplomatic asylum may be granted without distinction of nationality, but the State which grants asylum does not thereby incur an obligation to admit the refugees into its territory.
66. Article 2 contains several innovations: (1) the places of asylum include, besides those listed in the Havana Convention, embassies and the residences of chiefs of mission; (2) asylum may be granted not only to persons pursued for political offences or under circumstances involving concurrent political offences which do not legally permit of extradition, but also to those "pursued for political reasons". Article 3 denies the benefit of asylum (1) to persons accused of political offences who have been indicted or condemned for common offences by the ordinary tribunals; (2) to deserters from the armed forces "except when the act is clearly of a political character". In the second paragraph it provides that "The determination of the causes which induce the asylum appertains to the State which grants it".
67. Article 4 reproduces a rule which appears in several of the earlier instruments, namely, the obligation to communicate the names of the refugees to the administrative authorities of the locality. However, this obligation is waived in ""grave circumstances" or when circumstances make such communication dangerous to the safety of the refugees. Article 5 is also consistent with earlier agreements in providing that refugees shall not be permitted to commit acts which may disturb the public tranquillity or may tend toward participation in or influence upon political activities and in laying down that asylum shall be terminated if this prohibition is violated.
68. Article 6 deals with the question of the removal of the refugee in terms very similar to those of paragraph "Third" of article 2 of the Havana Convention; it states, however, that in the absence of the guarantees demanded for the safety of the refugee, his departure may be postponed until the local authorities make them available.
69. Article 7, reproducing the rule laid down in article 2, "Fourth", of the Havana Convention, provides that refugees, once they have left the territorial State, shall not be landed in any other part of it. The article adds that if an ex-refugee should return to the country in question, he shall not be accorded new asylum if the disturbance which led to the original grant subsists.
70. Article 8, which clearly owes its origin to events which occurred during the Spanish civil war, provides that if the number of refugees exceeds the normal capacity of the places of refuge specified in article 2, the diplomatic agents or military commanders may provide other places for the lodging of the said refugees, the local authorities being notified of that measure.
71. Article 9 provides that men-of-war or military airplanes temporarily located in dry docks or workshops for repairs shall not accord protection to persons who take refuge in them."89
72. Article 10 reads as follows:
"If, in a case of severance of relations, the diplomatic representative who has granted asylum should have to leave the territory of the country where he is located, he shall depart from it accompanied by the refugees; or, if this should be impossible for some reason not dependent upon the choice of the refugees or of the diplomatic agent, he may deliver them to the agent of a third State, with the guarantees specified in this treaty. Such delivery shall be effected by the transfer of the said refugees to the premises of the diplomatic mission which shall have accepted the charge in question, or by leaving the refugees on the premises where the archives of the departing diplomatic mission are kept; and these premises shall remain under the direct protection of the diplomatic agent to whom that function has been intrusted. In either case, the local Ministry for Foreign Affairs shall be duly advised, in conformity with the provisions of Article 4."
73. This Treaty is clearly concerned with extending the protection offered by diplomatic asylum and making it more effective. Not only political offenders, but persons pursued for political reasons and even, in some limited cases, persons who have committed related offences and deserters from land and naval forces, may take advantage of asylum. Moreover, asylum may be granted not only in the customarily recognized places but also in the residence of a chief of mission and even in premises specially provided for the lodging of refugees. Finally, the safety of the refugees is further protected by certain guarantees such as, for example, the reservation governing the obligation to communicate the names of the refugees, the provisions concerning the severance of diplomatic relations and the article concerning the guarantees necessary for removal.
6. The Convention on Diplomatic Asylum signed at Caracas in 195490
74. A few months after the International Court of Justice had delivered its judgement in the asylum case, the Council of the Organization of American States, at a meeting on 14 February 1951, adopted a resolution on asylum,91 excerpts of which are reproduced below:
"In view of the statement of the Representative of Guatemala, of February 7, whereby his Government requests that a point on 'Reaffirmation of the Right of Asylum as an American juridical principle' be included in the Programme of the Fourth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs; and
"WHEREAS ... it is worth while and desirable, at all times, to strengthen an institution like that of the right of asylum, inspired by noble humanitarian principles ...
"RESOLVES:
"2. To declare that the Right of Asylum is a juridical principle of the Americas set forth in international conventions and included as one of the fundamental rights in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, approved by the Ninth International Conference of American States at Bogotá;92
"3. To recommend to the Inter-American Juridical Committee that, in its current labours, it give preferential attention to the study of the topic of the regimen of political asylees, exiles, and refugees, with which it was charged by the Council acting provisionally as Organ of Consultation."
75. In pursuance of this resolution, the Inter-American Juridical Committee prepared two draft conventions at its 1952 session, one on territorial asylum and the other on diplomatic asylum. The draft convention on diplomatic asylum largely reproduced the provisions of the 1928 Havana Convention and the 1933 Montevideo Convention. However, it contained important new provisions regarding the evacuation of the asylee: article 10 required the diplomatic agent to request evacuation of the asylee once the latter was granted the status of a political offender and required the territorial State to grant the necessary guarantees and safe-conduct without unwarranted delay; article 11 clarified certain points regarding the conditions under which evacuation was to take place.93
76. The Inter-American Juridical Committee's draft was transmitted to the Inter-American Council of Jurists, which considered it at its second session at Buenos Aires in April-May 1953 together with two drafts, one submitted by Argentina and the other by Brazil. The Argentine draft convention94 partly reproduced the provisions of the Montevideo Treaty of 1939 but also contained some new provisions; among other things, it laid down the rule that the granting of asylum was optional rather than mandatory, excluded terrorists and persons guilty of an attempt on the life of a head of State from the enjoyment of asylum and regulated certain specific situations (overthrow of the Government to which the diplomatic mission granting asylum is accredited, cases in which the territorial State indicates that it intends subsequently to request the extradition of the asylee, etc.). A number of the above-mentioned points were taken into consideration in the Caracas Convention (see in particular, in para. 81 below, articles 2, 10 and 17 of the Caracas Convention).
77. The Brazilian draft convention95 gave particular emphasis to the question of qualification and proposed that the settlement of any dispute concerning qualification should be entrusted to an arbitral tribunal composed of three chiefs of mission accredited to the territorial State, two of them to be designated, respectively, by each of the parties, while the third would in principle be the dean of the diplomatic corps unless the parties agreed otherwise. According to one variant, the asylee would remain in the mission throughout the proceedings, which, depending on the tribunal's decision, would result in the surrender of the asylee or in the issue of a safe-conduct. According to a second variant, the asylee would remain in custody in the country of asylum during the proceedings. The tribunal would decide whether he would be released or detained during the extradition proceedings. This Brazilian proposal was not adopted, and the rule giving the right of qualification to the State of asylum is the one that prevailed in the Caracas Convention (see article 4 of that Convention in para. 81 below).
78. The Inter-American Council of Jurists referred the draft conventions of the Inter-American Juridical Committee, Argentina and Brazil to a working group; the latter prepared a new draft,96 which was approved by the Council on 8 May 1953, with a number of changes, by 15 votes in favour with 4 abstentions (Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Peru and the United States). The draft convention thus adopted97 was transmitted to the Tenth International Conference of American States, held at Caracas in March 1954.
79. On the basis of this draft, the Tenth Conference on 28 March 1954 adopted a Convention on Diplomatic Asylum,98 which was signed by Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica,99 Cuba, the Dominican Republic,100 Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala,101 Haiti,102 Honduras,103 Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru,104 Uruguay105 and Venezuela.106
80. Among the salient points of this Convention, which is longer and more detailed than its predecessors, are the following: the first paragraph of article 1, which unequivocally imposes on States Parties the obligation to respect asylum in accordance with the provisions of the Convention; article 2, which makes asylum a discretionary right of the State; article 6, which gives an illustrative definition of the concept of urgency; articles 4 and 7, which stipulate that it rests with the State granting asylum to determine the nature of the offence and whether urgency is involved; article 10, which closes a gap in the earlier conventions by making provision for the contingency that the government of the territorial State has not yet been recognized by the State granting asylum (which may happen, for example, in the case of a government established as a result of the revolution which gave rise to the request for asylum); article 19, which covers the possibility of a rupture of diplomatic relations; and article 20, which stipulates that asylum is not subject to reciprocity.
81. In order to illustrate the relationship between this Convention and those which preceded it, the substantive provisions of all these instruments have been reproduced below under seven major headings, so as to enable the solutions provided by the Conventions concerned for each of the questions considered to be compared:107
(1) Recognition of the right to grant asylum
Article 1
Asylum shall be respected by the territorial State in accordance with the provisions of this Convention.
Article 2
Every State has the right to grant asylum; but it is not obligated to do so or to state its reasons for refusing it.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
Havana Convention of 1928:
"[Asylum] ... shall be respected to the extent in which allowed, as a right or through humanitarian toleration, by the usages, the conventions or the laws of the country in which granted and in accordance with the ... provisions [of the Convention]." (art. 2, first para.)
Montevideo Convention of 1933:
"Any man may resort to its protection ... without prejudice to the obligations accepted by the State to which he belongs." (art. 3)
Montevideo Treaty of 1939:
"Asylum may be granted ... without prejudice to the rights and obligations of protection appertaining to the State to which the refugees belong." (art. 1, first para.)
(2) Places where asylum may be granted
Article 1
Asylum granted in legations, war vessels, and military camps or aircraft ... shall be respected ...
For the purposes of this Convention, a legation is any seat of a regular diplomatic mission, the residence of chiefs of mission, and the premises provided by them for the dwelling places of asylees when the number of the latter exceeds the normal capacity of the buildings.
War vessels or military aircraft that may be temporarily in shipyards, arsenals, or shops for repair may not constitute a place of asylum.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
Havana Convention of 1928:
"Asylum ... in legations, warships, military camps or military aircraft, shall be respected ... it (art. 2, first para.)
Montevideo Convention of 1933:
"... legations, warships, military camps, or airships (art. 1, first para.)
Montevideo Treaty of 1939:
"Asylum may be granted only in embassies, legations, men-of-war, military camps or military airplanes.... The chiefs of mission may also receive refugees in their residences, in cases where the former do not live on the premises of the embassies or legations." (art. 2)
"When the number of refugees exceeds the normal capacity of the places of refuge specified in Article 2, the diplomatic agents or military commanders may provide other places, under the protection of their flag, for the safety and lodging of the said refugees. In such cases, the agents or commanders must communicate that fact to the authorities." (art. 8)
"Men-of-war or military airplanes temporarily located in dry-docks or workshops for repairs shall not accord protection to persons who take refuge in them." (art. 9)
(3) To whom may asylum be granted?
Article 1
Asylum granted ... to persons being sought for political reasons or for political offences shall be respected ...
(i) Persons who may be given asylum
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
Havana Convention of 1928:
"Asylum granted to political offenders shall be respected ..." (art. 2, first para.)
Montevideo Treaty of 1939:
"Asylum may be granted ... exclusively to persons pursued for political reasons or offences, or under circumstances involving concurrent political offences, which do not legally permit of extradition." (art. 2)
(ii) Persons who may not be given asylum
Article 3
It is not lawful to grant asylum to persons who, at the time of requesting it, are under indictment or on trial for common offences or have been convicted by competent regular courts and have not served the respective sentence, nor to deserters from land, sea, and air forces, save when the acts giving rise to the request for asylum, whatever the case may be, are clearly of a political nature.
Persons included in the foregoing paragraph who de facto enter a place that is suitable as an asylum shall be invited to leave or, as the case may be, shall be surrendered to the local authorities, who may not try them for political offences committed prior to the time of the surrender.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
Havana Convention of 1928:
"It is not permissible for States to grant asylum ... to persons accused or condemned for common crimes, or to deserters from the army or navy." (art. 1, first para.)
"Persons accused of or condemned for common crimes taking refuge in any of the places mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall be surrendered upon request of the local government." (art. 1, second para.)
Montevideo Convention of 1933:
"It shall not be lawful for the States to grant asylum ... to those accused of common offences who may have been duly prosecuted or who may have been sentenced by ordinary courts of justice, nor to deserters of land or sea forces." (art. 1, first para.)
"The persons referred to in the preceding paragraph who find refuge in some of the above-mentioned places shall be surrendered as soon as requested by the local government." (art. 1, second para.)
Montevideo Treaty of 1939:
"Asylum shall not be granted to persons accused of political offences, who shall have been indicted or condemned previously for common offences, by the ordinary tribunals. " (art. 3, first para.)
"Asylum may not be granted to deserters from the sea, land, or air forces, except when the act is clearly of a political character." (art. 3, third para.)
Article 20
(iii) The question of nationality
Every person is under [the] protection [of diplomatic asylum], whatever his nationality.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
Montevideo Convention of 1933:
"... any man may resort to its protection, whatever his nationality (art. 3)
Montevideo Treaty of 1939:
"Asylum. may be granted without distinction of nationality (art. 1, first para.)
(4) Urgency
Article 5
Asylum may not be granted except in urgent cases ...
Article 6
Urgent cases are understood to be those, among others, in which the individual is being sought by persons or mobs over whom the authorities have lost control, or by the authorities themselves, and is in danger of being deprived of his life or liberty because of political persecution and cannot, without risk, ensure his safety in any other way.
The corresponding provision of the Havana Convention reads as follows:
"Asylum may not be granted except in urgent cases ..." (art. 2, "First")
(5) Duration of asylum
Article 5
Asylum may not be granted except for the period of time strictly necessary for the asylee to depart from the country with the guarantees granted by the Government of the territorial State, to the end that his life, liberty, or personal integrity may not be endangered, or that the asylee's safety is ensured in some other way.
The corresponding provision of the Havana Convention reads as follows:
"Asylum may not be granted except ... for the period of time strictly indispensable for the person who has sought asylum to ensure in some other way his safety." (art. 2, "First")
(6) Appreciation of the conditions required for the grant or maintenance of asylum
Article 4
It shall rest with the State granting asylum to determine the nature of the offence or the motives for the persecution.
Article 9
The official furnishing asylum shall take into account the information furnished to him by the territorial government in forming his judgement as to the nature of the offence or the existence of related common crimes; but this decision to continue the asylum or to demand a safe-conduct for the asylee shall be respected.
(i) Qualifications for the grounds for asylum
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1933 Montevideo Convention:
"The judgement of political delinquency concerns the State which offers asylum." (art. 2)
1939 Montevideo Treaty:
"The determination of the causes which induce the asylum appertains to the State which grants it." (art. 3, second para.)
(ii) determination of urgency
Article 7
... it shall rest with the State granting asylum to determine the degree of urgency of the case.
This provision has no equivalent in the earlier conventions.
(7) The obligations of the State of asylum during the period of asylum
Article 8
The diplomatic representative, commander of a warship, military camp, or military airship, shall, as soon as possible after asylum has been granted, report the fact to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the territorial State, or to the local administrative authority if the case arose outside the Capital.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1928 Havana Convention:
(i) Obligation to inform the territorial State
"Immediately upon granting asylum, the diplomatic agent, the commander of a warship, or military camp or aircraft, shall report the fact to the Minister of Foreign Relations of the State of the person who has secured asylum, or to the local administrative authority, if the act occurred outside the Capital." (art. 2, "Second")
1939 Montevideo Treaty:
"The diplomatic agent or military commander who grants asylum shall immediately communicate the names of the refugees to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the State where the act in question occurred, or to the administrative authorities of the locality, if the said act has taken place outside the seat of government, except when grave circumstances materially impede such communication or make it dangerous to the safety of the refugees." (art. 4)
(ii) Obligations concerning the behaviour of persons granted asylum
Article 18
The official furnishing asylum may not allow the asylee to perform acts contrary to the public peace or to interfere in the internal politics of the territorial State.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1928 Havana Convention:
"While enjoying asylum, refugees shall not be allowed to perform acts contrary to the public peace". (art. 2, "Fifth'.')
1939 Montevideo Treaty:
"While the asylum continues, the refugees shall not be permitted to commit acts which may disturb the public tranquillity or may tend toward participation in, or influence upon, political activities. The diplomatic agents or military commanders shall require of the refugees information as to their personal history, and a promise not to enter into external communications without the express intervention of the former. This promise shall be in writing and signed; and if the refugees should refuse to accept, or should violate, any of these conditions, the diplomatic agent or commander shall immediately terminate the asylum. The refugees may be forbidden to carry with them articles other than those destined for personal use, the papers which belong to them, and the money necessary for their living expenses, the deposit of any other securities or articles in the place of asylum being prohibited." (art. 5)
(8) The end of asylum
Article 11
The Government of the territorial State, may, at any time, demand that the asylee be withdrawn from the country, for which purpose the said State shall grant a safe-conduct and the guarantees stipulated in article 5.
(i) The right of the territorial State to demand the removal of the refugee and the correlative obligations of that State
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1928 Havana Convention:
"The Government of the State may require that the refugee be sent out of the national territory within the shortest time possible; and the diplomatic agent of the country who has granted asylum may in turn require the guarantees necessary for the departure of the refugee with due regard to the inviolability of his person, from the country." (art. 2, "Third")
1939 Montevideo Treaty:
"The Government of the State may demand that a given refugee be removed from the national territory within the shortest possible time; and the diplomatic agent or military commander who has granted the asylum may, for his part, demand the necessary guarantees before the refugee is permitted to leave the country, with due regard for the inviolability of the latter's person, and of the papers belonging to him and carried with him at the time when he received asylum, as well as for the funds necessary to support him for a reasonable time. In the absence of such guarantees, the departure may be postponed until the local authorities shall make them available." (art. 6)
(ii) The right of the State of asylum to demand the removal of the person granted asylum and the corresponding obligations of the territorial State
Article 12
Once asylum has been granted, the State granting asylum may request that the asylee be allowed to depart for foreign territory, and the territorial State is under obligation to grant immediately, except in case of force majeure, the necessary guarantees, referred to in article 5, as well as the corresponding safe-conduct.
This provision has no equivalent in the earlier conventions.
(iii) The removal of the refugee - physical conditions of removal
Article 13
In the cases referred to in the preceding articles, the State granting asylum may require that the guarantees be given in writing, and may take into account, in determining the rapidity of the journey, the actual conditions of danger involved in the departure of the asylee.
The State granting asylum has the right to transfer the asylee out of the country. The territorial State may point out the preferable route for the departure of the asylee, but this does not imply determining the country of destination.
If the asylum is granted on board a warship or military airship, departure may be made therein, but complying with the previous requisite of obtaining the appropriate safe-conduct.
Article 14
The State granting asylum cannot be held responsible for the prolongation of asylum caused by the need for obtaining the information required to determine whether or not the said asylum is proper, or whether there are circumstances that might endanger the safety of the asylee during the journey to a foreign country.
These provisions have no equivalent in the earlier conventions.
The case of transit through a third country
Article 15
When, in order to transfer an asylee to another country, it may be necessary to traverse the territory of a State that is a party to this Convention, transit shall be authorized by the latter, the only requisite being the presentation, through diplomatic channels, of a safe-conduct, duly countersigned and bearing a notation of his status as asylee by the diplomatic mission that granted asylum.
En route, the asylee shall be considered under the protection of the State granting asylum.
This provision has no equivalent in the earlier conventions.
Point of landing of the person enjoying asylum
Article 16
Asylees may not be landed at any point in the territorial State or at any place near thereto, except for exigencies of transportation.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1928 Havana Convention:
"Refugees shall not be landed in any point of the national territory nor in any place too near thereto." (art. 2, "Fourth")
1939 Montevideo Treaty:
"Once they have left the State, the refugees shall not be landed in any other part of it. In case an ex-refugee should return to the country in question, he shall not be accorded new asylum if the disturbance which led to the original grant subsists." (art. 7)
Question of the admission of the refugee to the territory of the State of asylum
Article 17
Question of the admission of the refugee to the territory of the State of asylum
Once the departure of the asylee has been carried out, the State granting asylum is not bound to settle him in its territory; but it may not return him to his country of origin, unless this is the express wish of the asylee.
The corresponding provision of the 1939 Montevideo Treaty reads as follows:
"The State which grants asylum does not thereby incur an obligation to admit the refugees into its territory, except in cases where they are not given admission by other States." (art. 1, second para.)
Article 17
The case in which the territorial State signifies its intention of demanding the extradition of the person enjoying asylum
If the territorial State informs the official granting asylum of its intention to request the subsequent extradition of the asylee, this shall not prejudice the application of any provision of the present Convention. In that event, the asylee shall remain in the territory of the State granting asylum until such time as the formal request for extradition is received, in accordance with the juridical principles governing that institution in the State granting asylum. Preventive surveillance over the asylee may not exceed thirty days.
Payment of the expenses incurred by such transfer and of preventive control shall devolve upon the requesting State.
These provisions have no equivalent in the earlier conventions.
(9) Other issues
Article 10
(i) Non-recognition by the State of asylum of the Government of the territorial State
The fact that the Government of the territorial State is not recognized by the State granting asylum shall not prejudice the application of the present Convention, and no act carried out by virtue of this Convention shall imply recognition.
This provision has no equivalent in the earlier conventions.
(ii) Recall of the diplomatic agent or severance of diplomatic relations
Article 19
If as a consequence of a rupture of diplomatic relations the diplomatic representative who granted asylum must leave the territorial State, he shall abandon it with the asylees.
If this is not possible for reasons independent of the wish of the asylee or the diplomatic representative, he must surrender them to the diplomatic mission of a third State, which is a party to this Convention, under the guarantees established in the Convention.
If this is also not possible, he shall surrender them to a State that is not a party to this Convention and that agrees to maintain the asylum. The territorial State is to respect the said asylum.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1933 Montevideo Convention:
"When the withdrawal of a diplomatic agent is requested because of the discussions that may have arisen in some case of political asylum, the diplomatic agent shall be replaced by his Government, and his withdrawal shall not determine a breach of diplomatic relations between the two States." (art. 4)
1939 Montevideo Treaty:
"If, in a case of severance of relations, the diplomatic representative who has granted asylum should have to leave the territory of the country where he is located, he shall depart from it accompanied by the refugees; or, if this should be impossible for some reason not dependent upon the choice of the refugees or of the diplomatic agent, he may deliver them to the agent of a third State, with the guarantees specified in this treaty. Such delivery shall be effected by the transfer of the said refugees to the premises of the diplomatic mission which shall have accepted the charge in question, or by leaving the refugees on the premises where the archives of the departing diplomatic mission are kept; and these premises shall remain under the direct protection of the diplomatic agent to whom that function has been entrusted. In either case, the local Ministry for Foreign Affairs shall be duly advised, in conformity with the provisions of article 4." (art. 10)
(iii) The question of reciprocity
Article 20
Diplomatic asylum shall not be subject to reciprocity.
The corresponding provisions of the earlier conventions read as follows:
1933 Montevideo Convention:
"Political asylum, as an institution of humanitarian character, is not subject to reciprocity ...; however, the States that do not recognize political asylum, except with limitations and peculiarities, can exercise it in foreign countries only in the manner and within the limits recognized by said countries." (art. 3)
CHAPTER II
DECISIONS OF TRIBUNALS
1. Decisions of municipal tribunals108
82. A number of decisions of municipal tribunals refer to the concept of extraterritoriality. To the limited extent to which that concept is linked to the institution of diplomatic asylum, it seemed useful to give, on a strictly illustrative basis,109 a very brief summary of the decisions in question.
83. In the Couhi case,110 the Italian Criminal Court of Cassation held, in a decision of 11 February 1921, that a crime committed in a foreign country at an Italian embassy, legation or consulate by an Italian who did not belong to the diplomatic or consular service must be held to be committed abroad. In the Société anonyme des grands Garages parisiens case,111 a French Conseil de Préfecture held, on 22 December 1930, that the fiction of extraterritoriality was a privilege enjoyed by persons attached to the diplomatic service for themselves and for objects intended for their use in the hôtels and other places occupied by them; the sales of motor-cars to embassies or legations could not be treated as exports, since the embassies or legations in question could not be considered as being outside France. In a decision of 20 June 1930,112 the German Federal Insurance Office declared that the principle of the inviolability of the premises of the official representation, although based on the principle of extraterritoriality, did not include the fiction that the house of the official representation was to be regarded as territory of the sending State. Accordingly, the employment of a German employee with an official representation of Germany or of a German State in a foreign State could not be regarded as employment in Germany. In the Afghan Embassy case,113 the German Reichsgericht (in Criminal Matters) held, in a decision of 8 November 1934, that the German courts had jurisdiction with regard to a crime committed in the Afghan Legation in Berlin, since that crime should be considered as having been committed in German territory. The tribunal expressed itself as follows:
"The principles of international law do not lay down that the residential and official premises of the envoy are foreign territory and that persons and things with respect to which extraterritoriality can be claimed must, when on those premises, be regarded as being outside national territory..... The privilege of extraterritoriality goes only so far as is necessary in order to secure the inviolability of the envoy and his retinue..... It would be contrary to the purpose of the principle of inviolability of envoys to regard a crime committed against the envoy on the legation premises as a crime committed abroad."
Similarly, the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, in a judgement delivered on 12 July 1963 in the case of Fatemi et al. v. United States,114 held that a foreign embassy was not a part of the territory of the sending State and that persons committing crimes against local law therein could be prosecuted if not protected by the inviolability of diplomatic premises or by diplomatic immunity. The court added:
"The modern tendency among writers is towards rejecting the fiction of exterritoriality..... As early as 1867 the doctrine of extraterritoriality was abandoned by European nations. Recently, in the case of R. v. Kent,115 the British courts held that 'A crime committed in a foreign embassy is a crime committed in the United Kingdom and the offender, if not protected by diplomatic immunity, is liable to prosecution in British courts'."
Lastly, in the case of Belgian State v. Maréchal,116 the Belgian Conseil d'Etat, in a decision of 30 April 1954, stated, in connexion with a claim in respect of war damage arising out of the destruction of property in the buildings of the Belgian Embassy in Berlin, that the parts of foreign territory in which international custom or treaty gave Belgium rights of extraterritoriality did not, by virtue of that fact, become Belgian territory.
84. Of more direct interest in connexion with the question under consideration is the decision of 15 October 1953 by the Jerusalem District Court Execution Office in the case of Heirs of Shababo v. Heilen.117
85. These are the facts in the case: Following a car accident in which Heilen, a soldier in the Belgian army on duty with the Belgian Consulate-General, had run over and killed a pedestrian, the heirs of the victim brought an action for damages against Heilen, the Consulate-General of Belgium in Jerusalem and the Consul General of Belgium in Israel. After judgement had been given against Heilen,118 the judgement creditors sought to enforce the judgement. As the judgement debt was not paid, application was made to the Chief Execution Officer for examination of the judgement debtor as to means. The judgement debtor having failed to appear in court in response to a duly issued summons, a warrant for his arrest was issued. It then appeared that Heilen was remaining within the precincts of the Belgian Consulate-General in Jerusalem, and although the police were normally bound to arrest a judgement debtor wherever he might be and bring him before the Execution Office, they felt in this case, in accordance with instructions received, that they were not entitled to enter the precincts of the Consulate-General and effect therein an arrest contrary to the wish of the Consul-General. Application was thereupon made by the judgement creditor to the Chief Execution Office for an order to the police to enter the Consulate-General for the purpose of making the arrest. The judgement debtor was not represented at the hearing, but the representative of the Attorney-General opposed the application, arguing that the warrant could only be executed outside the area of the Consulate-General.
86. The Chief Executive Officer held that there was no principle of international law which permitted the premises of a Consulate-General to be used as a place of refuge so as to frustrate the normal course of justice. He said inter alia:
"The representative of the Attorney-General argued that the entry of the police into the building of the Consulate-General using force if need be, breaking down doors, etc., is tantamount to an act of execution against it, that is to say, any step such as this is to be regarded as an act in rem for executing the judgement, which is forbidden, according to the argument of the representative of the Attorney-General. He added that even if the Consul-General is not entitled, according to the rules of public international law, to refuse entry to the police, as agents of the Execution Office, or to prevent them from arresting the judgement debtor who is inside the building seeking asylum, then this would still not entitle the police to break into the premises and meet one wrong by another. The correct procedure, so he argued, would be for them to act through the diplomatic channels. It appears, therefore, that there are two questions involved: First, is the Consul-General entitled to oppose the entry of the police into the Consulate-General for the purpose of arresting a judgement debtor inside its premises; and secondly, if the answer is in the negative, are the police entitled, nonetheless, in the face of unjustified opposition, to break into the premises for the purpose of effecting the arrest?
"I consider that the refusal of the Consul-General to allow the police to enter the Consulate-General's premise
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 93
|
https://www.vintagewings.ca/stories/wtf
|
en
|
WTF? — Captured Enemy Aircraft — Vintage Wings of Canada
|
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/t/611327f05254307c913f19a0/1628645381060/WTFTitle2.jpg?format=1500w
|
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/t/611327f05254307c913f19a0/1628645381060/WTFTitle2.jpg?format=1500w
|
[
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1618515859197-UHTAUM27YVQCW8RXDBXS/vintagewings-horizontal.png?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/fbd93cbf-a4c3-4b19-ba0e-17dc57957f11/VintageWingsEnglish.jpg?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1618515859197-UHTAUM27YVQCW8RXDBXS/vintagewings-horizontal.png?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/fbd93cbf-a4c3-4b19-ba0e-17dc57957f11/VintageWingsEnglish.jpg?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645360337-2KRBPAFDGEQI93N7FF9E/WTFTitle2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645535229-OSYSH3KMQEU0B25794QW/WTF135.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1629412281185-NR7MC1U5PD5OTAPCWM6Q/HopesandPlansTtle.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1629409225867-PU713DI273XTSGVFNS3N/MoylesTitle2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1629145561539-4UXVCOI7QYKQ7WMY7V2X/Roundeltitle.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645599973-VMNXGYC6YDCUKBKM6L00/WTF136.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645637428-5JQT01YWNJF131G9046C/WTF137.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645679237-BLEJSH9A4F50OCDSP56B/WTF138.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645710866-9R3EYCKERGE0FNSS1VCC/WTF139.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645749787-IIZXFX4F3KI5PPEIWGMQ/WTF140.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645781748-D5YG7V296F1HEQP6ALT8/WTF141.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628645859889-DR51V31125OGG021AYS3/WTF142.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628646193415-Y4Z57MBXYLTIRC81BV4L/WTF144.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628646256352-MU2RFXCKD0L66RIZCPOZ/WTF145.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628646356544-H1J0Q0APT1GT3X7PUJND/WTF146.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628646756331-0N5G4PYH0TEP3T2ZYBJK/WTF182.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628646988463-B5YP83UKGJLG1QR0J6KH/WTF183.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647028646-19753C4K21MDLXW2H8OI/WTF181.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647326778-5643RXGVJCQG6K931NAC/WTF176.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647402581-B67INJ6MRP7796X8IMUC/WTF178.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647499326-7RI9RC5IRDZ59J0M0AVS/WTF179.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647586991-R763YS8YV3P2BRP7B32X/WTF173.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647667790-4VCN8U7JOAH1U1ZGA6TF/WTF-99.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647786942-W6VFEGCDZFPU7PI00NN0/WTF-63.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628647997430-FWEX39HF0SBZ5HWH25UJ/WTF-64.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648095788-CEWHP6MHSSRMT92MCOJX/WTF-86.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648201090-2XMYO5RLABDHKXDPEUKZ/WTF-87.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648263258-SWS2PFYSLD5JJUWZ2X8Y/WTF-88.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648565195-D7AB2CHQ36UBSAI5GWJW/WTF200.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648632488-CTI28TULYJS1LTS4UT96/WTF220.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648671719-235Q0HU5WO7JU9BGQRCJ/WTF240.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648808833-HCPKLNB8CX4LJPRJ226G/WTF-4.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648881112-4QLLN1O38L6G8X5LKPU8/WTF-5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628648966192-P7F0Y7YAY3554IJAV3HO/WTF-51.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628649090426-QGCT0F0QAXPF1RZ79GYJ/WTF-67.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628649199800-HOQGED11ERNDQKR09YMI/WTF-85.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628649417868-G5PM7XEFGH8L9VWODP9Y/WTF-17.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680664900-YFGQPDON7UGBTF2F8IGJ/WTF147.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680714261-1UIQ50IOAN87QBT3FRFU/WTF-62.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680746666-ISBKQVOPVZG6FH56RJFU/WTF-79.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680783737-UA4FCNHX0QQMUTGI8NKR/WTF128.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680826090-75DE6LU7CBJGCDZO4JMP/WTF-74.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680884569-Y7WUTICBQ9I49QQGGQ82/WTF206.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628680939138-W24VXXNT0DUBLMCW8Y6F/WTF-56.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681011554-R8395DS0C0RKWCZUYNZC/WTF148.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681044202-FG9RMUOO766XZQUYAX0M/WTF151.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681095396-JMAIIZ26F4TDBOLM2OZ1/WTF150.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681179423-XXFK3PF9HLRY5GB5LVPN/WTF-72.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681218534-GRCQWDG6WGW1E8B1NXJM/WTF-73.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681270842-19LNAN8BKQOTHIZPM2N6/WTF224.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681322103-QA3ATRAQEHXU4PC28MA3/WTF-71.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681359096-ZOU4V0SC8TJC1ZGM8YI4/WTF189.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681453192-MZI2J6X42APBER20O2YO/WTF188.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681485243-FE0SLTQ5VV68II3LPS10/WTF192.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681522756-OZVMZBFMVYD2JJXC51NT/WTF215.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681558278-0OAM8GMFKXKMSVKJ00HT/WTF214.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681584759-B9A0EJYYSJ1B97GU6ABA/WTF218.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681629602-LJYKX5REL6Y3AGMQXFN6/WTF217.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681667703-NXHELQ61VWGTFAOBLTRL/WTF-81.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681926864-T9DOK4VGCV673TM8R1QD/WTF219.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628681971944-56L3I5PT1CXMZ4ERSCA3/WTF-23.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682013068-TROMYIR8MCVQKQSL0G2H/WTF127.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682052479-AFZPJ8ZWZR3LG071XOWC/WTF-103.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682083456-P1EVH7K12P4G69IVEW0G/WTF-25.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682111005-3C2QUH0A8IQUYSAD1KJ3/WTF126.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682140783-WNU7S9CSC7IARV7YMT2M/WTF-97.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682166951-FUE4WNF3KVYOUYZ6HAKS/WTF-111.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682200184-CW5WCCFXZU6Q42HCZ74V/WTF-27.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682242024-EOWAK312KMVE8NEJDUWQ/WTF154.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682308737-1YHKSAEU26LC3M4274ZX/WTF-30.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682338381-L46NT7E12AR76L8Y069V/WTF157.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682415180-9WR713LO07A8SWV6JQVG/WTF155.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682467804-NQXXYWMWRLI5VAHXJ1MP/WTF205.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682501084-YTN975SGTWLPR8AFJJM5/WTF300.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682614899-UWEPOKH8WKVE4CFIEMDY/WTF301.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682678135-V0KCQD0JU9C6QWTYK7FE/WTF303.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682765938-32T2E26GYBPPAQI2V7BY/WTF302.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682715121-C6FRT3N3T5NRIF0NG12K/WTF304.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682932415-CZ95H0ZE46ZYURP869Q5/WTF193.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628682995993-Q72NAHCIAV9G0CB19QMY/WTF194.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683038523-0D6YFVLLPG9VPJC1LVFM/WTF-31.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683096205-V7NT8MOEOI7R9Z5I56T2/WTF-37.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683133648-DNEYF3E4N9ICV3VOHLXS/WTF248.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683172579-IFSMAD84M7MHWAQJ2VDE/WTF195.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683213534-IH33NW47YUQCMI7HBPAI/WTF-29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683248689-KIAYGBOTDB9TBPMO1UAL/WTF210.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683277112-69QN2K7OWS2ZQHCFFOS4/WTF211.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683316695-3S3YYPL3INSPWNH3J10W/WTF238.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683402354-NUW9QN0GKLZNY41VPATE/WTF-66.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683456898-WD1CC72S2UGJ938SVBYD/WTF-36.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683482787-8U7A5RB5B7R3OHGNTVSY/WTF-91.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683510005-4K7U5JWCT5FDBSU6ZOOT/WTF-92.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683539492-9KBMFEW160ZPEPL3SCRD/WTF130.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683571787-4BJGK8P0MH3NELQIGABK/WTF-35.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683616042-MW90S5G86T7Q24QSSYR9/WTF-100.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683642545-NFW4MRYG8P0SY0R4T8RN/Hart32.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683676492-IG9JOZYGPL74BGHMLBIE/WTF-119.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683792140-DFHTW7PCC0RWF7G0PZKG/WTF-43.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683824454-QC2LE28YQWQL3QZDWKNT/WTF-44.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683883712-HKYHHM6Y0T3SC93PIOC5/WTF-44.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683856772-1OVUVLGGZ017LQNF2PQQ/WTF-46.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628683933403-Y4J8IA9KRZ6B3OWPYQ3L/WTF-47.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684013308-CSVW7BS71C3FLL7W0PP5/WTF162.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684047490-T9ETNSWA70ZI0PUAGOOS/WTF-82.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684076102-7C2FF736LMX7N9UJSB29/WTF-89.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684105041-JN0QBY4FSVU1SMC9OAG6/WTF-93.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684139639-7AV3R9L7TPKN899XH3A4/WTF-95.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684516581-96M4N42J3Y960BXPL2OX/WTF-96.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684558719-WZ64HET0S1SDZ29H0Y0L/WTF-48.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684607322-9B3256C15PRN4VCE9ZGW/WTF-49.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684642583-3633EWMH7CXKV9ZD8KHF/WTF-50.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684677203-22GABCQ290OE3Y3SD6VB/WTF163.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684711971-9IOG135ONM9EXF1BIY2F/WTF133.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684760621-H2JYZL5BBH16HUDS56V3/WTF-53.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684790757-0S92XA0232PS8HTYNELF/WTF-68.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684822321-9JDES4W2NM5Y4KUEER51/WTF-115.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684855893-JXKBJTYO6KAOYDD3WU17/WTF-58.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684905568-5HQLL68G2VAJVNVDSXA9/WTF-59.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628684972464-QI66AEM7QHJMQWGM2RL9/WTF-123.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685007742-4I88D728UKIXY3J06Y4O/WTF-52.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685040112-RNUC5QP19DKJCQKT0JM4/WTF125.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685131585-2N91XENOZCOQPOXJOMWU/WTF-98.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685158478-SK1P8TDTZ8IZ079BGKEZ/WTF165.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685187347-34D6KFXNEJNT34XNY2R4/WTF-20.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685214543-AMOTDN39U7BV58NWR29R/WTF-121.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685268540-ZQIYMB4TYE9GV4HNWZXC/WTF-3.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685306715-H788C4P000Y1K7CZG774/WTF-6.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685337854-POKI4HF03Z31JRG4V6WI/WTF255.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685444780-P7VIM6ITP8UQREMBVGGF/TypeB_5.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685493235-YURNRAR4QERE59EUW57A/WTF129.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685527320-YRQKWYLZ1NH4GKQPBFPP/WTF204.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685557952-FYCQZI33KXQ4DL4NS1VV/WTF131.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685911180-RW2WVQBSGDVBUOKRGOTC/WTF-124.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685948689-RUL350WZ3B6HMK4IAU2H/WTF-160.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628685985226-9R0XRWO2V6JBCQ8LZSC6/WTF152.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686014574-BQJ2I5SE1XEJP8GKA3II/WTF-110.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686047389-67ARBKP4WMVH3QAL34WF/WTF184.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686080219-NL2RYP7J4Y6222F1LZ43/WTF236.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686138435-YY6ZKX0V438QPN153AZ6/WTF237.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686173787-EQUOY892IJ97DEFJK65H/WTF185.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686275910-W7OZPW6UZUWX5FNWK6AL/WTF-28.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686309011-761IHBGGTDB7ICK7QCPP/WTF159.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686345770-BNV0VPY7VIZB7W8WLQ5F/WTF-90.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686379241-KMOM2MGVL5QZ75773WN3/WTF186.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686410726-XB9BYZECJVWXTI6633LG/WTF-76.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686439919-5ECB6BRR2289YGX2GQYP/WTF153.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686491907-FTTGUBS1WVZW2FBHR2X4/WTF156.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686526113-3F1GLP1B934CLRJDL395/WTF158.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686562015-AO5W8UKZ6AQDSBXVPRSR/WTF-18.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686710076-5O28N2PCCOZL5WAXRINT/WTF187.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686745107-DRVFM6GBQG1W8NEMTIHX/WTF-94.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686774305-7ZYFNN1X9FRJRECV1XUL/WTF201.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686808492-WZK4YRD6P1AVGBPXJ5UF/WTF202.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686845356-AKW1H1UDO267H65VF73X/WTF-22.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686879827-NZ4UQOSGL5CYPGWDU64U/WTF190.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686918983-AWZDXA81XIZ71MYGX57C/WTF-26.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686949769-O3K86V20V48Q05JXMSUH/WTF228.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628686988007-X23M1VISDCCV913MPGM2/WTF-16.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687028104-K7F5NTYX7N1D9DR3UWXX/WTF234.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687070559-XW2HWREBYULZDOB5H128/WTF233.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687104198-D7XLE8SIWLR07GEQWTVE/WTF230.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687151862-ALAQ7BSGKIJY55C40ONJ/WTF231.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687718679-UA59JHHWESUTYQP3TJKA/WTF232.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687762977-X6DOZAPJJZU3E00GEU6Q/WTF-32.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687819105-M2XH3EZOZ2HB0UJIEAKN/WTF-33.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687933690-9SH9BLVIRLNC6X9TTKLY/WTF-24.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628687968952-7WWROVFYS61IF7WHF4AL/WTF223.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688023009-QZI7G67J2JZUQJF4ER2F/WTF225.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688058034-G328K98X6DN1FMDGMTKP/WTF222.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688107003-SQBJBQ8849SGGOFK2XXB/WTF-45.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688148445-R8NH3CTY6D8LYAWOJ5W0/WTF-55.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688211873-CE552QJ3UUWL12JJFN29/WTF-83.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688262681-L1UGQRXR3ORYPLYHIF3L/WTF-61.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688325639-NTS0ARGCB1KVJ13C4Q8E/WTF-54.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688410142-U8561QC4PNAPFZ2OGHZS/WTF-84.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688446638-1ORM6RGUIHUPU83XIHJV/WTF-60.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688487816-USKB4B3POP9JJK3WKOMQ/WTF-77.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688597696-7NKLRY7SAKKZ4M1A5YRO/WTF-57.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688647804-F4NJG05VLKSGNQ6XOJZ3/WTF149.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688681969-LYNGOWYTQTXDACSWXFU7/WTF-78.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688760044-DAU6DBK55SZ1YH35XLIE/WTF216.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688799777-0DF945MU4XIZJJFWS34R/WTF-40.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688842832-ZGIE1RY7TWUJUTAHV1C7/WTF-38.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688881108-AFV0XSHIA3PBVSU11GMB/WTF197.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688917604-LHK13NPPGHFYG9HS4F9Y/WTF198.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628688961814-HNUI6C0XLE0Y4H1SY8I4/WTF196.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689012326-3XMQ6ET9P3BGT3WT8YRF/WTF-39.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689056726-EVQ9ERW6I1ZNI4099DXI/WTF-41.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689098537-5UBHSLMUT6JKEOOD9EJ4/WTF213.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689155153-BHWFOGM8VO13I6T44MB8/WTF-42.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689194094-FCYD7AMMZG2XMFI79ZHA/WTF180.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689232979-WI3A559AQ9Z8DGLD4MQ7/WTF258.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689268044-J542629WYULWAH65P0NW/WTF-102.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689306001-BD0MZ0FDWOFF3JNXHIMY/WTF-65.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689347019-EOTVN503PT656979PM43/WTF252.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689464165-EY9Z43JPQBKFPZU87CWA/WTF259.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689504022-VZ2EHSKVZ2HXX7VOPF1D/WTF-101.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689540726-9OJQIP393SGE490LIA4L/WTF-107.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689574826-FELYS2GTUNXYTLMMOFWK/WTF243.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689611184-YOXGSU7LEKB7225QNNNH/WTF-105.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689641623-YIY5LY1O2MRH19JFXTFT/WTF250.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689676650-RXMDHNMOVA5KI3FR3ZJB/WTF241.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689736471-PIKL63O48LWDVSRSVE14/WTF242.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689777028-UQE2KG3FM97FVM3VYM0X/WTF161.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689812464-ZJKIU4KILAZFZ3K33SKY/WTF175.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689851954-1D7REFYJLSVGF1M3GHV0/WTF172.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628689968942-WC979F7UY5KSQDEIPP2R/WTF174.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690001088-M577HB4CJHYP7GMK157S/WTF249.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690040203-U6KP53BCU1L89L4ETKQN/WTF199.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690077062-CM8GVEUGHADRDVHKEIP6/WTF-108.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690130469-KSCW0UE3MJVK45UACXB5/WTF-2.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690184385-4UYP2EI7CCF5FA2U63LO/WTF-7.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690241246-S8PNH4QQYVW4J83Y3ZXW/WTF-8.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690281787-7WTXNURVETGEA0OL8JIP/WTF-9.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690319072-RHI243KDEVRPEH2R6M78/WTF-70.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690360681-2740P3Z10EPHG94SG6YV/WTF132.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690392649-74CCB4MJ02FH5VCGWZ0K/WTF-69.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690431892-JK6GQ08QAF40LHPLJN5R/WTF134.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690483358-091S2EY37YECTL5EOHYH/WTF-19.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690523228-96EZZMHGJSLCPN5DTB15/WTF-10.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690564521-RAIP4KL6R66HRN6FKEO1/WTF-11.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690679037-2E8BUDBGAH34113AQSH3/WTF-13.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690718985-M8YV1ZFI8EY7GJDYA5IG/WTF-118.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690756234-YGQ0SGB9Q349X60AVX81/WTF-15.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690810450-BANYDZR9SZTTF7IHQPAS/WTF-104.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690847979-W4EAUKQR37F6C2O7UULW/WTF171.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690897244-OIM51C9VHCHXL8R6ZJXH/WTF191.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690937022-RF76Q11CRU6VU440YITL/WTF253.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628690972312-5KWPL88ZNDKSFSS0LUAT/WTF254.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691014031-ZQF7ZE53W7XZQW9WWJ8X/WTF226.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691055270-5KVMGUVF73FRN6SE5GBO/WTF227.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691108727-CCHWZ441169HQDGRZRU4/WTF-106.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691156005-JUO1K03JSSYSV4QGDDYY/WTF244.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691186511-W1JCO2WGXQUOVEOHX9M2/WTF209.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691226934-YSJOE4BQ5QLBFCHVF1OF/WTF-112.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691420414-Q2ZRN608YN4F6RQPZAKZ/WTF-109.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691464687-Q8S1EMVQM92QIGSFZFUU/WTF-113.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691500200-C8JVRQLOWHC1FXJPHW71/WTF-114.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/1628691535089-9E9EPB1H1VT8XJULWWUQ/WTF-116.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v2/namespaces/memberAccountAvatars/libraries/609c11ee4383335716392fc5/ad9adbe4bc98412dacc4120791a0300a/ad9adbe4bc98412dacc4120791a0300a.jpg?format=300w"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Dave O'Malley"
] |
2021-08-11T10:20:01-04:00
|
Over the past seven years of researching aviation stories on the web, I have kept a folder on my laptop dedicated to images of Second World War aircraft that had been captured and had suffered the indignity of being painted …
|
en
|
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/607892d0460d6f7768d704ef/b4620e2c-da25-4774-9367-002c8f99cb95/favicon.ico?format=100w
|
Vintage Wings of Canada
|
https://www.vintagewings.ca/stories/wtf
|
Over the past seven years of researching aviation stories on the web, I have kept a folder on my laptop dedicated to images of Second World War aircraft that had been captured and had suffered the indignity of being painted in the national markings of the enemy they were designed to fight and vanquish—like a Spitfire in the service of the Luftwaffe, a Zero in US Navy markings.
It has always struck me as undignified to see a Supermarine Spitfire wearing the hated Hakenkreuz (Swastika). Here was an aircraft which came to be the poster child for the strength of the British people and their ability to withstand the international bully that was Nazi Germany and now they had their hands and evil symbols all over it. To me, it was an outrage—like vandals spray-painting foul language on my mother’s car; as if some thugs had stolen Terry Fox’s van and painted 666 and neopaganist pentagrams on the sides.
But I soon learned that something I had originally thought was a rare exception was in fact a widespread, even systematic practice; not only in the Second World War, but from the very first time aircraft were pitted against each other in war.
One thing I know is that no fighter pilot relishes a fair fight. What they want above all is an advantage so that when they go toe to toe with the enemy, they are assured a much greater chance of the win than their opponent. Ever since David and Goliath, a fighter with a technological edge can triumph over a greater opponent. A Luftwaffe fighter pilot would rather engage a Fairey Battle than a Supermarine Spitfire, because the outcome would be weighted in his favour.
One of the simple ways to gain a technological advantage over an enemy is simply to know his weaknesses, be familiar with his blind spots, know what it is he can and can’t do. As the greatest war theorist of all time, Sun Tzu, wrote in The Art of War, “It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperilled in a hundred battles”. To this end, Allied and Axis nations alike in both World Wars slavered at the chance to take possession of one of their enemy’s flying machines and study it up close on the ground and in the air.
This folder of mine grew to hundreds of photographs and many links to the stories that explained the images. Over the years, I realized that many images that had been in this folder had long ago lost their links to the information I needed to explain them. But that didn’t stop me from putting together a pictorial essay. Here, for your enjoyment and edification, are nearly 250 of those images of captured aircraft wearing spurious markings. The truth is I could have made this a 500-image pictorial tribute, but one has to stop somewhere. These images have come from many sources over the years, and some links I have lost or have ceased to exist. I have written many of the accompanying texts, but in most cases, I have simply edited the texts that I found with the images (thank you Wikipedia). In each case I attempted to find additional sources on the web to back up the stories associated with each image.
In no way is this definitive. In no way is this a historical treatise or be-all and end-all of anything. In no way is this more than simply a visual tribute to all those aircraft that had to endure the indignity of enemy symbols. In many cases I may in fact have it wrong and I invite anyone to show me the correct information and I will update anything. In fact, for this I would be grateful. If anyone has issue with the use of any of this material if it is proprietary, let me know and I will remove offending images.
Let’s get the show on the road.
The Second World War
At the beginning of the Second World War, both for the Europeans and for the Americans (when their turn came two years later), the Allies were caught off guard by the ruthlessness, the seemingly unstoppable momentum and the new weapons of the enemy for which they had not yet found answering technologies. In Europe, the Fairey Battles, Hampdens, Lysanders, Whitleys, Gladiators and Ansons were simply not the equals of the Messerschmitts, Heinkels and Dorniers. The French, British, Dutch, and Belgians found themselves reeling backwards under the technological tsunami that was the blitzkrieg.
After Pearl Harbor, the scourge of the Mitsubishi Zero lashed the Pacific and South Asia from the Aleutians to Papua New Guinea and from Hawaii to Burma. The Hellcat and Corsair were still at least a year away from their debuts. If only the US Navy could get their hands on a single intact Mitsubishi Zero, not so they could copy or benefit from the technology, but so they could test fly it, understand its strengths and, more importantly, find its weaknesses. The Zero was fast, wickedly manoeuvrable and its pilots were battle tested in China and trained more rigorously than any in history. American and Allied pilots were just as courageous, but half a year into the Pacific war, they had not yet found the right tactics to fight the Zero on an equal basis. Then along came the Akutan Zero.
The Akutan Zero
In the summer following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, far, far out on the Aleutian Island archipelago, a young Japanese Petty Officer by the name of Tadayoshi Koga was fighting his rising fear and an overheating Nakajima 12-cylinder radial engine that was about to seize up on him. Just 15 minutes before, he had been strafing Yankee Catalina flying boats at the remote American fishing outpost of Dutch Harbor and just a few hours before that, he was drinking tea with his squadron mates aboard the mighty carrier Ryujo.
Over Dutch Harbor, he heard the metallic clank of something hitting his engine, perhaps a bullet or flak. Immediately, he smelled smoke and saw his oil pressure gauge start to drop. His oil line had been hit and he had just minutes to nurse his aircraft to safety. Trailing smoke, he made for a prearranged emergency landing spot on then-uninhabited Akutan Island, a remote, cold and mountainous island 25 miles further up the Aleutian chain from Dutch Harbor towards Unimak Island. There, if he landed safely, he would climb out of his fighter, destroy it and work his way to the coast where a Japanese submarine was standing by to rescue him. His section mates Chief Petty Officer Makoto Endo and Petty Officer Tsuguo Shikada stayed with him all the way and he could see them circling around him as he set up for his final landing in a grassy valley on a northeastern cape of Akutan. At the last minute, Shikada saw the sun glint off water hidden beneath the grassy surface of the valley. He knew instantly that Koga should have made a wheels up landing, but it was too late.
As soon as the aircraft’s weight was on them, Koga’s Zero’s wheels immediately dug into the boggy ground. From high above Shikada saw it flash in the sun as it dug in and snapped onto its back. The last thing that Koga saw was the flashing, tall, green grass, the mountains in the distance and the sun on the mists in the valley. His neck broke when the aircraft flipped onto him. Endo and Shikada were required to strafe and destroy the Zero to prevent it from falling into enemy hands, but could not bring themselves to do so as they were not sure whether Koga had survived and had just been knocked out.
He hung there in his straps until the heat left his body. He hung there while his mates landed back aboard Ryujo. He was still hanging there under his Zero more than a month later when Lieutenant Bill Thies’ PBY Catalina overflew the spot on his way into Dutch Harbor after being off course. He and his crew circled Koga’s aircraft with its bright red Hinomaru roundels on its wings and knew they had found something important.
Within just a few weeks, the Zero had been removed from Akutan to San Diego and in another month, it was ready to fly. While Koga’s body lay buried on an uninhabited island in a frozen corner of the world, his aircraft was flying in the sunny South Californian sunlight, its beautiful, serene and elegant Hinomarus replaced by the hated white stars on blue circles of the enemy.
The Akutan Zero was the first intact enemy aircraft to be acquired, repaired and flight evaluated by the newly formed Technical Air Intelligence Unit, whose job it was to recover Japanese aircraft to obtain data regarding their technical and tactical capabilities. The Akutan Zero became TAIU No.1. The tests immediately bore fruit. Lieutenant Commander Eddie R. Sanders took the Akutan Zero up for its first test flight and reported: “The very first flight exposed weaknesses of the Zero which Allied pilots could exploit with proper tactics... immediately apparent was the fact that the ailerons froze up at speeds above 200 knots so that rolling maneuvers at those speeds were slow and required much force on the control stick. It rolled to the left much easier than to the right. Also, its engine cut out under negative acceleration due to its float-type carburetor. We now had the answer for our pilots who were being outmaneuvered and unable to escape a pursuing Zero: Go into a vertical power dive, using negative acceleration if possible to open the range while the Zero’s engine was stopped by the acceleration. At about 200 knots, roll hard right before the Zero pilot could get his sights lined up.”
The Akutan Zero was just one of literally hundreds of aircraft that fell into the hands of the enemy on both sides during the Second World War, but it was the best known—at least after the war. By the start of the Second World War, the Germans and the British had special units formed and waiting for enemy aircraft to fall into their hands—the British had test facilities and units like 1426 Enemy Aircraft Flight (EAE), while the Germans had the Zirkus Rosarius and their test facility at Rechlin plus Special Operations units like Kampfgeschwader (KG) 200. The Japanese and the Americans both sought to acquire enemy aircraft for evaluation and the Germans and Japanese even used captured aircraft on operations—both clandestine and tactical.
While both sides had systems for retrieving captured aircraft and for testing them, ordinary field commanders and flying units would often mark captured aircraft for themselves and operate them as squadron instructional machines or as squadron hacks. The result was hundreds of captured aircraft usually used for the enjoyment of the pilots and as war trophy motivators.
Here, now, are some of the thousands of images we found and some of the stories of their capture and subsequent fates:
|
||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 85
|
https://www.awm.gov.au/articles/second-world-war
|
en
|
Second World War, 1939–45
|
https://www.awm.gov.au/themes/awm/favicon.ico
|
https://www.awm.gov.au/themes/awm/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/awm-media/collection/P01103.005/screen/4077884.JPG",
"https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/awm-media/collection/069221/screen/4100387.JPG",
"https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/awm-media/collection/026629/screen/7747355.JPG",
"https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/awm-media/collection/117022/screen/6039790.JPG",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/sites/default/files/styles/homepage_fragments/public/21941/summaryimage/warchest.jpg?h=575a3de2&itok=4fhxYIjh",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/sites/default/files/styles/homepage_fragments/public/32151/summaryimage/transcribe-promo_0.jpg?h=827069f2&itok=qgzJ6yWB",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/sites/default/files/styles/homepage_fragments/public/32456/summaryimage/pop_header-image_01.png?h=b2edd669&itok=nix9okQt",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/sites/default/files/styles/homepage_fragments/public/36999/summaryimage/family.jpeg?h=10d202d3&itok=duq91zd8",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/themes/awm/images/disclaimerFooter.jpg",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/themes/awm/images/staticmap.jpg",
"https://www.awm.gov.au/themes/awm/images/building.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2024-05-07T09:30:52+10:00
|
en
|
/themes/awm/favicon.ico
|
https://www.awm.gov.au/articles/second-world-war
|
On 3 September 1939 Prime Minister Robert Gordon Menzies announced the beginning of Australia's involvement in the Second World War on every national and commercial radio station in Australia.
Almost a million Australians, both men and women, served in the Second World War. They fought in campaigns against Germany and Italy in Europe, the Mediterranean and North Africa, as well as against Japan in south-east Asia and other parts of the Pacific. The Australian mainland came under direct attack for the first time, as Japanese aircraft bombed towns in north-west Australia and Japanese midget submarines attacked Sydney harbour.
On 7 May 1945 the German High Command authorised the signing of an unconditional surrender on all fronts: the war in Europe was over. The surrender was to take effect at midnight on 8–9 May 1945. On 14 August 1945 Japan accepted of the Allied demand for unconditional surrender. For Australia it meant that the Second World War was finally over.
The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) participated in operations against Italy after its entry into the war in June 1940. A few Australians flew in the Battle of Britain in August and September, but the Australian army was not engaged in combat until 1941, when the 6th, 7th, and 9th Divisions joined Allied operations in the Mediterranean and North Africa.
Following early successes against Italian forces, the Australians suffered defeat with the Allies at the hands of the Germans in Greece, Crete, and North Africa. In June and July 1941 Australians participated in the successful Allied invasion of Syria, a mandate of France and the Vichy government. Up to 14,000 Australians held out against repeated German attacks in the Libyan port of Tobruk, where they were besieged between April and August 1941. After being relieved at Tobruk, the 6th and 7th Divisions departed from the Mediterranean theatre for the war against Japan. The 9th Division remained to play an important role in the Allied victory at El Alamein in October 1942 before it also left for the Pacific. By the end of 1942 the only Australians remaining in the Mediterranean theatre were airmen serving either with 3 Squadron, Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) or in the Royal Air Force (RAF).
Japan entered the war in December 1941 and swiftly achieved a series of victories, resulting in the occupation of most of south-east Asia and large areas of the Pacific by the end of March 1942. Singapore fell in February, with the loss of an entire Australian division. After the bombing of Darwin that same month, all RAN ships in the Mediterranean theatre, as well as the 6th and 7th Divisions, returned to defend Australia. In response to the heightened threat, the Australian government also expanded the army and air force and called for an overhaul of economic, domestic, and industrial policies to give the government special authority to mount a total war effort at home.
In March 1942, after the defeat of the Netherlands East Indies, Japan's southward advance began to lose strength, easing fears of an imminent invasion of Australia. Further relief came when the first AIF veterans of the Mediterranean campaigns began to come home, and when the United States assumed responsibility for the country's defence, providing reinforcements and equipment. The threat of invasion receded further as the Allies won a series of decisive battles: in the Coral Sea, at Midway, on Imita Ridge and the Kokoda Trail, and at Milne Bay and Buna.
Further Allied victories against the Japanese followed in 1943. Australian troops were mainly engaged in land battles in New Guinea, the defeat of the Japanese at Wau, and clearing Japanese soldiers from the Huon peninsula. This was Australia's largest and most complex offensive of the war and was not completed until April 1944. The Australian army also began a new series of campaigns in 1944 against isolated Japanese garrisons stretching from Borneo to Bougainville, involving more Australian troops than at any other time in the war. The first of these campaigns was fought on Bougainville and New Britain, and at Aitape, New Guinea. The final series of campaigns were fought in Borneo in 1945. How necessary these final campaigns were for Allied victory remains the subject of continuing debate. Australian troops were still fighting in Borneo when the war ended in August 1945.
While Australia's major effort from 1942 onwards was directed at defeating Japan, thousands of Australians continued to serve with the RAAF in Europe and the Middle East. Athough more Australian airmen fought against the Japanese, losses among those flying against Germany were far higher. Australians were particularly prominent in Bomber Command's offensive against occupied Europe. Some 3,500 Australians were killed in this campaign, making it the costliest of the war.
Over 30,000 Australian servicemen were taken prisoner in the Second World War and 39,000 gave their lives. Two-thirds of those taken prisoner were captured by the Japanese during their advance through south-east Asia in the first weeks of 1942. While those who became prisoners of the Germans had a strong chance of returning home at the end of the war, 36 per cent of prisoners of the Japanese died in captivity.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 6
|
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php%3Ffbid%3D2813587062001143%26id%3D145237522169457%26set%3Da.216124641747411
|
en
|
Facebook
|
https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/yb/r/hLRJ1GG_y0J.ico
|
https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/yb/r/hLRJ1GG_y0J.ico
|
[
"https://facebook.com/security/hsts-pixel.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Sieh dir auf Facebook Beiträge, Fotos und vieles mehr an.
|
de
|
https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/yb/r/hLRJ1GG_y0J.ico
|
https://www.facebook.com/login/
| ||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 26
|
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/occupation-and-reconstruction-germany-1945-48
|
en
|
The Army and the occupation of Germany
|
[
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/nam_stacked_web-bw.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/101792_slice.jpg.webp?itok=0ilIlCua",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/101792_slice.jpg.webp?itok=WpQ3bB-c",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-06/250459_full_v3.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/262451_half_1.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107729_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/253238_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/103028_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-10/262505_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107568_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/240586_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/103758_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/269441_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107730_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/108222_slice.jpg.webp?itok=4XWfen_Q",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/108222_slice.jpg.webp?itok=PY9k-sbG",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/81367_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm6_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm3_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/259331_slice.jpg.webp?itok=4QdRvBgg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/259331_slice.jpg.webp?itok=ktj6TUPf",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/101907_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/108282_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/261279_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/261277_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm5_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107679_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/108217_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/108216_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107678_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/112284_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2017-07/101808_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/262777_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm1_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm2_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/100844_slice.jpg.webp?itok=MhI6bfsS",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/100844_slice.jpg.webp?itok=9rNZJMDk",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2017-07/103850_slice.jpg.webp?itok=0TJP2GAM",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-03/107552_half.jpg.webp?itok=cHneMshd",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2019-10/97818_half.jpg.webp?itok=J4AvPN2x",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2019-10/260621_full.jpg.webp?itok=cYqCWL4s",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2021-02/foe-friend-notitle_teaser_v2.jpg.webp?itok=GVhqnz2X",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-04/103761_slice.jpg.webp?itok=LWzds_5P",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/facebook.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/x.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/instagram.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/youtube.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Following their victory over Nazi Germany in 1945, the Allies were faced with administering a country in ruins. British soldiers had a leading role in this, helping to hunt war criminals, rebuild industry and help displaced persons.
|
en
|
/themes/custom/nam_theme/favicon.ico
|
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/occupation-and-reconstruction-germany-1945-48
|
Occupation
On 7 May 1945, after months of fierce fighting, the Germans agreed to Allied demands for unconditional surrender, finally ending six years of warfare that had left millions dead and much of Europe in ruins. The following day, Tuesday 8 May 1945, was declared 'Victory in Europe' (VE) Day, and marked the formal end of the European war. The Allies were now faced with occupying a conquered and destroyed nation.
It had already been agreed that Germany and Austria would be divided into four occupation zones: Soviet, American, French and British. Each of the major powers was the sole political and legal authority in its zone.
The German capital of Berlin, despite being deep inside the Soviet occupation area, was also to be split into four separate zones. The four powers would also work together via the Berlin-based Allied Control Council, formed in August 1945, which would oversee matters relating to the whole of Germany.
BAOR
On 25 August 1945, Field Marshal Montgomery's 21st Army Group was renamed the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR). It was made responsible for the occupation and administration of the British Zone in north-west Germany. In this task, it was assisted by the Control Commission Germany (CCG). This consisted of British civil servants and military personnel. It took over aspects of local government, policing, housing and transport.
The BAOR’s headquarters were established in Bad Oeynhausen in North Rhine-Westphalia. Both here and elsewhere, it requisitioned German buildings for military administration and accommodation, exacerbating the housing shortage. Indeed, with around 800,000 Commonwealth soldiers in Germany by the end of 1945, finding barracks and camps for them all in a ruined country was major headache.
Last-ditch resistance
Following their victory, the Allies feared that Nazi fanatics might wage a partisan war against the occupation, and gather in the mountains of Bavaria and Austria, in the so-called 'Alpine Redoubt'. These concerns proved unfounded and were largely the result of German propaganda fooling Allied intelligence services.
Another last-ditch Nazi resistance effort, the Werewolf plan, was also something of a damp squib. This was aimed at encouraging acts of sabotage and reprisals against collaborators in areas occupied by the Allies. Despite its limitations, it was a useful propaganda device that helped convince the most ardent Nazi supporters to carry on fighting in the final weeks of the war.
In any case, the Allies took the threat seriously and had interned around 100,000 civilian suspects by the end of 1945. They also kept many German officers in prisoner-of-war camps for longer to prevent them supporting the Werewolf campaign on release.
The last Werewolf activities petered out in early 1947, with its operatives having failed to mobilise a war-weary population to support their doomed struggle.
War criminals
Thousands of men and women suspected of involvement in the concentration camp system and other crimes across Europe were rounded up by Allied forces. The key Nazi leaders were to be dealt with jointly by the main Allied powers, while the rest would be punished in those countries where they had committed their atrocities. Apprehending these lesser-known Nazis became the responsibility of the Allies depending on which zone of Germany or Austria they controlled.
Between November 1945 and October 1946, the Nuremberg military tribunal tried 24 leading Nazis and charged them with crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Eleven were executed and the others sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment.
Investigation teams
The BAOR was responsible for pursuing suspected war criminals in its zone of north-west Germany. It established the British Army War Crimes Investigation Teams (WCIT), which was assisted by other units, including the Special Air Service (SAS).
Among those brought to trial were the SS personnel of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, which had been liberated by the British in April 1945. Those found guilty included Commandant Josef Kramer who was sentenced to death by a military court and hanged on 13 December 1945.
The most famous Nazi caught by the British was Heinrich Himmler, chief of the SS and one of the main architects of the Holocaust. He was arrested, while in disguise, at a checkpoint and taken to an interrogation camp near Lüneburg on 23 May 1945. Under interrogation, Himmler admitted who he was, but avoided trial by committing suicide with a concealed cyanide pill.
Political support for war crimes prosecutions soon declined. As relations with the Soviet Union deteriorated, it was considered more expedient to make friends with Germany rather than keep prosecuting its people and alienate them from the West. As early as April 1946, the British government was calling for cuts to the WCIT. Many investigating officers were demobbed without being replaced. By early 1948, only a handful of cases were being pursued.
By then, the WCIT had brought around 350 cases to trial involving over 1,000 accused Nazis. Of these, 667 were convicted of crimes and 230 sentenced to death. War crimes trials were also brought by many other countries, including the Soviet Union and Poland, but only a small fraction of guilty Nazis were ever punished.
De-nazification
The hunt for war criminals was accompanied by a campaign to rid German and Austrian politics, industry, media, arts, and the judiciary of Nazis. Former party and SS members were removed from positions of power and influence, and Nazi organisations were abolished.
At the same time, hundreds of thousands of Germans were detained in internment camps while their backgrounds were investigated. There were nine such camps in the British zone, all guarded by British troops.
By late 1946, growing tensions with the Soviet Union, the economic importance of western Germany and a lack of Allied manpower to run the de-nazification effort, saw the campaign wind down. In their zone, the British handed over de-nazification panels to German authorities.
A ruined nation
The BAOR and Control Commission Germany also had to restart German economic life. Years of bombing and the recent fighting had left agriculture, industry and transport in ruins. Industrial output was down by a third from 1939 levels. There were shortages of food, clothes and fuel. Millions of people had been made homeless by the war.
In 1945-46, the British mobilised released German prisoners of war to assist in gathering the harvest (Operation Barleycorn) and to work in the Ruhr coal mines (Operation Coalscuttle). But this only provided limited assistance. For most Germans, life in the immediate post-war years was one of rationing, shortages and poverty.
Economic recovery
Initially, there was a reluctance among the wartime Allies about fully rebuilding the German economy. Some planners argued that Germany should be reconstructed purely as an agrarian state, one that lacked the heavy industry needed to wage a future war.
The victorious powers also seized German military, technological, industrial and scientific assets, as well as all patents in Germany. Many factories and laboratories were dismantled and shipped off as a form of reparations.
Eventually, however, the realisation that the economic recovery of Europe was largely dependent on the rebirth of German industry changed the minds of the Americans and British. They also feared the possibility of civil unrest developing, with an accompanying upsurge in Communist influence, if Germans' living standards did not improve.
This change in policy was exemplified by the introduction of the Deutsche Mark (DM) in 1948, which replaced the weak wartime currency, the Reichsmark (RM). This brought an end to the black market, helped stop inflation and stabilised the economic recovery.
In 1949, Marshall Aid was extended to the newly formed West Germany. This American package of economic and technical assistance boosted industry and raised living standards.
Army's rebuilding role
Germany's economic rebirth was assisted by the British Army. Major Ivan Hirst and his comrades of the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers took over the Volkswagen plant in Wolfsburg in 1945, initially to make and repair cars for the British. The CCG provided raw materials and labour.
Eventually, Hirst helped turn Volkswagen into today's well-known brand. Most of the factory's workforce initially consisted of displaced persons from across Europe, but more Germans were employed as time went on. By the end of 1947, 20,0000 cars had been made.
Other German businesses were assisted by the Army, including the KWS Grain Factory and the Huth-Apparatebau radio factory in Hanover. The latter concern employed locals to make radio sets manufactured primarily from components salvaged from German military equipment.
The British Army also helped found 'Der Spiegel' magazine. The latter was co-founded in Hanover by Major John Chaloner who was assigned to the Public Relations and Information Services Control, a unit rebuilding the German media industry under the supervision of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He worked with recently released German prisoner of war Rudolf Augstein.
The BAOR also mobilised former enemy soldiers into the German Civil Labour Organisation (GCLO). This provided paid work and accommodation for thousands of men. By late 1947, over 50,0000 Germans were employed as labourers, drivers, mechanics and in many other roles. In 1948-49, the GCLO played a major part in supporting the Allied effort during the Berlin Airlift.
Black market
The shortage of food and other supplies immediately after the German surrender meant that illegal commerce, the so-called ‘black market’, filled the void. The wartime Reichsmark (RM) was almost worthless, so goods like cigarettes and coffee served as makeshift currency. Many goods were supplied to illegal traders by Allied servicemen.
British soldiers often bought goods cheaply in staff canteens and NAAFI shops, which were reserved for their use only, and sold them on the black market for RMs. Initially, RMs were accepted in Army canteens and stores and could be used to buy more goods, or converted into sterling and sent home as money orders. For example, a packet of NAAFI-issued cigarettes, which cost 1-2 shillings (5-10p), could be sold for 160RM on the black market, worth £4 at the official rate of exchange of 40RM to £1.
The CCG tried to stamp out the black market by investigating suspects, raiding markets and checking traffic at road blocks. In February 1948 alone, over 4,200 people were arrested for black market activities in the British zone.
From 1946, military involvement in the trade was partly curtailed by issuing troops with British Armed Forces Special Vouchers. This meant they had a different currency from the locals, and the only one accepted in NAAFI canteens and various messes.
But the wider black market was only fully ended by West Germany’s economic recovery and by issuing a stable and trusted new currency, the Deutsche Mark (DM).
Non-fraternisation
From the Army's first crossing into enemy territory, personnel were expressly forbidden to have any social contact with Germans. In March 1945, Field Marshal Montgomery sent a letter outlining the policy to all soldiers in 21st Army Group. Its main focus was on enforcing a sense of defeat on the Germans:
‘Twenty-seven years ago the Allies occupied Germany: but Germany has been at war ever since. Our Army took no revenge in 1918; it was more than considerate… So accommodating were the occupying forces that the Germans came to believe that we would never fight them again in any cause. From that moment to this their continued aggression has brought misery to millions.’
Policy change
But this policy proved unenforceable. Soldiers of all ranks resisted the ban on fraternisation. Many had to work with Germans to re-establish industrial concerns and local government, making it impossible to adhere to the policy's strict conditions.
Others actively sought out the company of German women, or worked closely with civilians in the black market, while some just felt pity for a poor and desperate people.
Eventually, the High Command accepted the policy was unworkable. In June 1945, soldiers were no longer forbidden from fraternising with children. The following month, they were authorised to hold conversations with adult Germans in public.
Finally, in September 1945, Montgomery cancelled his previous orders on the issue and simply reminded his soldiers that they were 'to conduct themselves with dignity, and to use common sense when dealing with Germans'.
Even so, he still banned his troops from billeting with German families, or from marrying Germans. But as time went on, these rules too were quietly forgotten.
Displaced persons
At the end of the war, the Allies also had to deal with millions of displaced persons (DPs). These included former concentration camp inmates, forced labourers taken from their homelands by the Nazis to work in Germany, and Allied prisoners of war (POWs) who had to be sent home.
The military in the various zones of Germany did what they could for DPs, many of whom were sick or malnourished. They were housed in makeshift camps where they were fed, medically checked and processed. But eventually, in October 1945, the Allies and Soviets handed responsibility for DPs to the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) .
In the British zone, the Army assisted UNRRA by providing transportation, supplies and security. Dealing with so many people took time. But by the end of 1945, over six million refugees had been repatriated by the military of the four occupied zones and UNRRA. The last German DP camps closed in the early 1950s.
Exiles
Many displaced persons who were former residents of the Soviet Union, or from nations in Eastern Europe and the Balkans recently taken over by Communists, had no wish to return. Some had collaborated with the Germans and could expect little mercy. But even those forcibly taken by the Germans would still be suspects in the eyes of the Communist authorities.
Political opponents of the Communists also feared going home. Indeed, many of those who did return were jailed or executed in countries like Poland and Yugoslavia.
The British, in their zone of occupation, formed some of these people into the Civil Mixed Watchman Service. They were tasked with guard duties in the camps set up to deal with the tide of humanity moving through Germany. The British also established the Civilian Mixed Labour Organisation to undertake reconstruction work.
In 1959, both organisations were merged into the Mixed Service Organisation (MSO), which would continue to work for the BAOR for many years. MSO units had a British Army commanding officer and senior non-commissioned officers overseeing a multi-national rank and file.
Iron curtain
These developments occurred against a backdrop of rising tensions between the Western Allies and Soviets elsewhere in Europe. Potential flashpoints included the threat of a Communist takeover in Greece, and growing Soviet demands for territorial concessions from Turkey.
In a speech in March 1946, less than a year after the war’s end, Winston Churchill denounced the Soviet imposition of Communism on the nations of Eastern Europe. His words came to define much of the post-war era: 'From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.'
US President Harry Truman’s intention to support any nations threatened by Communism (the so-called Truman Doctrine of 1947) raised the stakes even higher.
In March 1948, the Soviet Union withdrew from the Allied Control Council after learning of Allied proposals to create a new West German state. There was now a growing concern in the West that the Soviets would attempt to impose by force their solution to the German question.
Berlin
The total breakdown of Soviet-Allied cooperation and joint administration in Germany became apparent with the Berlin Blockade in 1948-49. The Soviets, taking advantage of their zone's position surrounding the German capital, severed road and rail links between western Germany and Berlin.
The Western Allies responded by airlifting supplies to the people of West Berlin. The Allies were so alarmed by the Soviet actions that they decided the only answer was collective defence. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) was therefore formed in April 1949 with General Dwight Eisenhower as the first Supreme Allied Commander Europe.
Two German states
In May 1949, the three western occupation zones were merged to form the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The Soviets followed suit in October 1949 with the establishment of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany).
In the west, the three post-war occupation zones were formally abolished by treaty in May 1955. That same month, West Germany joined Nato. It was also encouraged to build a new military, the Bundeswehr, which took its place alongside the BAOR as an ally in the burgeoning Cold War.
In response to West Germany joining Nato, the Communist states of Eastern Europe formed the Warsaw Pact under Soviet tutelage.
As a result of its commitments to Nato, Britain had to convert the BAOR from a static occupation force consisting of two divisions into a field force of at least four divisions. This force's main focus now changed to preparing to face an invasion of West Germany by the Warsaw Pact.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 68
|
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2023/11/16/romania-inaugurates-an-f-16-pilot-training-center-for-nato-ukraine/
|
en
|
Romania inaugurates an F-16 pilot training center for NATO, Ukraine
|
[
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/pf//resources/img/air-logo-white.png?d=129",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/80mB_T9ozP1UJntujB2vjR4H4vE=/1024x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/QSYFE4X6G5DWRADZKZHUNZWAMQ.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/XCdMEnWh5DN8JTXVV6wv-vqoyoQ=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/SXPV5ISICNCJ5C34U66R4NUYBE.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/POIT5ZaLDqZldvVmhdVvBbvAyXQ=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/IALPFS4TFRGEFKMZWVUGY44CGU.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/OWDAlHhmVCxIoqMdPjoRtEJcUmE=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/VNHP4JQWJVE5DM2ZHK3FQ6WPL4.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/Qb992dBhHTn1LWrR-9jgakP98NU=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/EAYVRI5BHZD2DML2E4PXEMK7NU.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/OGpUfPX8SXrzGoCea1J3rEZ2o_o=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/ENJVN6AKUJH4RL3ZZX35UFOODE.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/LvTaiGTG6Dg1SH_Bn9oHOxsm4PM=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/d3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net/08-09-2024/t_8488c8b0c4794df9b2c62519f80b1c71_name_Stumpworx_Thumb.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/4xGTVX2Z5aYMzBcsKoAeNGkTpBY=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/d3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net/08-09-2024/t_e8c1f21242d54bb192a95a8cfacd36f8_name_SMD_RECAP_THUMB.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/dyqY_f7XP8hVRJhwhnnPyqlwzGo=/400x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/d3k85ws6durfp9.cloudfront.net/08-09-2024/t_327f903728764d178840fe2f0f99bc82_name_DNW_632_LEHRFELD_THUMB_3.jpg",
"https://www.airforcetimes.com/pf//resources/img/air-logo-white.png?d=129"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"nato",
"ukraine",
"russia",
"ukraine-war",
"f-16",
"romania",
"pilot-training",
"circulated-air-force-times",
"circulated-military-times",
"air-force-times"
] | null |
[
"Stephen McGrath, The Associated Press",
"Stephen McGrath",
"The Associated Press"
] |
2023-11-16T00:00:00
|
The training facility, situated at an air base in Fetesti in southeast Romania, will aim to increase interoperability between NATO allies.
|
en
|
/pf/resources/img/favicons/air/apple-touch-icon.png?d=129
|
Air Force Times
|
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2023/11/16/romania-inaugurates-an-f-16-pilot-training-center-for-nato-ukraine/
|
BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) — NATO member Romania inaugurated on Monday an international training hub for F-16 jet pilots from allied countries and other partners, including Ukraine.
The training facility situated at an air base in Fetesti in southeast Romania will aim to increase interoperability between NATO allies, and better position the military alliance “to face the complex challenges” in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea region, Romania’s defense ministry said.
It said the powerful U.S.-made warplanes will be supplied by the Royal Netherlands Air Force while the aircraft maker Lockheed Martin will provide instructors and maintenance at the training center.
Kathleen Kavalec, the U.S. ambassador to Romania who attended the opening, called the collaboration an “example of how the public and private sectors can cooperate to further our defense priorities.”
“I am here with one simple message,” she said. “The United States government is here to support in any way we can.”
Romania, which has been a NATO member since 2004, shares a long border with Ukraine. Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Kyiv has repeatedly asked its backers to send sophisticated fighter planes to give it a combat edge, and some NATO countries have.
In response to the war next door, Romania ramped up defense spending while NATO bolstered its presence on Europe’s eastern flank by sending additional multinational battle groups to alliance members Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Slovakia.
The center’s opening comes after Romania said last week that it is pushing to buy 54 latest-model Abrams main battle tanks and related equipment from the United States in a deal worth at least a billion dollars to help the European Union country meet regional security challenges.
In April, Romania’s Supreme Council of National Defense also approved the acquisition of an unspecified number of latest generation American-made F-35 fighter jets, as Romania pushes to modernize its air force.
Romania has played an increasingly prominent role in the alliance throughout the war, including hosting a NATO meeting of foreign ministers in November 2022.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 13
|
https://www.aviamagazine.com/tags/RNLAF
|
en
|
AviaMagazine.com
|
[
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/assets/headers/M7-lg.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3908808605.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3913184476.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3871232898.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3858228498.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3770802200.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3701273732.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3674720611.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3612885890.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3595342943.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3570469142.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3526370622.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3521629131.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3486380571.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3456400801.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3423245736.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3391453329.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3385748758.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3385833848.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3386244108.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3370696706.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3360408109.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3331661507.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3326728847.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3321456849.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3307554027.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3297017483.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3286631069.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3814790138.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3865400815.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/gallery/thumbs/3799224180.jpg",
"https://www.aviamagazine.com/system/images/skylarkLogoFooter.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"aircraft",
"spotting",
"aviation",
"spotter",
"civil",
"military",
"spotting",
"pictures",
"militair",
"civiel",
"Koninklijke",
"Luchtmacht",
"Royal",
"Dutch",
"Air",
"Force",
"RNLAF",
"Belgische",
"Belgian",
"BAF",
"United",
"States",
"USAF",
"Navy",
"USN",
"Royal Air Force",
"RAF",
"BLu",
"KLu",
"THK",
"HAF",
"FAB",
"AdlA",
"Arme de l'Aire",
"Kongelige Norske Luftvorsfaret",
"Danske Flyvevabnet",
"Svenska Flygvapnet",
"Ilmavoimat",
"Schweizerische Fliegertruppen",
"Aeronautica Militare Italiano",
"T rk Hava Kuvvetleri",
"Elliniki Polemiki Aeroporia",
"Army",
"Marine Corps",
"French",
"Norwegian",
"Swedish",
"Finnish",
"Swiss",
"Italian",
"Schiphol",
"Zestienhoven",
"Eelde",
"Maastricht",
"Twenthe",
"Welschap",
"Timetables",
"CNNO",
"C.N.N.O",
"CIS",
"C.I.S",
"Showreports",
"Vintage",
"Wrecks",
"Relics",
"Movements",
"nieuws",
"jetliners",
"propliners",
"airliners",
"commuters",
"bizprops",
"helispot",
"Soviet updates",
"Triptease",
"Fokker",
"airport guide",
"Maps",
"arrivals",
"departures",
"excercises",
"deployments",
"harbour visits"
] | null |
[
"AfterDark Media"
] | null | null |
Orange Jumper
With a special event on 11 November 2023 and a night shoot the evening before, the National Military Museum (NMM) in Soesterberg, Netherlands, celebrated the recent introduction of a unique F-16 into its collection. This one-of-a-kind F-16B J-066 is also known as the “Orange Jumper” which operated as test aircraft for the Royal Netherlands Air Force as well as many European and US Air Forces.
RIAT 2023 Departure
Traditionally most of the Royal International Air Tattoo participant’s head home on Monday after the show. Like every year this event can be witnessed with special tickets from two sides of the runway.
NMM Nightshoot
The Dutch National Military Museum (NMM) located at former Soesterberg Air Base, organised its first Nightshoot event. Spotters were invited to visit on 2 September 2022 during sun-set and early nightfall to photograph aircraft placed on the tarmac outside the museum. Amongst others the F-4E in 32nd TFS colours and the TF-104 were present, which are not always visible during normal museum hours.
Frisian Flag 2022
After two years of (Covid) absence, Frisian Flag was back at Leeuwarden Air Base. This year’s participants included Canadian CF-188 (F/A-18) from 425 squadron, Aviano based Vipers from the 510th FS, French Mirages and Rafales and Italian F-2000s and Tornado’s. Germany and the UK also participated, although flying from their home bases. A first this edition was the participation of the F-35.
Air Force Days 2019
After an absence of two year the Royal Netherlands Air Force Days are back. This two day event, at 14 and 15 July was held at Volkel Air Base and attracting some 430.000 visitors. A nice variety of aircraft were present at the Static and Air show, with the Air Power demo highlighting the flying program. Especially for this event, two Dutch F-35s flew over from the US, with the latest, F-008, being on Dutch soil for the first time.
Frisian Flag 2017
Every year Leeuwarden AB is home to the combined NATO exercise, Frisian Flag. This year two USAF F-15 ANG units joint amongst Dutch, German, Belgium, French, English and Portuguese units. In two week’s time, the aircraft flew two sorties a day over the North sea West of Denmark.
Air Force Days 2016
This edition of the Dutch Air Force Days will enter the history books as first ever public air show appearance of the F-35, formerly known as Joint Strike Fighter. A first for the Dutch a few weeks ahead of the RIAT where the Americans will show their F-35.
Air Force Days 2014
20, 21 June Gilze-Rijen Air Base hosted this year’s Royal Air Force Days. This year’s theme was operation air support and showed the capabilities of today’s Air Force. 245.000 visitors saw modern equipment, but there was also time to look back, for instance to celebrate 50 years of Alouette III service in the RNLAF.
Air Force Days 2013
After a year of absence, The Royal Netherlands Air Force Open Days, or Air Force Days, took place at Volkel Air Base on 14 and 15 June 2013. This year celebrating 100 years of military aviation in the Netherlands.
Royal Dutch Lightning
After the RAF, the Royal Netherlands Air Force is the second non US Air Force receiving their first F-35 Lightning II. Although the Dutch haven’t decided yet to buy the new fighter, participation in the development process was agreed. Now after eleven years, the first airframe (AN-1) took to the sky.
Air Force Days 2011
The annual open days of the Royal Netherlands Air Force, called Air Force Days were held on 16 and 17 September at Leeuwarden AB in the north of the Netherlands. Great weather on Friday made the airshow a spectacular event, especially with the use of lots of flares.
Koksijde International Airshow 2011
This year, the Belgian Air Component (COMOPSAIR), Air Force department of the Belgian military, celebrates the 65th anniversary of the Air Force. The costal airbase of Koksijde was the scene of this celebration, with special guests like the Saudi Arabian Hawks and the USAF Thunderbirds.
Royal Netherlands Air Force Days 2010
The annual open days of the Royal Netherlands Air Force, now called Air Force Days were held on 18 and 19 June at Gilze-Rijen AB in the south of the Netherlands. Although the weather wasn’t great there were some interesting visitors. Aviamagazine was present on Friday 18th.
Air Force Days 2009
Volkel Air Base was host to the 2009 Royal Netherlands Air Force Days. 20 July Aviamagazine was present to see the star of the show flying again. After years of restoration, the mighty Avro Vulcan, strategic delta wing bomber, was present on the static and flew a demo during the air show.
KLu Opendays 2008
The Annual Open Dagen (open days) of the Royal Netherlands Air Force was held on Friday 20th and Saturday 21st at Leeuwarden AB in the far north of the Netherlands. Highlights included a Canadian CP-140, the OV-10 and a flying display of the new NH-90. A first for the Netherlands was the Polish team Iskra and the historical RAF trainer Gnat.
KLu Opendays 2007
The Annual Open Dagen (open days) of the Royal Netherlands Air Force was held on Friday 15th and Saturday 16th at Volkel AB in the south of the Netherlands. Highlights included a Hungarian Jas-39, the Turkish Stars demo team and a Polish delegation (Su-22 and An-26).
Dutch F-16 Delivery to Chile, Part 2
On Thursday April 5th another 6 F-16AM&BM’s left the Netherlands for their new home base in Chili. They will be stationed at Cerro Moreno Air Base with Grupo No.8 The Vipers delivered this time were in standard RnethAF camo and markings (no one carried squadronmarkings). They will be repainted in Chili.
Dutch Vipers to Springfield
In 2006 the Dutch Ministery of Defence decided after a study to station 14 F-16AM/BM’s at Springfield Beckley MAP, Ohio to train Dutch pilots. On Monday April 16th, 6 F-16’s left Leeuwarden Air Base for a non stop ferry flight to Springfield.
F-16 vs Spyker F-1
Both the Royal Netherlands Air Force and the Spyker Formula One team tested there strength 20th of April at the Full Throttle event on Volkel AB, where a F-16 raced the Spyker F1 race car.
KLu Opendays 2006
Aircraft enthusiasts from all over Europe visited Leeuwarden AB in the Netherlands, in the weekend of 16-17 June, for the first appearance in over twelve years of the US Navy demo team The Blue Angels. On Friday there was a small incident with a blown tire during take-off of Angel number 5, which delayed the show a bid, Saturday everything wend fine including the weather.
KLu Open Dagen 2005
The Annual Open Dagen (open days) of the Royal Netherlands Air Force was held on Friday 17th and Saturday 18th at Gilze-Rijen AB in the south of the Netherlands. And from a spotters point of view it was a great edition. Highlights included special guests from Egypt and New Zealand.
Opendays Royal Netherlands Army
May 28 and 29, the Royal Netherlands Army organized it`s annual Open Days. Host for this year event was the Airborne Brigade at former airbase Deelen, located in the center the Netherlands.
RNLAF F-16 solo display
After several years, the RNLAF replaced it´s demo F-16 (J-016) with a new airframe J-055 and a complete new color scheme. AviaMagazine already was the first site worldwide to show you the first pictures off the rollout at Woensdrecht AB on March 31. Now we're proud to present exclusive pictures of the first acceptation demo held at Woensdrecht AB on April 21st.
Afghanistan, Kundus province
After many years of war Afghanistan is now on it´s way to peace. Although there is a long way to go the democratic elections in October are a big step forward. To provide stability in the region, the UN send an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). ISAF forces are based in Afghanistan and their neighbouring countries and primarily work with a "Show of force" strategy.
KLu Opendays 2004
On Friday 18 and Saturday 19 June the annual Open Dagen of the Royal Netherlands Airforce took place at Volkel AB, Netherlands. Looking at the days with a spotters point of view, it was disappointing. 25 years F-16 with the fewest F-16 in years, no eastern Europe (new NATO members), expect the An-30 and no Migs.
Air-to-air refuelling
Invited by the Royal Netherlands Air Force, AviaMagazine.com joined an air-to-air refuelling mission north of the Wadden islands. On the 20th of February 2004 the KDC-10 saw a total of six thirsty Viper quests. Join us on this once in a lifetime experience.
KLu Open Dagen 2001
In 2001, Leeuwarden AB, was the host for the annual Klu Open Days. 6 and 7 July the Royal Netherlands Air Force showed its air power. Highlights this year were two A-4s from the Singapore Air Force, on training in Southern France. As the Netherlands were looking for a F-16 replacement, Italy brought a Eurofighter EF-2000 prototype and France a Dassault factory Rafale. But also some more classic fighters like the Romanian Lancer B (MiG-21) and Germany with the, former East German, MiG-29.
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 4
|
https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research/research-enquiries/history-of-aviation-timeline/world-aviation/1953-2/
|
en
|
RAF Museum
|
[
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2020/12/logo-01.png",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-201x72.png 201w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-300x107.png 300w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-1024x367.png 1024w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-768x275.png 768w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-1536x550.png 1536w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-2048x733.png 2048w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-106x38.png 106w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-433x155.png 433w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-773x277.png 773w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-542x194.png 542w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-516x185.png 516w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-1900x680.png 1900w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-249x89.png 249w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-512x183.png 512w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-112x40.png 112w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-685x245.png 685w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-342x122.png 342w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2022/12/English_Made_Possible_logo_white_PNG-435x156.png 435w",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2020/12/logo-03.png",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2020/12/logo-04.png",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2020/12/logo-05.png",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2020/12/logo-06.png",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2020/12/logo-07.png",
"https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2023/05/enei-logo.png 128w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2023/05/enei-logo-106x41.png 106w, https://assets.rafmuseum.org.uk/app/uploads/2023/05/enei-logo-102x40.png 102w"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2021-01-13T09:44:41+00:00
|
This is a list of world aviation events which took place in 1953. Find out more on the website of the RAF Museum.
|
en
|
RAF Museum
|
https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research/research-enquiries/history-of-aviation-timeline/world-aviation/1953-2/
|
World Aviation in 1953
6 January
The German airline Luftag is formed.
12 January
The United States Navy (USN) begins operational flight tests from the first angled-deck aircraft carrier, the USS Antietam.
14 January
Eight Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG15 jets are shot down during air fighting over North Korea.
22 January
Four Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG15 jet fighters are shot down during air fighting over North Korea.
31 January
Wonsan in North Korea is bombed by American carrier-borne aircraft.
16 February
Two Republic F-84 Thunderjets flown by Japanese Defence Force pilots intercept two Russian piston-engined fighters over north Japan.
18-19 February
United States aircraft make heavy attacks on Communist forces in North Korea.
5 March
A Polish Air Force pilot lands a Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 jet and seeks political asylum on the Danish island of Bornholm.
10 March
Two Czechoslovakian Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 jets attack two United States Air Force (USAF) Republic F-84 Thunderjets near Bavaria.
13 March
Six Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 jet fighters are shot down during air fighting over North Korea.
27 March
The Royal Netherlands Air Force is established as an independent service.
30 April
A civil aviation agreement is signed between Denmark and South Africa.
30 April
A Polish pilot who landed on Bornholm Island leaves Britain for the United States.
14 May
India’s air transport companies are nationalised, with the formation of Air India International Ltd for long distance flights and Indian Air Lines for internal routes and services to nearby countries.
15 May
Central British Columbia Airways adopts the name Pacific Western airlines.
18 May
American airwoman Jacqueline Cochran becomes the first woman to fly faster than the speed of sound, piloting a Canadian built version of the North American F86E Sabre at a speed of Mach 1.01 (652mph).
20 May
Another Polish pilot lands a Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 jet on Bornholm Island.
26 May
Twelve Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 jet fighters are shot down over North Korea.
8 June
Communist aircraft bomb Seoul.
11-14 June
A Chinese offensive in Korea.
14 June
Communist aircraft bomb Kimpo and Inchon near Seoul.
18 June
The world’s first air disaster involving more than 100 deaths occurs when a United States Air Force C-124 Globemaster II crashes after take-off in Japan.
1 July
Civil air traffic control in West Germany is handed over to the Federal German Government.
7 July
A Sikorsky S.55 makes the first international helicopter flight into central London.
16 July
Lieutenant Colonel WF Barnes of the United States Air Force (USAF), flying a North American F-86D Sabre, sets the world’s first speed record over 700mph. The record of 1,151km/h (715mph) is ratified by the FI.
27 July
The Korean war ends.
14 August
Flight Lieutenant Bentleigh of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) breaks the sound barrier for the first time over Australia, flying the first Australian built Sabre fighter.
23 August
The Martin licence-built B-57 Canberra completes its final tests before entering service with the United States Air Force (USAF).
25 August
Following successful tests, the United States Air Force (USAF) announces that the Convair B-36 bomber in a GRB-36F configuration is able to launch and retrieve Republic GRF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance aircraft from an under-fuselage trapeze. Twelve of these bombers are converted, enabling them to launch and control missiles in support of development programmes.
31 August
An altitude of 83,235 feet is achieved by Lieutenant Colonel Marion E. Carl of the United States Marine Corps (USMC), flying a Douglas D558-2 Skyrocket research aircraft and launching from a Boeing B-29 Superfortress at 34,000 feet.
1 September
Belgian airline Sabena inaugurates the first scheduled international helicopter services from Brussels linking with Maastricht, Rotterdam and Lille.
2 September
A world record speed of 690mph over a 100 kilometre closed course is set by Brigadier General J Stanley Holtoner of the United States Air Force (USAF), flying a North American F-86D Sabre fighter at Ohio.
5-7 September
The National Aircraft Exhibition is held at Dayton in Ohio.
11 September
The United States Air Force (USAF) announces that the Sidewinder air-to-air missile (AAM) has made its first completely successful interception, destroying a Grumman F6F Hellcat drone.
27 September
Three defence agreements are signed by the United States and Spain.
1 October
A defence treaty is signed by the United States and South Korea.
3 October
Lieutenant Commander JB Vardin sets a new world speed record, flying a Douglas F4D-1 Skyray, averaging 1,211kph (752mph) in four runs over a 3 kilometre course.
4 October
A de Havilland Comet IA of the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) flies non-stop from Goose Bay in Labrador to London covering the 2,460 miles in 5 hours 56 minutes.
12 October
The United States signs an agreement in Athens allowing their armed forces to use Greek air and naval bases.
16 October
A world speed record of 728mph over a 100 kilometre closed course is set by Robert O Rahn flying a Douglas XF4D Skyray.
29 October
A world record of 754mph over a 15 kilometre course is set by Lieutenant Colonel FK Everest flying a North American F-100 Super Sabre fighter.
20 November
A speed of 1,327mph is achieved by Scott Crossfield in a Douglas D558-2 Skyrocket aircraft, dropped from a Boeing B-29 Superfortress at 32,000 feet.
29 November
The Douglas DC-7 enters scheduled airline service with American Airlines.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 50
|
https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/index.html
|
en
|
A Timeline of U.S. Army Special Operations Forces
|
https://arsof-history.org/images/arsof_favicon.ico
|
https://arsof-history.org/images/arsof_favicon.ico
|
[
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1917_apr_6.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/1918_jan_23.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/1918_aug_28.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1918_nov_12.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1942_apr_9.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1942_jun_13.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1942_jul_9.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/1943_mar_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1943_mar_5.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1943_apr_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1943_aug_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1943_may_21.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1943_nov_28.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1943_dec_29.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1944_jan_30.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1944_feb_7.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1944_feb_12.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1944_apr_13.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1944_jun_4.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1944_jun_6.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1944_aug_3.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/1944_sep_25.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1945_jan_17.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1945_jan_30.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/1945_feb_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1945_oct_1.png",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1950_jul_5.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1950_aug_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1950_oct_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1950_oct_29.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1950_nov_8.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1951_jan_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1951_jan_15_3.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1951_jan_15_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1951_mar_19.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1951_mar_23.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1951_oct_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1952_apr_10.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1952_apr_26.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1952_may_19.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1952_oct_20.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1953_sep_22.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1953_nov_11.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1955_may_5.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1955_jul_27.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1955_aug_22.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1957_jun_24.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1957_june_24.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1959_mar_27.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1960_apr_15_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1960_apr_15_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1960_apr_15_3.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1960_apr_15_4.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1960_may_7.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1960_jun_6.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1961_sep_21.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1961_sep_23.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1961_oct_12.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1962_jan_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1962_jan_15_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1962_mar_21.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1962_oct_22.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1963_apr_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1963_may_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1963_dec_5.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1964_jan_24.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1964_oct_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1965_apr_28.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1965_apr_28.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1965_oct_20.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1965_oct_21.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1965_nov_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1966_sep_16.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1967_apr_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1967_dec_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1968_sep_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1969_may_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1969_nov_26.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1970_nov_21.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1971_sep_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1972_sep_13.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1973_jul_10.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/1974_jan_31.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1974_jun_27.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1975_oct_30.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1978_sep_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1980_apr_25.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1980_dec_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1981_jan_10.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1982_oct_1.png",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1983_june_17.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1983_oct_23.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1986_feb_3.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1986_sep_17.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1987_apr_9.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1987_apr_16.png",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1987_jul_24.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1988_jun_12.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1988_dec_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1989_jun_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1989_dec_20.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1989_dec_20.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1990_jun_28.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1990_jun_29.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1990_aug_2_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1990_nov_27_1.png",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1990_nov_27_2.png",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1991_jan_17.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1991_apr_11.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1992_dec_9.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1993_aug_22.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1993_oct_3.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1994_jul_26.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1994_sep_19.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1994_oct_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1995_sep_15_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1995_sep_15_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1995_sep_15.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/1995_nov_16.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1995_nov_16.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/1995_dec_8.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/1999_apr_3.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2001_oct_4.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2001_oct_16.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2001_dec_10.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2003_mar_20.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2003_mar_28.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2003_mar_31.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2003_apr_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2003_may_23.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/2004_sep_7.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2007_apr_9.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/thumb/2008_apr_6.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/2008_dec_16.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/2009_mar_16.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2010_jan_12.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2010_nov_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2011_feb.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2012_may.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/2013_apr_12.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2013_may_29.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2014_oct_2.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2014_oct_31.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/800/2015_aug_21.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2017_may_23.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2018_jul_17.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/insignia_thumb/2019_may_1.jpg",
"https://arsof-history.org/arsof_timeline/images/400/2019_aug_18.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"USASOC History Department"
] | null |
A Timeline of U.S. Army Special Operations Forces
|
en
|
../images/arsof_favicon.ico
| null |
U.S. Army Special Operations Forces
TIMELINE
World War I
WWI
28 JUL 1914 – 11 NOV 1918
Most ARSOF units derive their lineage from World War II legacy units, but Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs/Military Government trace their roots to World War I, which the U.S. entered on 6 April 1917. In 1918, the War Department and American Expeditionary Forces established sections to perform propaganda activities. After the Armistice, the Army conducted Military Government operations in Germany and Russia. It also published American Military Government of Occupied Germany in 1920, which laid a solid groundwork for Civil Affairs during World War II. However, combat propaganda was a casualty of postwar demobilization and the lean Great Depression years, forcing the Army to re-learn this capability in the early 1940s.
1917
U.S. entered WWI
Contextual events
6 APR 1917 U.S. declared war on Germany, citing its use of unrestricted submarine warfare, and declared war on the Austro-Hungarian Empire on 7 DEC
18 MAY 1917 President Woodrow Wilson the signed Selective Service Act into law, requiring American males aged 21 to 30 to register for the draft
26 MAY 1917 American Expeditionary Forces (AEF) established
25 JUN 1917 First AEF troops arrived in France
7 NOV 1917 In the October Revolution, Bolsheviks seized Petrograd, toppling the Provisional Russian government and establishing the Russian Soviet Republic the following January
22 DEC 1917 Led by Vladimir Lenin, Russia opened peace negotiations with Germany
1918
Psychological Subsection Established. CPT Heber Blankenhorn, Psychological (Propaganda) Subsection established under the purview of Military Intelligence within the War Department General Staff.
Photo: Captain Heber Blankenhorn
American Expeditionary Force’s Propaganda Campaign Began. The Propaganda Section disseminated more than 3 million leaflets targeting enemy forces during WWI.
Contextual events
The “Spanish Flu” began, killing some 50 million people worldwide over two years
8 JAN 1918 President Wilson announced his postwar aims, called the "Fourteen Points"
3 MAR 1918 Russia and Germany signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, ending Russian involvement in WWI
15 JUL 1918-3 AUG 1918 In the Second Battle of the Marne, Allies checked the final German offensive of the war before it reached Paris
26 SEP 1918 AEF began Meuse-Argonne offensive, the largest and costliest American military operation of WWI
3 NOV 1918 Austria-Hungary agreed to an armistice with the Allies, ending combat on the Italian Front
11 NOV 1918 Germany and the Allies agreed to terms for armistice
Post-WWI
Post-WWI
11 NOV 1918 – 7 DEC 1941
U.S. Military Government Began in Germany. Army occupation lasted until 11 July 1923.
American Military Government in Siberia. The Expeditionary Force conducted duties until 1 April 1920. U.S. Forces also participated in an Allied occupation of North Russia.
Contextual events
14 FEB 1919 President Wilson proposed League of Nations at the Paris Peace Conference
2 - 6 MAR 1919 Communist International (COMINTERN) founded in Moscow to promote the worldwide spread of Communism
SPRING 1919 Anarchists mailed bombs to U.S. government and business leaders; most were intercepted, but one detonated at the home of U.S. Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer
28 JUN 1919 The Treaty of Versailles signed, officially ending WWI
11 AUG 1919 New German constitution established the Weimar Republic
7 NOV 1919 A series of U.S. government raids began against suspected radicals, leading to thousands of arrests over several months
1934 - 1939
Basic Field Manual: Volume VII Military Law, Part Two: Rules of Land Warfare, was published. With a large section on Military Government, it became the basis for Field Manual 27-10: Rules of Land Warfare, published on 1 OCT 1940.
Contextual events
31 MAR 1939 Britain and France pledged to support Poland if it was attacked
22 MAY 1939 Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini signed the “Pact of Steel” military alliance between Germany and Italy
23 AUG 1939 German and Soviet foreign ministers agreed to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression
1 SEP 1939 Germany invaded Poland, starting World War II in Europe
3 SEP 1939 Britain and France declared war on Germany
17 SEP 1939 Soviet Union invaded Poland
6 OCT 1939 Germany and the Soviet Union completed conquest of Poland
1940
Basic Field Manual 27-5: Military Government, published.
Contextual events
9 APR 1940 Germany invaded Denmark and Norway
10 MAY 1940 Winston Churchill became Prime Minister of Great Britain. Germany invaded Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, crossing into France two days later
26 MAY-4 JUN 1940 Allied troops evacuated from France at Dunkirk
14 JUN 1940 Germans occupied Paris
10 JUL 1940 Battle of Britain began, as German air force (Luftwaffe) attempted to destroy the British Royal Air Force (RAF), prior to a German invasion of Great Britain
16 SEP 1940 U.S. instituted the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, requiring all men between the ages of 21 and 45 to register for the draft
5 NOV 1940 President Roosevelt reelected for unprecedented third term
World War II
WWII
7 DEC 1941 – 28 AUG 1945
Many units that influenced U.S. Army Special Operations Forces were formed during World War II, which the U.S. entered on 8 December 1941, following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor the day prior. These included the First Special Service Force, the Alamo Scouts, the Philippine Guerrillas, and elements of the Office of Strategic Services, for Special Forces; the six Ranger Battalions, Merrill’s Marauders, and the MARS Task Force, for the Rangers; and Military Government and Psychological Warfare elements, for today’s Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations units. With the exception of a small Military Government capability, all special operations units were disbanded at the end of the war.
1941
Coordinator of Information (COI) Established. The first National Intelligence Agency and the direct predecessor to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). It was established and headed by William J. Donovan.
Special Activities/Goodfellow (SA/G) Formed. It later became the OSS Special Operations Branch.
Contextual events
11 MAR 1941 President Roosevelt signed the Lend-Lease Act to provide arms to Great Britain
22 JUN 1941 Germany invaded the Soviet Union
14 AUG 1941 The U.S. and Great Britain issued a joint declaration, the Atlantic Charter, an affirmation of shared principles for the post-war world
30 OCT 1941 U.S. extended Lend-Lease aid to the Soviet Union
7 DEC 1941 Japanese aircraft attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, and other U.S. bases on the island of Oahu
8 DEC 1941 Japan attacked U.S. military installations in the Philippines; U.S. declared war on Japan
11 DEC 1941 Germany and Italy declared war on U.S.
1942
American Forces Surrender in Bataan, Philippines. Hundreds of Americans and Filipinos refused to surrender and melted into the jungle to fight the Japanese for the next three years. Guerrilla leaders like COL Wendell W. Fertig, LTC Russell W. Volckmann, and MAJ Donald D. Blackburn became instrumental in the birth and development of Army Special Forces.
Detachment 101 Created. It organized thousands of native troops to fight the Japanese in Burma until disbanded on 12 July 1945. The ‘Redass Squadron’ supported Det 101 with light aircraft.
School of Military Government at the University of Virginia Opened. The first of several to convene in civilian universities during WWII.
Office of Strategic Services (OSS) Established. Its Research and Analysis Branch contributed to Civil Affairs area manuals during World War II, and helped train officers for Civil Affairs duties in multiple theaters.
1st Ranger Battalion activated at Carrickfergus, Ireland. Nine days later, it moved to the British Commando Depot at Achnacarry, Scotland, for training.
First Special Service Force (FSSF) Activated at Fort William H. Harrison, MT. The Canadian-American FSSF adopted the crossed arrows of the Indian Scouts as their distinct branch insignia and a red arrowhead as their SSI. Today’s SFGs draw their official Army lineage from the Force.
Operation JUBILEE.
50 American Rangers participated in an amphibious raid against Nazi positions at Dieppe, France.
Psychological Warfare Service of Allied Force Headquarters Created. Redesignated as the Psychological Warfare Branch in November 1942, it fell under the Information and Censorship Section, headed by BG Robert A. McClure.
528th Quartermaster Service Bn Activated at Camp McCain, MS.
Contextual events
9 APR 1942 U.S. forces on Bataan, Philippines, surrendered to Japanese; several thousand American and Filipino prisoners of war died in the subsequent Bataan Death March
18 APR 1942 U.S. Army Air Forces aircraft, led by LTC James Doolittle, bombed Tokyo
4-7 JUN 1942 U.S. carrier-based aircraft inflicted heavy losses on the Japanese navy at the Battle of Midway, allowing the U.S. to transition to offensive operations in the Pacific Theater
7 AUG 1942 U.S. Marines landed on Guadalcanal, initiating a five month campaign to establish a foothold in the strategically important Solomon Islands
2 DEC 1942 Atomic “chain reaction” achieved at world’s first nuclear reactor, in Chicago
1943
OSS Morale Operations (MO) Branch Established. It handled ‘black’ propaganda overseas.
1st and 2nd Broadcast Station Operating Detachments (BSOD) Assigned to Psychological Warfare Branch. The BSODs were activated to provide radio broadcast support to the North Africa Campaign.
Civil Affairs Division Established in the War Department. MG John H. Hilldring was named its head a month later.
Philippine Guerrillas in Mindanao. Navy LCDR Charles ‘Chick’ Parsons landed by submarine to meet COL Wendell W. Fertig, leader of the largest guerilla unit. Parsons arranged for continued communications and logistical support to Fertig’s command.
2nd Ranger Battalion Activated at Camp Forrest, TN.
Allied Military Government for Occupied Territories Established in Italy. It was the first major U.S. Military Government action in WWII.
First OSS Operational Groups (OG) Established. They served in Italy, Greece, Yugoslavia, France, Norway, Burma, and China. The OG is the functional model for the Special Forces Operational Detachment - Alpha.
1st Mobile Radio Broadcasting Company (MRBC) Assigned to Psychological Warfare Branch. The 1st MRBC was created as a stand-alone unit with mobile radio broadcast transmitters, printing presses, loudspeakers, and monitoring devices. It was the first of five MRBCs activated during the war.
3rd and 4th Ranger Battalion Activated in Tunisia, North Africa.
OSS Maritime Unit (MU) Established.
Operation COTTAGE - First Special Service Force. Two FSSF Battalions conducted an amphibious assault on the Aleutian Island of Kiska. The Japanese had withdrawn undetected weeks prior to the landing.
Commission to Protect Historical Treasures Approved. President Franklin D. Roosevelt approved a Commission to Protect Historical Treasures. It resulted in SHAEF’s establishment of the Civil Affairs section of Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives.
5th Ranger Battalion Activated at Camp Forrest, TN.
Attached to the British X Corps, the Ranger Force conducted an amphibious landing at Maiori, near Salerno, Italy (Operation AVALANCHE). By mid-day, the force seized Chiunzi Pass and Vietri Pass overlooking Naples, exposing the German flank.
BG Robert A. McClure Appointed Head of the Publicity and Psychological Warfare (P&PW) Division. LTG Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed BG Robert A. McClure head of the P&PW Division in London, England. Three months later, P&PW became the SHAEF G-6.
Alamo Scout Training Center Established. The Training Center was established on Fergusson Island, New Guinea. It was created by Sixth Army commander LTG Walter Krueger to “train selected volunteers in reconnaissance and raider work.” During its service, Alamo Scouts liberated 197 Allied prisoners.
Civil Affairs Center was established at Shrivenham, England, to assign, train, and equip Civil Affairs personnel for European service.
Battle of Monte La Defensa - FSSF. FSSF scaled the steep cliffs of Monte La Defensa to rout German Defenders. This action paved the way for Allied forces to penetrate the German Winter Line in Italy.
MRBCs Activated. 2nd, 3rd (in the lineage of the 7th POB), 4th, and 5th MRBCs were activated at Camp Ritchie, MD. They deployed to Europe in the spring of 1944 for tactical Psywar support. The 6808th Publicity and Psychological Warfare Service Battalion was activated, and three months later it was reorganized as the 72nd Publicity Service Battalion.
Contextual events
12-23 JAN 1943 Roosevelt and Churchill met at the Casablanca Conference, finalizing Allied plans and deciding on a policy of unconditional Axis surrender
31 JAN-2 FEB 1943 German Sixth Army surrendered at Stalingrad, turning the tide of the war in Europe
9 JUL 1943 Allies invaded Sicily in Operation HUSKY, beginning a six-week campaign to secure control of the island
3 SEP 1943 First Allied troops landed on mainland Italy; the main invasion force followed on 9 SEP
28 NOV-1 DEC 1943 Churchill, Roosevelt, and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin met at the Tehran Conference; Western Allies agreed to open a second front against Germany on European mainland
1944
OSS Special Operations (OS) Branch began construction of Area H in London. Opened two months later, it was the largest Office of Strategic Services supply facility in Europe, and satisfied the logistics requirements for teams operating in that theater.
The 6615th Ranger Force (P) (consisting of the 1st, 3rd, 4th Ranger Battalions, the 83rd Chemical Battalion, and the 509th Parachute Infantry Battalion) was formed under the command of Colonel Darby, in preparation for the landing at Anzio.
The 6615th Ranger Force (P) conducted an assault landing at YELLOW Beach near Anzio, Italy, during Operation SHINGLE.
Battle of Cisterna, Italy. The 1st and 3rd Ranger Battalions were destroyed.
5307th Composite Unit (P) - Merrill’s Marauders. Codenamed GALAHAD Force, it departed Ledo, India, to fight as a long-range penetration unit in Burma.
European Civil Affairs Division Created. The European Civil Affairs Division was created to “perform the administrative and operational functions for all [Civil Affairs] personnel” in Europe. It later activated three CA regiments.
G-6, SHAEF Reorganized. The G-6, SHAEF split to form the Publicity Division and the Psychological Warfare Division (PWD/SHAEF) (BG Robert A. McClure). PWD/SHAEF coordinated propaganda efforts, oversaw Voice of SHAEF and Radio Luxembourg, conducted ‘consolidation’ propaganda of Allied Information Service, and delivered five billion leaflets.
FSSF Elements the First Allied Troops into Occupied Rome.
D-Day: 2nd and 5th Ranger Battalions. 2nd Ranger Battalion assaulted Pont du Hoc in Normandy, France. Remainder of 2nd and all of the 5th Battalion assaulted Omaha Beach. Over the next several nights, OSS Operational Groups and Jedburgh teams parachuted into occupied France.
512th Signal Company (A) Activated. It supported the airborne and special operations of the Allied Airborne Task Force during WWII and is in the lineage of the 112th Signal Battalion. The 512th was deactivated on 10 February 1945 in France.
Merrill’s Marauders, OSS Det 101 Captured Myitkina, Burma
Operation DRAGOON - FSSF. The Allied invasion of southern France began. The FSSF, the 528th Quartermaster Battalion, the 512th Airborne Signal Company, and Psywar units participated.
6th Ranger Battalion Activated. 6th Ranger Battalion activated in Port Moresby, New Guinea. Formed by LTG Krueger (CDR, Sixth Army), LTC Henry A. Mucci, the battalion later seized two islands in advance of the invasion of Leyte.
FSSF Final Formation at Villanueve-Loubet, Near Menton, France. The FSSF disbanded on 6 January 1945.
Contextual events
6 JUN 1944 Operation OVERLORD began with Allied amphibious landings in Normandy, France
15 AUG 1944 Allied troops landed on the southern coast of France in Operation DRAGOON
20 OCT 1944 American forces landed on Leyte, Philippines. In the subsequent naval battle, which lasted from 23-26 OCT, U.S. forces crippled the Japanese Combined Fleet
7 NOV 1944 President Roosevelt reelected for fourth term
16 DEC 1944 Battle of the Bulge began a with German surprise attack on Allied troops in the Ardennes
1945
MARS Task Force Captures First Positions Along Burma Road. Possession of those positions was instrumental in opening a ground supply route to China.
Cabanatuan POW Rescue. Task force comprised of Company A, 6th Rangers, Alamo Scout teams Nellist and Rounsaville, and Philippine guerrillas liberated 500 POWs from the prison camp at Cabanatuan.
First Lieutenant Jack L. Knight, MARS Task Force, earned Medal of Honor. 1LT Jack L. Knight, MARS TF, earned a Medal of Honor (posthumously) for leading a bold attack against the Japanese at Loi Kang, Burma. 1LT Knight was the only Army special operations soldier to be awarded the Medal of Honor during World War II.
112th Airborne Army Signal Battalion Activated. Consolidated with 512th Signal Company (A), it participated in Operation VARSITY and provided strategic communications support for the Potsdam Conference in July-August 1945.
389th Translator Team Activated in Dulag, Leyte, Philippines. It supported 96th Infantry Division operations on Leyte and Okinawa.
Position of Theater Psychological Warfare Officer was established in the China Theater. It coordinated joint/interagency psychological warfare activities in Japanese-occupied China.
U.S. Army Commenced Military (then Civil) Government of the Ryukyu Islands. The first Military Government units went ashore on Okinawa on 1 April. Civil Government lasted until 15 May 1972.
The Occupation of Italy, Germany and Austria Began. The Office of Military Government for Germany (OMGUS) operated until 5 May 1955. The Army’s Occupation of Austria ended on 27 July 1955. The occupation of Italy ended 15 September 1947.
PWD/SHAEF Dismantled. Over the next few months all tactical Psywar units were deactivated. Military Government’s Information Control Division absorbed the PWD’s assets.
95th, 97th, and the 98th HHDs, Military Government Group, Activated at the Presidio of Monterrey, CA. Also, on 26 August the 96th Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, Military Government Group, was activated at the Presidio of Monterrey, CA. It was redesignated 10 May 1967 as 96th Civil Affairs Group, and 26 November 1971 as 96th Civil Affairs Battalion.
Contextual events
4-11 FEB 1945 At the Yalta Conference, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin planned for the defeat of Germany, and post-war Europe
12 APR 1945 President Roosevelt died, and was succeeded by Vice President Harry S. Truman
7 MAY 1945 Germany surrendered; Victory in Europe (V-E) Day celebrated the following day
26 JUN 1945 United Nations (UN) Charter signed by representatives of 50 countries; it was officially formed on 24 OCT
6 AUG 1945 U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan; a second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki on 9 AUG
14 AUG 1945 Japan agreed to unconditional surrender
2 SEP 1945 Japan formally surrendered on board USS Missouri, ending WWII. In French Indochina, Ho Chi Minh declared an independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV)
Post-World War II / Early Cold War
Post-WWII/Early Cold War
28 AUG 1945 – 25 JUN 1950
After World War II, a bitter ideological divide emerged between the U.S. and its allies on one side, and the Soviet Union and its Communist allies on the other. Political, economic, and military conflicts between the two blocs persisted until the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. Open warfare with the Soviet Union was avoided; however, both sides contributed to the arms race, and supported proxy forces around the globe. Conflict was especially intense in Latin America, and in Africa and Southeast Asia, where former European colonies struggled to achieve independence. During the Cold War, U.S. Army Special Warfare units trained partner forces and conducted unconventional warfare, while ARSOF direct action and hostage rescue capabilities expanded. A failed hostage rescue mission in Iran in 1980 prompted the Department of Defense to establish several new headquarters to better manage and coordinate Special Operations Forces.
1945
U.S. Occupation of Japan and Korea. Military Government began in Japan. The U.S. Army occupation of Korea also began below the 38th Parallel.
OSS Disbanded.
Contextual events
10 JAN 1946 The United Nations convened its first session, in San Francisco
22 FEB 1946 George F. Kennan, Deputy Chief of Mission in Moscow, argued for “containment” of the Soviet Union, in his “Long Telegram” to the State Department
5 MAR 1946 Winston Churchill stated that an “iron curtain” divided Europe’s Western democracies from Soviet-dominated governments in the East, in a speech at Westminster College, in Fulton, Missouri
24 AUG 1946 Huk Rebellion began in the Philippines, lasting until 1954
19 DEC 1946 Communist Viet Minh soldiers attacked French forces in Hanoi, beginning the First Indochina War
1947
Trieste United States Troops Established.Trieste United States Troops was established to conduct Military Government of the Free Territory of Trieste. It ended on 26 October 1954 when the area was turned over to Italy.
Contextual events
12 MAR 1947 President Truman announced the “Truman Doctrine,” stating that the U.S. would provide political, economic, and military aid to people resisting “subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures.”
5 JUN 1947 Secretary of State George C. Marshall called for a comprehensive economic program to rebuild Europe
26 JUL 1947 President Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947, a major reorganization that led to the creation of the post-World War II U.S. national security bureaucracy
29 NOV 1947 UN General Assembly voted to partition Palestine, recommending the creation of independent Arab and Jewish states, and establishing Jerusalem as an international city
1948
406th MRBC Activated in New York. Sponsored by National Broadcasting Company, it became the Mobile Radio Broadcasting Company (MRBC) of the 301st Radio Broadcasting & Leaflet (RB&L) Group two years later.
Contextual events
3 APR 1948 President Truman signed the Economic Recovery Act of 1948; known as the “Marshall Plan,” it provided some $12 billion to rebuild Western Europe
14 May 1948 Israel proclaimed independence and was immediately recognized by the U.S. and Soviet Union; British troops withdrew from Palestine the next day
24 JUN 1948 Soviets blockaded West Berlin, prompting a U.S.-led aerial resupply of the city, known as the Berlin Airlift
26 JUL 1948 Executive Order 9981 ended segregation in the U.S. military
15 AUG 1948 South Korea formally became the Republic of Korea; led by Syngman Rhee, it governed the Korean peninsula south of the 38th parallel
9 SEP 1948 The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) was founded, with Kim Il-sung as its leader; it governed the peninsula north of the 38th parallel
2 NOV 1948 President Truman reelected
1949
U.S. Occupation of Korea Ended.
Contextual events
4 APR 1949 Twelve nations, led by the U.S., signed a mutual defense treaty creating the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); intended to provide security against the Soviet Union, it was the first U.S. peacetime military alliance outside of the Western Hemisphere
12 MAY 1949 The Berlin Airlift ended when the Soviets lifted the blockade
23 MAY 1949 Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) created as a democratic nation
29 AUG 1949 Soviet Union tested its first atomic bomb
1 OCT 1949 Mao Zedong proclaimed the establishment of the communist People’s Republic of China (PRC)
7 DEC 1949 Chinese Nationalists, led by Chiang Kai-shek, retreated to Taiwan, and established a new capital at Taipei
Korean War
Korean War
25 JUN 1950 – 27 JUL 1953
U.S. involvement in the Korean War led to the rebirth of Army Special Operations Forces. A new Ranger Training Center created Ranger Infantry Companies (Airborne), and later instructed individuals in Ranger skills. The Eighth U.S. Army created a guerrilla organization to command, control, train, and advise North Korean guerrillas fighting alongside United Nations troops. Civil Affairs units helped alleviate the widespread misery experienced by the Korean people. Tactical and strategic Psychological Warfare units reappeared. Toward the end of the conflict a new Psychological Warfare Center and School was formed at Fort Bragg, NC, to train Psywar and Special Forces soldiers. Some of the first Special Forces soldiers served in combat in Korea.
1950
Far East Command Formed the GHQ Raider Company. Conducting special missions behind enemy lines in Korea, the GHQ Raiders became an element of the Special Activities Group (SAG). It supported the amphibious assault at Inchon, and participated in the fierce fighting during the Chosin Campaign in late 1950.
Eighth Army Ranger Training Center Established Near Pusan, Korea. It supported the forming of the Eighth Army Ranger Company on 25 August 1950, to infiltrate enemy lines and attack command posts and key facilities.
Psychological Warfare Division (PWD) of the Army G-3 Established. Led by BG Robert A. McClure, it implemented plans to activate, train, and deploy Psywar units.
Training began at Kijang for the Eighth U.S. Army Ranger Company.
Ranger Training Center Established at Fort Benning, GA. Created to train Ranger Infantry Companies (Airborne) (RICA).
301st RB&L Group Was Activated in New York. Federalized in May 1951, it deployed six months later as the strategic Psywar asset in Europe. It returned to reserve control in May 1953 and was disbanded.
Tactical Information Detachment (TID) Arrived in Taegu, Korea. Redesignated in November as the 1st Loudspeaker & Leaflet (L&L) Company, it provided tactical Psywar support to Eighth U.S. Army.
Civil Assistance. U.S. conducted Military Government (MG) functions (under COL Charles R. Munske) in the North Korean capital of P’yongyang with a sub-element in Chinnamp’o. MG in P’yongyang lasted until its evacuation on 4 December 1950.
1st Radio Broadcasting & Leaflet (RB&L) Group Activated at Fort Riley, KS. In the lineage of the 1st POB, 1st RB&L deployed to Tokyo, Japan, to provide strategic Psywar support to the Far East and United Nations Commands.
1st Ranger Infantry Company (A) (RICA) Arrived in Korea. It was followed on 24 December by the 2nd and 4th RICAs. Ultimately, six RICAs (the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and the 8th) served in the Korean War.
Contextual events
9 FEB 1950 Senator Joseph R. McCarthy claimed the U.S. State Department was “infested” with Communists; the resulting anti-communist campaign ruined many careers
7 APR 1950 In National Security Council Paper-68, Paul Nitze and Secretary of State Dean Acheson argued for a massive U.S. military build-up to counter Soviet aggression
25 JUN 1950 North Korea invaded South Korea
30 JUN 1950 Lodge-Philbin Act passed, allowing recruitment of foreign nationals in the U.S. Army
SEP 1950 U.S. Military Advisory Assistance Group (MAAG) Indochina arrived in Saigon
15 SEP 1950 UN forces executed an amphibious attack on North Koreans at Inchon, stopping the North Korean advance, and setting the stage for a UN counteroffensive
NOV 1950 China entered the Korean War in support of North Korea; UN forces retreated
1951
Civil Affairs in Korea. The UN Public Health and Welfare Detachment was renamed the UN Civil Assistance Command, Korea (UNCACK). Prior units were the U.N. Public Health and Welfare Detachment and U.N. Civil Assistance Command. On 30 June 1953, UNCACK was renamed the Korea Civil Assistance Command (KCAC).
Office of the Chief of Psychological Warfare Established in the Pentagon. Led by BG Robert A. McClure, its efforts led to the establishment of the Psychological Warfare Center and the activation of the 10th SFG at Fort Bragg, NC.
Eighth Army Created a Guerrilla Command. Framed as the Attrition Section, it organized, trained, and directed over 20,000 North Korean anti-Communist fighters in support of UN war aims. It underwent many reorganizations and name changes, becoming popularly known as ‘the 8240th Army Unit.’
Military Government School Began at Fort Gordon, GA.
5th L&L Company Activated at Fort Riley, KS. In the lineage of the 5th POB, it deployed to Germany six months later and provided tactical Psywar support to the Seventh U.S. Army.
Operation TOMAHAWK. The 2nd and 4th RICAs conducted a parachute assault at Munsan-ni, Korea, as part of the 187th Airborne RCT.
First Psychological Warfare Officers Course Began at the Army General School, Fort Riley, KS. Members of the Psywar Division had begun writing the Program of Instruction the previous December. On 15 June 1951, thirty-nine officers graduated from the six-week course.
All RICAs Disbanded. The Ranger Training Center became the Ranger Training Command, training individuals, vice units, in small unit leadership and Ranger skills. This is the origin of the Army Ranger School.
First Psychological Warfare Non-commissioned Officers’ Course Began. On 21 November 1951, forty-five students graduated from Psywar NCO Class No. 1 at the Army General School, Fort Riley, KS.
Contextual events
29 MAR 1951 Julius and Ethel Rosenburg sentenced to death for espionage; both were executed on 19 JUN
11 APR 1951 President Truman relieved GEN Douglas A. MacArthur from duty as Commander, UN Command/Far East Command
10 JUL 1951 Armistice negotiations began in Kaesong, Korea
1952
Psywar Center Established at Fort Bragg, NC. Commanded by COL Charles H. Karlstad, it was the forerunner of today’s U.S. Army JFK Special Warfare Center and School.
9th L&L Company Activated at Fort Riley, KS. Parent unit in the lineage of 9th POB.
The Occupation of Japan Ended.
HHC, 10th SFG Activated at the Psychological Warfare Center, Fort Bragg, NC. On 19 June 1952 the remainder of the 10th SFG was activated. On the following day COL Aaron Bank assumed command of the Group.
6th RB&L Group Relocated. 6th RB&L Group (originally Psywar Det., 5021st ASU at Fort Riley) moved from Fort Riley, KS, to Fort Bragg, NC, as the main Psywar unit assigned to the Psychological Warfare Center. When 1st L&L and 1st RB&L returned from the Far East, they were similarly assigned to the PWC.
The Psychological Warfare School Established Under the Psywar Center. A Distinctive Unit Insignia (DUI) for the Psywar Center and School was approved on 28 November 1952.
Contextual events
OCT 1952 The British declared a state of emergency in response to the Mau Mau Rebellion in Kenya; tens of thousands were killed in the subsequent counterinsurgency campaign, which lasted until 1960
3 OCT 1952 Britain tested its first atomic weapon in the Montebello Islands
1 NOV 1952 U.S. tested the first hydrogen bomb at Eniwetok Atoll, in the Marshall Islands
4 NOV 1952 Dwight D. Eisenhower elected as President
1953
First SF-Trained Soldiers Assigned to Korea. Most served with the EUSA guerrilla command and other units operating with the anti-Communist NK guerrillas. Ultimately, ninety-nine Special Forces personnel served in Korea, making this the first combat use of Special Forces.
Contextual events
5 MAR 1953 Joseph Stalin died
25 APR 1953 James D. Watson and Francis H. C. Crick published a groundbreaking paper on DNA structure
29 MAY 1953 Edmund P. Hillary and Tenzing Norgay became the first climbers to scale Mount Everest
27 JUL 1953 Armistice signed at Panmunjom, Korea; it restored the border between North and South Korea at the 38th parallel
19 AUG 1953 Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq overthrown in coup; Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi became leader of Iran
Post-Korean War
Post-Korean War
27 JUL 1953 – 1 NOV 1955
1953
77th SFG Activated at Fort Bragg, Nc. It was commanded by LTC Jack T. ‘Blackjack’ Shannon.
10th SFG Deployed to Flint Kaserne in Bad Toelz, Germany.
Contextual events
7 APR 1954 At a news conference, President Eisenhower stated that communist victory in Indochina could have a “falling domino” effect, leading to communist domination of the Pacific
7 MAY 1954 Viet Minh defeated the French Army at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu
17 May 1954 The U.S. Supreme Court declared segregated public schools unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education
27 JUN 1954 Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz resigned, following a U.S.-backed coup
21 JUL 1954 The Geneva Accords ended the First Indochina War, with France and the Viet Minh agreeing to partition Vietnam along the 17th parallel, pending national elections in July 1956
8 SEP 1954 U.S., Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Thailand established the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO)
1955
14th RB&L Group Activated. In the lineage of the WWII-era 4th MRBC, the 14th Radio Broadcasting & Leaflet Group was activated at Fort Shafter, Hawaii.
Support Operations Task Force Europe (SOTFE) Activated. Redesignated as the Special Operations Task Force Europe on 1 September 1978.
American Occupation of Germany Ended. The OMGUS was deactivated.
American Occupation of Austria Ended.
CA/MG Established as a Branch in the U.S. Army Reserve.
Department of the Army Approved the Arrowhead Shoulder Sleeve Insignia For Wear by Special Forces. The airborne tab was added in November 1958.
Contextual events
18 APR 1955 Physicist Albert Einstein died
14 MAY 1955 Warsaw Treaty Organization (Warsaw Pact), a political and military alliance between the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites, was founded to counter NATO
26 OCT The Republic of Vietnam (RVN) was proclaimed, with Ngo Dinh Diem as president
1 DEC 1955 Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on a Montgomery, AL, bus to a white passenger, prompting the yearlong Montgomery Bus Boycott
1956
Detachment A Activated in Berlin, West Germany. Officially designated as the 39th Special Forces Operational Detachment (SFOD). Inactivated on 16 December 1984.
Psywar Center and School Redesignated. The Psywar Center and School were redesignated as the U.S. Army Special Warfare Center and School.
Contextual events
26 JUL 1956 Egyptian President Gamal A. Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, a strategic waterway in Egypt jointly owned and operated by the British and French
23 OCT 1956 Hungarian Revolution began; Soviet military intervened and restored Communist rule by 10 November
29 OCT 1956 Suez Crisis began when Israeli forces crossed into Egypt, later supported by the French and British; the U.S. condemned the invasion and pressured its allies to accept a ceasefire 8 days later
2 DEC 1956 Fidel Castro returned to Cuba and led a guerrilla war in the Sierra Maestra mountains
1957
1st SFG Activated in Japan. It arrived at Okinawa in July 1957.
1st SFG MTT Trained RVN Commandos in Nha Trang.
Contextual events
FEB 1957 Asian Flu Pandemic (H2N2 virus) began; it caused over one million deaths worldwide, including over 100,000 in the U.S.
24 SEP 1957 President Eisenhower ordered 101st Airborne Division troops to Little Rock, AR, to support school integration
4 OCT 1957 USSR launched Sputnik I, the first artificial space satellite
1958
1st SFG Mobile Training Team 12A graduated the first class of Republic of Korea Army Special Forces in Korea. This relationship ultimately led to a continuous presence on the peninsula known as Special Forces Detachment - Korea. In 2005, that detachment became the 39th Special Forces Detachment.
Contextual events
JAN 1958 Mao Zedong unveiled his “Great Leap Forward” plan to implement communist reforms in China; it resulted in tens of millions of Chinese deaths from famine
31 JAN 1958 U.S. launched its first satellite, Explorer I
27 MAR 1958 Nikita S. Khrushchev became Soviet Premier
29 JUL 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) founded
21 DEC 1958 Charles de Gaulle elected President of France
1959
Project HOTFOOT. 107 SF Soldiers of the 77th SFG ordered to Laos. Led by LTC Arthur D. ‘Bull’ Simons, they trained Laotian soldiers to fight the Communist Pathet Lao. Mission changed to the overt Operation WHITE STAR in April 1961, and ended in July 1962.
The Civil Affairs/Military Government Branch Renamed the Civil Affairs Branch. First established in the U.S. Army Reserve on 17 August 1955.
The VII Corps Commander Authorized the Creation of a Provisional LRRP Unit to Conduct Deep Reconnaissance in Europe. The VII Corps Commander (Lieutenant General Guy S. Meloy, Jr.) authorized the creation of a provisional Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol (LRRP) unit to conduct deep reconnaissance for the Corps in Europe. This marked the beginning of the creation of Long Range Penetration or Reconnaissance units to provide deep patrol support to specific Corps, Divisions, or Brigades.
Contextual events
1 JAN 1959 Dictator Fulgencio Batista fled Cuba; Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara led rebels into Havana two days later
3 JAN 1959 Alaska became the 49th U.S. state
16 FEB 1959 Fidel Castro sworn in as Cuban Prime Minister
24 JUL 1959 Vice President Richard M. Nixon engaged Khrushchev in the “Kitchen Debate,” comparing U.S. and Soviet standards of living
21 AUG 1959 Hawaii became the 50th U.S. state
Vietnam War
Vietnam War
1 NOV 1955 – 30 APR 1975
The Special Forces advisory mission in Vietnam began as mobile training teams in the late 1950s and early 1960s. In 1964, 5th Special Forces Group headquarters deployed to South Vietnam to control all Special Forces activities in-country. Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations capabilities expanded significantly during the war, countering Communist influence in South Vietnam. President Richard M. Nixon’s ‘Vietnamization’ policy led to the reduction of U.S. forces in South Vietnam beginning in 1970, but ARSOF remained until the fall of Saigon in 1975. After the war, ARSOF experienced drastic cuts in size and capabilities, evidenced by the inactivation or transferring to the U. S. Army Reserve of various ARSOF units.
1960
The 11th, 12th, 19th, 20th SFGs Activated. HQ, 11th SFG (USAR) relocated on 1 March 1961 to Boston, MA. HQ, 12th SFG (USAR) relocated on 24 March 1964 to Chicago, IL. On 1 May 1961, the 19th SFG was withdrawn from the Regular Army and allotted to the Utah Army National Guard. On 8 July 1961, the 20th SFG was withdrawn from the Regular Army and allotted to the Alabama National Guard.
Commander-In-Chief, Pacific, Requested Psychological Warfare Support For the Advisory Mission in Vietnam. Most product support came from outside of Vietnam. A psychological warfare Mobile Training Team later arrived in country to assist, but its presence was short-lived.
37-Man MTT From 77th SFG Deployed to South Vietnam. Led by COL William Ewald, it conducted Ranger training for selected Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) soldiers.
77th SFG Redesignated the 7th SFG at Fort Bragg, NC.
Contextual events
1 FEB 1960 Four African-American college students refused to leave a “whites only” lunch counter in Greensboro, NC; their actions inspired similar “sit-ins” around the country
3 FEB 1960 British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan’s “Winds of Change” speech foreshadowed the end of European colonialism; over 30 nations gained independence during the decade
1 MAY 1960 Francis Gary Powers' U-2 spy plane shot down over Soviet airspace
26 JUN 1960 At a Communist Party conference in Bucharest, Soviet Premier Khrushchev openly criticized China and Mao Zedong, revealing the depth of the Chinese-Soviet split
14 SEP 1960 Organization of the Gasoline Exporting Countries (OPEC) founded
8 NOV 1960 John F. Kennedy elected President
1961
1st Psychological Warfare Battalion Deployed to Laos. 1st Psychological Warfare Battalion (Broadcasting & Leaflet) personnel deployed to Laos to support U.S.-Laotian anti-Communist efforts.
Additional SF Advisors Deployed to South Vietnam. President Kennedy dispatched 400 Special Forces and 100 other advisors to RVN.
5th SFG Activated at Fort Bragg, NC.
Special Forces Operational Detachment - Korea Formed. “Det-K” began with a series of TDY assignments from 1st SFG in Okinawa. The arrangement became more permanent. By November 1961 it had became the “FA 40th Detachment,” under the operational control of the Korea Military Assistance Group. Redesignated on 16 October 2005 as the 39th Special Forces Operational Detachment (Airborne).
Green Beret Authorized For Special Forces. Department of the Army Message 574088 stated, “The beret [green] is authorized as an item of the uniform for all Special Forces.” On 12 October President John F. Kennedy visited Pope Air Force Base and Fort Bragg, NC.
13th Psychological Warfare Battalion was activated at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The predecessor of the 13th Psychological Operations Battalion, the battalion transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve in 1975 and finally settled at Arden Hills, Minnesota, in 1996.
Contextual events
1 MAR 1961 President Kennedy issued an executive order establishing the Peace Corps
12 APR 1961 Soviet astronaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human in space
17 APR 1961 U.S.-backed Cuban exiles (Brigade 2506) landed at the Bay of Pigs, in Cuba, with the goal of overthrowing Fidel Castro; their failure strengthened Castro’s hold on power, and led to closer Cuban-Soviet ties
25 MAY 1961 President Kennedy announced his goal to land an American on the moon by decade’s end
13 AUG 1961 East German soldiers began sealing the border between East and West Berlin; construction of the Berlin Wall commenced two days later
1962
U.S. Army Special Warfare Center and School Established (USASWCS). USASWCS established as a School Activity under the Continental Army Command (CONARC).
A-113 (1st SFG) Dispatched to Buon Enao, South Vietnam. Detachment A-113 (1st SFG) dispatched to South Vietnam’s Central Highland village of Buon Enao. CPT Ronald Shackleton initiated the Village Defense Program (VDP). It later became the Civilian Irregular Defense Group (CIDG) program.
22nd Special Warfare Aviation Detachment (SWAD). Assigned to the Special Warfare Center, it was inactivated December 1963.
Special Warfare Concept Promoted. In his graduation speech to the U.S. Military Academy class of 1962, President John F. Kennedy promoted Special Warfare as an alternative to Massive Retaliation.
HQ, U.S. Army Special Forces Vietnam (P) (USASFV[P]) Formed. Located in Saigon, South Vietnam, COL George C. Morton and seventy-two 5th SFG personnel formed the nucleus of the unit.
USAJFKSWCS Shoulder Sleeve Insignia Approved.
Contextual events
20 FEB 1962 John H. Glenn, Jr. became the first American to orbit the earth
15 MAY 1962 President Kennedy ordered 5,000 Marines to Thailand in response to instability in neighboring Laos, which was fighting a communist insurgency
27 SEP 1962 Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was published; it was a catalyst for the modern environmental movement
14-28 OCT 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis brought world to brink of nuclear war
20 OCT 1962 Sino-Indian War began with the Chinese invasion of northwest India, ending a month later in a Chinese victory
1963
8th SFG Activated at Fort Gulick, Canal Zone, Panama.
South Vietnamese Government Began the Chieu Hoi Program. Chieu Hoi encouraged Viet Cong insurgents to defect and support the government. Bolstered by U.S. Army psychological warfare and lasting until 1972, it resulted in the defection of some 200,000 enemy combatants.
6th SFG was activated at Fort Bragg, NC.
3rd SFG was activated at Fort Bragg, NC.
Military Freefall Capability Demonstrated. 14 members of the U.S. Army and Air Force conducted a mass exit freefall jump from a C-130 aircraft at 43,500 feet above ground level at El Centro, CA. The demonstration led to increased interest in the military applications of the capability and resulted in the Military Freefall Parachutist Course taught at USAJFKSWCS.
Contextual events
12 MAY 1963 Riots erupted in Birmingham, Alabama, after the attempted assassination of key civil rights leaders; Kennedy sent over 18,000 federal troops to restore order
5 AUG 1963 The U.S., Soviet Union, and United Kingdom signed the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, prohibiting above-ground testing of nuclear weapons
28 AUG 1963 At the March on Washington, Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech
2 NOV 1963 South Vietnamese President, Ngo Dinh Diem, assassinated
22 NOV 1963 President John F. Kennedy assassinated, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson sworn in as President
1964
14th Psychological Warfare Battalion supported Vietnam effort. The 15th Psychological Warfare Detachment (printing), 14th Psychological Warfare Battalion, printed nearly 80 million leaflets for U.S. Pacific Command, mostly for the Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. The battalion also trained 1st SFG psychological warfare personnel deploying to Vietnam.
MACV-SOG Activated. Military Assistance Command Vietnam, Studies and Observations Group (MACV-SOG) activated in Cholon, South Vietnam.
Redesignation. U.S. Army Special Warfare Center and School was redesignated as the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USAJFKSWCS). The change was made in honor of the 35th President of the United States.
5th SFG Reassigned From Fort Bragg, NC, to Nha Trang, South Vietnam. It replaced USASFV(P) as the command element for all U.S. Army Special Forces personnel in Vietnam.
Contextual events
2 JUL 1964 President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawing segregation in public places and banning employment discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, or national origin
2 AUG 1964 USS Maddox engaged three North Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Gulf of Tonkin
7 AUG 1964 In the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, Congress authorized President Johnson to “take all necessary measures” to defend U.S. forces from North Vietnamese aggression
3 NOV 1964 President Johnson was reelected
1965
Most ‘psychological warfare’ units became ‘Psychological Operations’ units.
Operation POWER PACK. Elements of 1st Psywar Battalion and 1st Psywar Company deployed to support the U.S. Information Service (USIS) to assist in the stabilization effort and to earn the sympathy of the Dominican people. The 42nd Civil Affairs Company also conducted operations until 1 November 1965.
Operation POWER PACK. Elements of the 7th SFG deployed in support of the XVIII Airborne Corps and the 82nd Airborne Division to the Dominican Republic as part of a force to stabilize the country and prevent a Communist takeover.
The V and VII Corps LRRP Companies are Made Permanent U.S. Army-authorized TO&E Companies. The V Corps company redesignated as Company D (LRP), 17th Infantry. The VII Corps company redesignated as Company C (LRP), 58th Infantry. Both retained their airborne status.
7th POG Activated on Okinawa.
129th Aviation Company. Supported U.S. forces, including 5th SFG in Vietnam, with lift and gunship support. The unit is a legacy unit of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment.
6th PSYOP Battalion Activated in Vietnam.
41st Civil Affairs Company Deployed to Vietnam. Two more CA companies (the 2nd and 29th) followed.
2nd Psychological Operations Group (POG) Activated at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Contextual events
8 MAR 1965 U.S. Marines landed near Da Nang, becoming the first U.S. combat troops in South Vietnam
27 JUN 1965 U.S. forces launched their first offensive, targeting National Liberation Front (Viet Cong) positions near Saigon
6 AUG 1965 President Johnson signed the Voting Right Act, outlawing practices used to suppress the African-American vote
11 AUG 1965 Five days of race-related rioting began in Watts, Los Angeles, CA, resulting in 34 deaths and thousands of arrests
14-18 NOV 1965 Battle of Ia Drang marked the first major engagement of the Vietnam War between the U.S. and North Vietnamese Army (NVA)
1966
Four test CH-47A Chinook gunships nicknamed ‘Guns-A Go-Go’ served in Vietnam. Their legacy became inspiration for 4/160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment.
“The Ballad of the Green Berets”. SSG Barry Sadler sang his hit song on the Ed Sullivan Show.
Commander of MACV Creates the Recondo School at Nha Trang, Republic of Vietnam. At the direction of GEN William C. Westmoreland, Commander of the Military Assistance Command - Vietnam (MACV), established the Recondo School at Nha Trang, Republic of Vietnam. The rigorous three week course trained soldiers in the skills required to conduct long-range reconnaissance and commando missions in Vietnam.
Contextual events
12 JAN 1966 In his State of the Union address, President Johnson vowed that the U.S. would remain in South Vietnam “until aggression has stopped”
11 MAR 1966 France announced its intention to withdraw from the NATO integrated military command, and requested removal of Allied headquarters from French territory; while still in the alliance, France remained apart from the integrated command until 2009
16 MAY 1966 Mao Zedong formally announced the establishment of a new “Cultural Revolution Group;” subsequent political purges in China lasted until 1976 and killed millions
1967
46th SFC Activated. 46th SF Company activated at Lopburi, Thailand. The company was inactivated on 1 April 1970.
4th POG and 7th, 8th and 10th PSYOP Battalions Activated in Vietnam.
Contextual events
27 JAN 1967 Three American astronauts were killed in the Apollo 1 spacecraft fire
12 JUL 1967 A deadly race riot erupted in Newark, NJ, followed on 23 JUL by one in Detroit, MI; these were part of a period racial unrest known as the “Long, Hot Summer of 1967”
5-10 JUN 1967 In the Six-Day War, Israel defeated Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq
9 OCT 1967 Communist revolutionary ‘Che’ Guevara was killed in Bolivia
1968
The Green Berets Movie Released. The movie, starring John Wayne, was released in theaters by Warner Brothers-Seven Arts.
Elements of 10th SFG Redeployed. On 3 SEP, the 1st Battalion, 10th SFG, became the SF Detachment, Europe.
SF POW MAJ Nick Rowe escaped captivity in Vietnam. MAJ James N. ‘Nick’ Rowe escaped after being held by the Viet Cong for five years. He was later instrumental in establishing the Survival, Escape, Resistance and Evasion (SERE) course at Camp Mackall, NC.
Contextual events
30 JAN 1968 NVA and Viet Cong launched the Tet Offensive; after suffering heavy losses, the U.S. achieved military victory, but protests against the war intensified
4 APR 1968 Martin Luther King, Jr. assassinated in Memphis, TN, prompting riots in U.S. cities
10 MAY 1968 U.S. and North Vietnamese diplomats met in Paris for peace talks
5 JUN 1968 Senator and presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy shot shortly after winning California’s Democratic primary; he died the following day
20 AUG 1968 Warsaw Pact troops, led by the Soviet Union, invaded Czechoslovakia, ending “Prague Spring” protests and reforms
1 NOV 1968 President Johnson halted U.S. bombing of North Vietnam, hoping to kick-start the stalled peace negotiations in Paris
5 NOV 1968 Richard M. Nixon elected U.S. President
1969
Redesignation. U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare School redesignated as the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Institute for Military Assistance.
Department of the Army Approved a Scuba Badge For Qualified Divers. This badge was worn by Special Operations divers until 2004.
1st Civil Affairs Bn Activated on Okinawa. It was in the lineage of the 91st CA Battalion.
Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 528th Battalion Quartermaster Activated. Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 528th Quartermaster Battalion, was activated in Phu Bai, Republic of Vietnam. It supported conventional Army units in the I Corps Tactical Zone until its inactivation on 15 April 1971.
Special Forces Soldier Statue Dedicated at Fort Bragg, NC.
3rd SFG Inactivated at Fort Bragg, NC.
Contextual events
4 FEB 1969 Yasser Arafat became leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
17 MAR 1969 Golda Meir became Prime Minister of Israel
21 JUL 1969 During the Apollo 11 mission, Neil A. Armstrong and Edwin E. ‘Buzz’ Aldrin walked on the moon
1 SEP 1969 Libyan Colonel Muammar Gaddafi led a coup that deposed King Idris and established the Libyan Arab Republic
15 OCT 1969 Mass protests, under the banner “Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam,” began across the U.S.
1970
Operation IVORY COAST. A Special Forces ground element, led by COL Arthur D. ‘Bull’ Simons, conducted a raid on the Son Tay prison camp in North Vietnam.
Contextual events
6 MAR 1970 Three members of the Weather Underground terrorist group died while making bombs intended to kill U.S. soldiers
17 APR 1970 Crippled spacecraft Apollo 13 returned safely back to Earth
30 APR 1970 U.S. and South Vietnamese troops began operations inside Cambodia, sparking public outcry and triggering a new wave of anti-war protests
4 MAY 1970 4 students were killed and 8 injured when National Guardsman fire on protestors at Kent State University
17 NOV 1970 Trial began for Army 2LT William L. Calley for his part in the 1968 My Lai Massacre; he was found guilty of premeditated murder and sentenced to life imprisonment
1971
5th SFG Redeployed From Nha Trang, South Vietnam to Fort Bragg, NC.
6th SFG Inactivated at Fort Bragg, NC.
The USAJFKSWCS Military Freefall School Graduated its First Class at Fort Bragg, NC.
U.S. Army Civil Affairs School Moved From Fort Gordon, GA, to Fort Bragg, NC.
Contextual events
13 JUN 1971 New York Times began publishing portions of the “Pentagon Papers,” a classified study of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, from 1945 to 1968
1 JUL 1971 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, lowering the voting age to 18
25 OCT 1971 Reversing its previous decision, the UN voted to recognize the People’s Republic of China and expel the Republic of China (Taiwan)
3-16 DEC 1971 India defeated Pakistan in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
1972
8th SFG Inactivated. 8th SFG inactivated at Fort Gulick, Canal Zone, Panama. Elements of the 8th SFG became 3rd Battalion, 7th SFG.
4th POG Reactivated at Fort Bragg, NC. It had been inactivated a year earlier at Fort Lewis, WA.
Contextual events
21 FEB 1972 President Nixon became first U.S. president to visit the People’s Republic of China
22 MAR 1972 U.S. Congress passed the Equal Rights Amendment, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex and sent it to the states for ratification
26 MAY 1972 At Moscow Summit, Nixon and Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev signed the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty (SALT)
17 JUN 1972 Five men were arrested for breaking into the Democratic National Committee offices at the Watergate Complex
5-6 SEP 1972 Palestinian Black September terrorists killed 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team in Munich
7 NOV 1972 President Nixon reelected
1973
Bryant Hall Dedicated at Fort Bragg, NC.
96th Civil Affairs Battalion Relocated From Fort Lee, VA, to Fort Bragg, NC.
Contextual events
27 JAN 1973 Paris Peace Accords formalized the Vietnam ceasefire agreement between the U.S., North and South Vietnam, and the Viet Cong
29 MAR 1973 The last U.S. combat troops departed Vietnam
4 APR 1973 World Trade Center, the world’s tallest building, opened
14 MAY 1973 The U.S. launched Skylab, its first space station
11 SEP 1973 A military coup removed Chilean President Salvador Allende; Augusto Pinochet assumed power two days later
6 OCT 1973 Yom Kippur War (October War) began when Egyptian troops crossed the Suez Canal, rupturing the Israeli defensive line, and Syria attacked Israeli positions in the Golan Heights
17 OCT 1973 OPEC declared an oil embargo on the U.S., and other Western nations supporting Israel
1974
Army Chief of Staff Directed the Establishment of a Ranger Battalion.
1st SFG Inactivated at Fort Bragg, NC.
1st Ranger Battalion Parachuted into Fort Stewart, GA, and Activated.
2nd Ranger Battalion Activated at Fort Lewis, WA.
96th Civil Affairs Battalion Activated. The 96th CA Battalion remained the only active duty CA unit in the Army.
Contextual events
17 MAY 1974 Donald DeFreeze (Field Marshal Cinque), leader of the Symbionese Liberation Army, died in a shootout with Los Angeles Police
18 MAY 1974 India successfully tested a nuclear bomb, becoming the first nuclear power outside of the UN Security Council
8 AUG 1974 President Nixon announced his resignation as a result of the Watergate Scandal; Vice President Gerald R. Ford was sworn in as President the following day
Post-Vietnam War
Post-Vietnam War
30 APR 1975 – 27 NOV 1990
1975
PSYOP Realignments. HHD, 2nd POG withdrawn from the Regular Army and allotted to the USAR in Parma, OH. Also, HHD, 7th POG transferred from the Regular Army (later moving to Moffett Field, CA).
SF at a Low Point. The year ends with the Regiment down to three active duty Groups and attempting to remain relevant in the post-Vietnam Army.
Contextual events
13 APR 1975 Civil war erupted in Lebanon, lasting until 1990
17 APR 1975 The Communist Party of Kampuchea, the “Khmer Rouge,” captured Phnom Penh, ending the Cambodian Civil War
30 APR 1975 Vietnam War ended with the fall of Saigon to the North Vietnamese Army
12 MAY 1975 U.S. merchant ship SS Mayaguez seized in international waters by Khmer Rouge forces in Cambodia; 41 U.S. servicemen were killed in a rescue operation just before hostages were released
1976
Contextual events
4 JUL 1976 U.S. celebrated its Bicentennial
4 JUL 1976 Israeli commandos rescued 102 hostages at Entebbe Airport, Uganda
9 SEP 1976 Mao Zedong, Chinese leader, died
2 NOV 1976 James E. ‘Jimmy’ Carter elected President
1977
SF Blue Light Teams. 5th SFG establishes SF BLUE LIGHT Teams. Three Assault Teams formed and trained at Mott Lake on Fort Bragg, NC. In August 1978 the BLUE LIGHT program ended.
Contextual events
21 JAN 1977 President Carter pardoned Vietnam War draft evaders
9-11 MAR 1977 Islamic radicals seized 149 hostages in Washington, DC, killing 2
16-17 APR 1977 Apple II computer introduced
26 OCT 1977 The world’s last naturally occurring case of smallpox was recorded
1978
Redesignated. Support Operations Task Force Europe redesignated as the Special Operations Task Force Europe.
Contextual events
14-15 MAR 1978 Israel invaded Lebanon
27 APR 1978 Communist rebels killed Afghan President Mohammed Daoud Khan and overthrew the government
5-17 SEP 1978 President Carter hosted Camp David peace talks between Israel and Egypt, laying the groundwork for an Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty the following year
8 SEP 1978 Scores of protesters killed in Iran; Shah imposed martial law
25 DEC 1978 Vietnam invaded Cambodia, capturing Phnom-Penh within two weeks; the resulting Vietnamese occupation lasted until 1989
1979
‘Quiet Professional’ Article Published. The Army Times published the article “SF: No More Hot-Dogging,” by COL Charles A. Fry. The opinion piece advocates greater SF professionalism and support to the Army.
Contextual events
16 JAN 1979 Shah of Iran forced into exile; Ayatollah Sayyid Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile on 1 FEB, and Islamic Republic of Iran declared on 1 APR
4 MAY 1979 Margaret Thatcher became first female Prime Minister of Great Britain
17 JUL 1979 Dictator Anastasio Somoza fled Nicaragua; Cuban-backed Sandinistas established a government 3 days later
4 NOV 1979 An Iranian mob seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, taking 63 hostages
21 NOV 1979 Mob burned the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan, killing a U.S. Marine
24 DEC 1979 Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan
1980
Operation EAGLE CLAW. A joint attempt (including Special Forces and Ranger elements) failed to rescue American Embassy hostages held in Tehran. It exposed shortcomings in America’s Special Operations capabilities that led to several new commands and legislative reforms.
Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) Formed.
Contextual events
22 FEB 1980 At the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid, New York, the U.S. ice hockey team defeated the heavily favored Soviet team in what became known as the “Miracle on Ice”
21 MAR 1980 Protesting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, President Carter announced a U.S. boycott of the upcoming Summer Olympics in Moscow
22 SEP 1980 Iraq invaded Iran
4 NOV 1980 Ronald W. Reagan elected U.S. President
1981
SF in El Salvador. Special Forces arrived in El Salvador to train its soldiers in their war against leftist rebels. This training mission lasted until February 1992.
160th Aviation Battalion Activated at Fort Campbell, KY. Provisionally activated on 15 August 1981, the battalion, better known as Task Force-160, was comprised of units from the 101st Airborne Division.
Contextual events
20 JAN 1981 Iran released the remaining 52 Americans hostages after 444 days of captivity
30 MAR 1981 President Reagan was shot by John Hinckley, Jr. in a failed assassination attempt
6 OCT 1981 President Anwar Sadat of Egypt assassinated; he was succeeded by Hosni Mubarak, who was sworn in on 15 OCT
1982
Realignment. The U.S. Army JFK Special Warfare Center designated as a separate TRADOC activity when CONARC split into FORSCOM and TRADOC.
1st Special Operations Command (P) Activated at Fort Bragg, NC.
Contextual events
28 JAN 1982 BG James L. Dozier was rescued after being held captive for 42 days by the Italian terrorist group Red Brigade
2 APR 1982 Argentina invaded the Falklands Islands; British victory in the subsequent war hastened the downfall of military rule in Argentina
30 JUN 1982 Deadline passed with the Equal Rights Amendment three states short of ratification
25 AUG 1982 U.S. Marines landed in Lebanon as part of a multinational force to oversee the evacuation of Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) guerrillas under Israeli siege
13 NOV 1982 The Vietnam Veterans Memorial was dedicated in Washington, DC
1983
Department of the Army Authorized a Special Forces Tab For Wear by Qualified Soldiers. The tab bore the same colors as those used for Special Forces Shoulder Sleeve Insignia.
Operation URGENT FURY. The 1st & 2nd Ranger Battalions conducted a parachute assault on Point Salinas airfield in Grenada. On 25 October, elements of TF-160 and ARSOF elements participated in the assault on the Richmond Hill Prison. Tactical PSYOP teams broadcasted surrender appeals to People’s Revolutionary Army soldiers and their Cuban advisors. CA helped the Grenadian government transition to post-Communism.
Contextual events
23 MAR 1983 President Reagan announced the Strategic Defense Initiative, a space-based missile defense program, to defend the U.S. against nuclear attack
1 SEP 1983 Soviets shot down a Korean airliner killing 269 passengers, including a U.S. Representative, after the flight deviated into prohibited Soviet airspace
25 OCT 1983 The U.S. invaded Grenada to protect American citizens and remove the Cuban-aligned Revolutionary Military Council
1984
Physical Security Support Element Activated in Berlin, West Germany. Replaced Detachment A (39th SFOD).
1st SFG Reactivated at Fort Lewis, WA.
Rangers Received Colors. 3rd Ranger Battalion and the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 75th Regiment received their colors at Fort Benning, GA.
Contextual events
16 MAR 1984 William Francis Buckley, CIA station chief in Beirut, was kidnapped, and later tortured and killed by Islamic Jihad
8 MAY 1984 Soviet Union announced it would boycott the 1984 Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles
12 OCT 1984 The Provisional Irish Republican Army attempted to assassinate British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
6 NOV 1984 President Reagan was reelected
2-3 DEC 1984 A chemical explosion and fire in Bhopal, India, killed more than 23,000 people
1985
160th Aviation Battalion Reassigned. It transferred from 101st Airborne Division to 1st SOCOM.
PSYOP MOS Established. Psychological Operations Specialist Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 96F established. Implemented 16 October 1985.
Contextual events
16 MAR 1985 Associated Press reporter Terry Anderson was taken hostage in Beirut by Hezbollah, and held six years
14 JUN 1985 Hezbollah hijacked TWA Flight 847, and beat Navy SW2 Robert D. Stethem to death
10 JUL 1985 Greenpeace vessel Rainbow Warrior was sunk by French agents in Auckland, New Zealand
7 OCT 1985 Cruise ship Achille Lauro hijacked by Palestinian terrorists
1986
75th Infantry Regiment Redesignated the 75th Ranger Regiment at Fort Benning, GA.
112th Signal Battalion Reactivated at Fort Bragg, NC. Placed under 1st SOCOM to provide enhanced communications capabilities for ARSOF.
129th Aviation Company. Activated 129th Special Operations Aviation Company at Hunter Army Airfield, GA. On 16 June 1988, the unit was inactivated and formed the nucleus of A Company, 3-160th.
160th Special Operations Aviation Group (SOAG) Activated at Fort Campbell, KY. The 160th Aviation Battalion and the 160th SOAG co-existed until 1990.
Contextual events
28 JAN 1986 U.S. space shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after takeoff, killing all 7 on board, including schoolteacher Sharon Christa McAuliffe
5 APR 1986 Libyan agents detonated a bomb at a discotheque in West Berlin, killing 3 people, including 2 U.S. soldiers, and injuring over 200 others
15 APR 1986 U.S. conducted air strikes near Tripoli and Benghazi, in Libya, in response to Libyan support for international terrorism
26 APR 1986 An accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, in northern Ukraine, released radiation that spread across Europe
1987
TF-160 “Night Stalkers” DUI Approved.
Special Forces Branch Established. Created the 18-series Military Occupation Specialty (MOS) and the 180A MOS for Special Forces Warrant Officers.
USSOCOM Activated. DoD activated the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) at MacDill AFB, FL, under GEN James L. Lindsay. It provided unified command and control for all special operations forces.
13th Support Battalion (Special Operations) Redesignated. 13th Support Battalion (Special Operations) redesignated as the 528th Support Battalion (Special Operations) at Fort Bragg, NC. Constituted in the Regular Army to provide dedicated logistics support to 1st SOCOM.
Operation EARNEST WILL. The first combat action involving USSOCOM elements began in the Persian Gulf. Elements of 160th SOAG deployed to the region and operated off Mobile Sea-Based Platforms (Operation PRIME CHANCE) to protect re-flagged oil tankers and interdict Iranian gunboats.
Active and USAR Civil Affairs and PSYOP Units Assigned to USSOCOM.
Contextual events
5 MAY 1987 Joint Congressional hearings into the sale of U.S. arms to Iran in exchange for the release of hostages, and money to finance anti-Sandinista “Contras” in Nicaragua, the “Iran-Contra Affair,” began
17 MAY 1987 USS Stark hit by two Iraqi missiles, killing 47 U.S. Navy sailors
12 JUN 1987 President Reagan challenged Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev to “Tear down this [Berlin] wall”
8 DEC 1987 The U.S. and Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, leading to the destruction of nearly 3,000 missiles by June 1991
1988
160th Aviation Battalion Reorganized into 160th Aviation Regiment Under the U.S. Army Regimental System.
First Non-Commissioned Officers Academy (NCOA) Class Convened at USAJFKSWCS.
5th SFG Relocated From Fort Bragg, NC, to Fort Campbell, KY.
Operation MOUNT HOPE III. MH-47 Chinooks from 2/160th recovered a Soviet-made Mi-24 Hind helicopter from the desert of northern Chad.
Initial Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS) Course Began at SWCS. The class lasted for three weeks.
U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) Formed Provisionally at Fort Bragg, NC. On 1 December 1989 it was formally activated as a Major Army Command (MACOM) and the Army Service Component Command for USSOCOM.
Contextual events
16 MAR 1988 Iraq dropped chemical bombs on the Kurdish town of Halabja, resulting in international condemnation
20 AUG 1988 A formal ceasefire ended the 8-year-long Iran-Iraq War
8 NOV 1988 George H. W. Bush elected U.S. President
14 NOV 1988 The PLO recognized Israel’s right to exist, declared Palestine an independent state, and called for an international peace conference
21 DEC 1988 Libyan intelligence agents detonated a bomb on Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people, including 189 Americans, in retaliation for the 1986 U.S. bombing campaign against Libya
1989
1st Special Warfare Training Group Formed at the USAJFKSWCS. It consolidated many of USAJFKSWCS’ training and support management functions within one unit.
PSYOP Response to Hurricane Hugo. 6th POB personnel deployed to Saint Croix and the U.S. Virgin Islands as part of JTF-140 to provide Humanitarian Relief after Hurricane Hugo.
U.S. Army Reserve Special Operations Command (P) Activated.
Operation JUST CAUSE Began in Panama. USASOC’s first combat operation began in Panama in support of the XVIII Airborne Corps/JTF-South. The Ranger Regiment conducted parachute assaults at several locations, and elements of the 7th SFG and 617th SOAD conducted missions around the country. Other SOF elements, supported by the 160th SOAG, participated in key missions, including the rescue of Kurt Muse from the Modelo Prison.
PSYOP products encouraged Panamanian Defense Forces to surrender and with CA elements enhanced the safety of the civilian population. The 528th Support Battalion provided a Forward Arming and Refueling Point for aviation assets, and a wide array of logistics support to Army Special Operations Forces elements in theater. The 112th Signal Battalion deployed teams to create secure communications links for deployed Special Operations elements.
Contextual events
15 FEB 1989 The last Soviet troops departed Afghanistan
10 MAY 1989 Rioters in Panama protesting against fraudulent election results were attacked by Manuel Noriega’s forces
4 JUN 1989 Chinese troops killed hundreds of pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square
9 NOV 1989 East German guards allowed thousands of Berliners across the border into the western part of the city, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall and foreshadowing the collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe
20 DEC 1989 In Operation JUST CAUSE, U.S. troops invaded Panama to remove Manuel Noriega
1990
USAJFKSWCS Reassigned. U.S. Army JFK Special Warfare Center and School reassigned from TRADOC to USASOC. This gave USASOC control of all ARSOF components, with the exception of forward-deployed units.
160th Aviation Regiment and SOAG Combine to Become 160th SOAR. An administrative formality, the 160th Aviation Regiment combines with HHC, 160th SOAG to become the 160th Aviation Regiment (Special Operations), consolidating Special Operations Aviation units under one Command. The 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment was assigned to USASOC.
3rd SFG was reactivated at Fort Bragg, NC.
5th SFG Supported Operation DESERT SHIELD/STORM. 5th SFG operational in Southwest Asia in support of Operation DESERT SHIELD. Established a Special Forces Operating Base at King Fahd International Airport in Saudi Arabia.
Deployment Order for Operation DESERT SHIELD. Elements of 3rd, 5th, and 10th SFGs, and the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment depart for the Middle East. During DESERT SHIELD, and later DESERT STORM, they conducted Foreign Internal Defense, Special Reconnaissance, Direct Action, Personnel Recovery/Combat Search and Rescue, and Coalition Support missions.
3rd-7th SFG Relocated From Panama to Fort Bragg, NC. Company C remained in Panama, eventually relocating to Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, before moving to Fort Bragg.
PSYOP MOS 96F converted to 37F.
ARSOF Reorganizations. 1st SOCOM redesignated as U.S. Army Special Forces Command (Airborne) at Fort Bragg, NC. That same date, the 112th Signal Battalion (Special Operations) (Airborne) was assigned to U.S. Army Special Forces Command. Also, the U.S. Army Reserve Special Operations Command was inactivated and the U.S. Army Civil Affairs/Psychological Operations Command (USACAPOC) created and assigned to USASOC.
Contextual events
3 JAN 1990 Noriega surrendered to U.S. forces
25 APR 1990 Violetta Chamorro became president in first peaceful transition of power in over 50 years in Nicaragua, after defeating the Sandinista candidate in February elections.
2 AUG 1990 Iraq invaded Kuwait, leading to Operations DESERT SHIELD and DESERT STORM
3 OCT 1990 East and West Germany were formally reunified
8 OCT 1990 A symbol of globalization, the first McDonald’s restaurant opened in mainland China
Post-Cold War
Post-Cold War
1991 – 2000
The end of the Cold War led ARSOF to reorient from countering communist aggression to promoting democracy, mitigating humanitarian crises, and confronting rogue actors. In the waning days of the Cold War, ARSOF provided key support to the mission to remove Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega during Operation JUST CAUSE. During Operations DESERT SHIELD/STORM, ARSOF was critical to the U.S.-led coalition’s defense of Saudi Arabia and liberation of Kuwait. Other ARSOF deployments during the 1990s included United Nations peacekeeping, non-combatant evacuations, and multilateral efforts in Somalia, Haiti, the Balkans, throughout Africa, and in Latin America. In addition, there were increased terrorist attacks against U.S. targets, culminating in the devastating 11 September 2001 attack that cost nearly 3,000 American lives.
1991
PSYOP Supported Operation DESERT STORM. The Joint Psychological Operations Task Force (JPOTF) disseminated more than 25 million leaflets, hundreds of video and audiotapes, Voice of the Gulf radio broadcasts, and loudspeaker messages.
Rangers Deployed to Operation DESERT STORM. 1st Ranger Battalion deployed through 15 April 1991.
160th SOAR Conducted CSAR Mission. Pilots and crew from two 3/160th Black Hawks, and a security element from 5th SFG rescued an Air Force pilot behind Iraqi lines. One of the few downed-pilot recoveries of the war, it was the only one conducted under night vision goggles.
3-160th SOAR Extracted 5th SFGODA. 3-160th MH-60 Blackhawks extracted a compromised reconnaissance 5th SFG ODA under fire.
Company B, 96th CA Battalion Occupied as Salmon in Iraq. Occupation ended on 24 March 1991.
Operation PROVIDE COMFORT. 4th POG and Civil Affairs units assisted the Kurds in Northern Iraq. Their operations continued until 24 July 1991.
Operation PROVIDE COMFORT. 10th SFG conducted operations in Northern Iraq and Turkey.
Contextual events
27 FEB 1991 U.S. President Bush announced that U.S. military objectives in Operation DESERT STORM were met, having defeated the Iraqi army and liberated Kuwait
12 JUN 1991 Russia held its first presidential election, won by Boris Yeltsin
25 JUN 1991 Slovenia and Croatia declared formal independence from Yugoslavia; war followed
18-21 SEP 1991 Hard-liners in the Communist Party attempted a coup against Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev; its failure weakened both Gorbachev and the Communist Party
18 NOV 1991 Yugoslav People’s Army massacred hundreds of Croatian civilians after a three month siege that destroyed the city of Vukovar
25 DEC 1991 Gorbachev resigned as president, and the Supreme Soviet dissolved the Soviet Union the following day
1992
Long-term process of fielding MH-60Ks, MH-47Es, and MH-60Ls began. 1/160th was to receive the MH-60Ks and Defensive Armed Penetrators; 2/160th was to receive the MH-47Es; and 3/160th was to get aerial refuelable MH-47Ds from 2/160th.
Hurricane Andrew Hit SE U.S. A POTF deployed to Dade County, FL, to provide public service announcements for the humanitarian effort. The 112th Signal Battalion dispatched teams to provide communications support for Special Forces working in the affected area.
Operation RESTORE HOPE. Elements of the 4th POG and 96th CA Battalion deployed to Somalia as part of the U.S.-led Unified Task Force (UNITAF) Somalia.
Contextual events
7 APR 1992 The U.S. and European Community recognized Bosnia-Herzegovina’s independence from Yugoslavia; Bosnian Serbs began bombarding Sarajevo, and pursued “ethnic cleansing” of Bosniaks
29 APR 1992 Riots ensued after five Los Angeles police officers were acquitted for the beating of Rodney G. King, killing 63, injuring thousands, and resulting in over 6,000 arrests
30 MAY 1992 UN enacted economic and diplomatic sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro due to their failure to respect a ceasefire in Bosnia-Herzegovina
4 NOV 1992 William J. ‘Bill’ Clinton elected U.S. President
1993
Operation RESTORE HOPE. The 5th SFG established Forward Operating Base 52 in Mogadishu, Somalia.
CA and PSYOP Officially Designated Special Operations Forces.
Rangers Deployed to Operation RESTORE HOPE. 3rd Ranger Battalion deployed to conduct combat operations.
JSOTF Task Force Ranger is Formed in Somalia. Secretary of Defense, Leslie ‘Les’ Aspin Jr., directed the forming of a joint special operations task force (JSOTF) (named Task Force Ranger) in Somalia. The Task Force is formed as a result of attacks made by Somali warlords on American and United Nations forces and installations conducting humanitarian assistance missions. All elements of Task Force Ranger arrive in Somalia by 28 August.
Elements of Task Force Ranger Captured Osman Atto. Atto, a senior adviser and chief financier for warlord Mohamed Farah Aideed, and three bodyguards were detained in a daylight raid near the Digfer Hospital in Mogadishu. During the raid, for the first time U.S. helicopters received heavy Rocket-propelled Grenade (RPG) fires from Somali militia.
Operation GOTHIC SERPENT. TF RANGER (Ranger and SOF elements) conducted operations in Mogadishu, Somalia, to capture leaders of Warlord Farrah Aideed’s forces. The largest combat action since Vietnam, it ended badly when two MH-60 helicopters were shot down and eighteen soldiers killed in the ensuing rescue attempt. MSG Gary I. Gordon and SFG Randall D. Shughart earned the Medal of Honor, awarded posthumously, for their defense of the crew of one of the Black Hawks.
Contextual events
26 FEB 1993 Islamic terrorists detonated a truck bomb at the World Trade Center attempting to bring down the Twin Towers, killing 6 and injuring over 1,000
19 APR 1993 The 51-day standoff between members of the Branch Davidian religious sect and federal agents near Waco, Texas, ended when the group’s compound was destroyed by fire, killing nearly 80 people
5 JUNE 1993 24 Pakistani troops serving in a UN peacekeeping force were killed in Mogadishu, Somalia
13 SEP 1993 Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Accords, agreeing to limited Palestinian autonomy
1 NOV 1993 Treaty of Maastricht went into effect, establishing the European Union
1994
Diving Tower Became Operational. Free Ascent Diving Tower at the Special Forces Underwater Warfare Operations (SFUWO) School became operational.
USAR 11th and 12th SFGs Inactivated.
Operation UPHOLD DEMOCRACY. 1st, 2nd and 3rd Ranger Battalions, elements of 160th SOAR, and the 3rd SFG prepared to deploy from the aircraft carrier USS America (CV-66) as part of an invasion of Haiti. 3rd SFG formed the ARSOTF. The invasion was cancelled and replaced by a peacekeeping mission, Operation UPHOLD DEMOCRACY, where 96th CA and Army Reserve CA elements, along with PSYOP forces deployed to Haiti to aid in restoring Jean-Bertrand Aristide to the presidency.
Military Freefall Parachutist Badge Approved. Initially only for qualified soldiers assigned to USASOC; unrestricted wear authorized on 7 July 1997.
Contextual events
6 APR 1994 The Hutu majority rose up against the Tutsi minority government, killing over 800,000 in three months during the Rwandan genocide
4 MAY 1994 Cairo Agreement granted limited self-rule to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and Jericho; Yasser Arafat returned from exile on 1 JUL to lead the Palestinian Authority
10 MAY 1994 Nelson Mandela became South Africa’s first black President
11 DEC 1994 Russian troops stormed the secessionist republic of Chechnya, launching a war that killed 100,000 by the end of the decade
1995
USAR 11th and 12th SFGs Inactivated.
10th SFG Relocated to Fort Carson, CO.
Operation JOINT ENDEAVOR. Elements of the 1st, 3rd, and 10th SFGs deployed to Bosnia. 160th SOAR supported ARSOF and NATO forces from December 1995 until April 1996.
112th Signal Battalion fielded five forward-deployed signal detachments, to provide a ‘crashout’ communications capability to the overseas Theater Special Operations Commands. The detachments were designated:
112th Signal Det. - Europe
112th Signal Det. - South
112th Signal Det. - Pacific
112th Signal Det. - Central
112th Signal Det. - Korea
3rd PSYOP Battalion Activated at Fort Bragg, NC. Personnel came from the PSYOP Dissemination Battalion.
PSYOP Support to Operation ASSURED RESPONSE. Mission was a Non-combatant Evacuation Operation in Liberia.
U.S. Army Special Operations Support Command (SOSC) Activated at Fort Bragg, NC. Subordinate units included the 528th Support Battalion and the 112th Signal Battalion.
Operation JOINT ENDEAVOR. CA elements ordered to Operation JOINT ENDEAVOR in Bosnia, beginning years of CA involvement in the Balkans.
Contextual events
6 JAN 1995 Bomb-making materials and plans for ‘Operation Bojinka,’ the downing of a dozen jetliners by terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda, discovered in Manila, Philippines
20 MAR 1995 The radical group Aum Shinrikyu released Sarin gas in the Tokyo subway system, killing 13 and injuring over 5,000 people
19 APR 1995 Timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, killing 168
2 JUN 1995 Serbians shot down a USAF F-16; CPT Scott Grady rescued six days later
14-16 JUL 1995 Over 7,000 Bosniak men massacred by Serbs at Srebrenica
14 DEC 1995 The Dayton Agreement ended the war in Bosnia
1996
Operation ASSURED RESPONSE. A Non-combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO) in Liberia was supported by 160th SOAR and 10th SFG.
United Nations Humanitarian Efforts in Rwanda and Zaire. Civil Affairs and PSYOP units deployed to support the UN mission.
Contextual events
2 JAN 1996 U.S. troops entered Bosnia as part of a peacekeeping mission
APR 1996 Pogrom against Tutsis in Zaire resulted in a refugee crisis in Rwanda that ignited conflict between the two countries, and a series of wars across sub-Saharan Africa that killed roughly 4 million people by 2003
25 JUN 1996 Khobar Towers bombed in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. servicemen
27 JUL 1996 At the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, a bomb planted by a domestic terrorist detonated in the Centennial Olympic Park, killing 2 and injuring over 100
26 SEP 1996 Taliban stormed the presidential palace, and the Afghan government withdrew from capital city, Kabul; Taliban occupied the city the following day
5 NOV 1996 President Clinton reelected
1997
Contextual events
1 JUL 1997 Hong Kong was formally returned to China after 150 years of British rule
31 AUG 1997 Princess Diana died in an auto accident
5 SEP 1997 Mother Teresa of Calcutta died; she was canonized in 2016
4 DEC 1997 133 countries signed a UN prohibition on the use of land mines
1998
Operation JOINT FORGE. Four reserve PSYOP elements ordered to support the peacekeeping mission in Bosnia.
PSYOP Regiment Established.
Contextual events
11 MAY 1998 India resumed nuclear testing after a 24-year hiatus, exploding three warheads; arch-rival Pakistan tested five nuclear weapons on 29 MAY
7 AUG 1998 Terrorists linked to Al Qaeda bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224, including 12 Americans, and injuring over 4,500
16 DEC 1998 President Clinton ordered airstrikes against Iraq in response to Saddam Hussein’s failure to comply with UN weapons inspectors
19 DEC 1998 U.S. House of Representatives approved two articles of impeachment against President Clinton
1999
PSYOP in the Balkans. PSYOP units prepared to deploy in support of international humanitarian efforts in that region.
Contextual events
12 FEB 1999 U.S. Senate voted to acquit President Clinton on impeachment charges
12 MAR 1999 Former Warsaw Pact countries Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic formally acceded to the Washington Treaty and joined NATO
24 MAR-10 JUN NATO conducted a campaign of air strikes against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, leading to Yugoslav withdrawal from Kosovo, and the establishment of a NATO peacekeeping force
20 APR 1999 Two students at Columbine High School, Colorado, killed over a dozen people and wounded 21 others; the worst school shooting in U.S. history to date, it shocked the nation
31 DEC 1999 Boris Yeltsin resigned; Vladimir Putin, named Prime Minister in August, became acting President of the Russian Federation
2000
Task Force FALCON in Kosovo. The 75th Ranger Regimental Reconnaissance Detachment’s Team 2 and a C2 element deployed.
Contextual events
24 MAY 2000 Israeli forces withdrew from southern Lebanon, territory they first occupied in 1982
12 AUG 2000 Russian nuclear submarine Kursk destroyed by its own torpedo, all 118 crew killed
12 OCT 2000 Al Qaeda suicide bombers detonated a small boat alongside the USS Cole, harbored in Yemen, killing 17 U.S. sailors and wounding 39
7 NOV 2000 U.S. presidential election between Democrat Albert A. Gore, Jr. and Republican George W. Bush was “too close to call,” forcing an extended ballot recount in Florida
13 DEC 2000 Gore accepted a Supreme Court decision to end the Florida recount, conceding the election to Bush
2001
Philippine Terrorist Group Captured Three Americans. The incident speeded up Operation FREEDOM EAGLE, a SOCPAC initiative where elements of 1st SFG deployed to train select Philippine Army troops. In January 2002 this effort became Operation ENDURING FREEDOM-PHILIPPINES (OEF-P).
Post-9/11 Operations
Post-9/11 Ops
11 SEP 2001 – Ongoing
Soon after 9/11, ARSOF elements spearheaded Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, taking the fight to Al Qaeda, the terrorist organization responsible for the attacks. Since then, ARSOF has remained at the forefront of the global campaign against violent extremism, while posturing to meet ‘near-peer’ threats. With Special Operations soldiers from all ‘tribes’ operating across the world, ARSOF gradually expanded to meet increased operational demands. New organizations included the U.S. Army Special Operations Aviation Command, 1st Special Forces Command, 8th Psychological Operations Group, 95th Civil Affairs Brigade, and 528th Sustainment Brigade (Special Operations).
2001
Contextual events
9 SEP 2001 Ahmad Shah Massoud, leader of opposition against the Taliban, was assassinated
11 SEP 2001 Al Qaeda conducted a series of terror attacks using hijacked airplanes in New York, Washington DC, and over Pennsylvania, killing nearly 3,000, and injuring over 6,000
20 SEP 2001 In an address before a Joint Session of Congress, President Bush declared a “war on terror” to defeat Al Qaeda, and “every terrorist group of global reach”
7 OCT 2001 Operation ENDURING FREEDOM in Afghanistan began with a coalition bombing campaign against Taliban and Al Qaeda forces
5 DEC 2001 Interim government established in Afghanistan; the Taliban regime collapsed 4 days later
2002
Contextual events
16 JAN 2002 UN Security Council called on member states to enact economic sanctions and an arms embargo, and refuse travel for Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban
23 JAN 2002Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped by Pakistani terrorists, and later executed
29 JAN 2002 In his State of the Union Address, President Bush described Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as an “Axis of Evil” pursuing weapons of mass destruction and supporting international terrorism
12 OCT 2002 Bombings by terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah killed 202 in Bali, Indonesia
8 NOV 2002 UN Resolution 1441 ordered Saddam Hussein to allow international inspectors to dismantle his weapons program or “face serious consequences”
2003
Special Operations Support Command became ‘operationalized’ when its command group deployed to Iraq to provide a command and control headquarters for Logistics Task Force - West.
Operation IRAQI FREEDOM Began in Iraq. Various Psychological Operations units and task forces supported OIF, including the USCENTCOM JPOTF, a Military Information Support Team, and tactical elements. Bravo Forward Support Company, 528th Support Battalion supported Task Force Viking in Northern Iraq. Company B, 112th Signal Battalion provided communications support to Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force - North. Special Operations Support Command became ‘operationalized’ when its command group deployed to Iraq to provide a command and control headquarters for Logistics Task Force - West.
TF HUNTER Formed. Ranger elements combined with HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) to target enemy forces. Also, 160th SOAR inserted Special Forces teams into the Karbala Gap, Iraq, to provide reconnaissance for the conventional forces driving on Baghdad.
Rangers Assaulted Objective BEAVER. 160th SOAR aircraft inserted 2/75th Rangers into Objective BEAVER, a suspected chemical and biological weapons development facility. After providing fire support, the 160th SOAR successfully evacuated the Rangers following a sustained firefight.
Operation VIKING HAMMER. TF VIKING’s mission in Northern Iraq was to reinforce Kurdish Peshmerga forces arrayed against the Iraqi Army and to eliminate the terrorist Ansar Al-Islam group.
3/75th Rangers Assaulted Objective SERPENT.
Rangers Seized Haditha Dam Complex. Company B, 3/75th Rangers, seized Objective LYNX, the Haditha Dam complex northwest of Baghdad, and held it for eight days. On 6 April, 160th SOAR AH-6 Little Birds provided aerial reconnaissance and fire support.
Operation BARRACUDA. Army Special Operations Forces participated in the successful mission to rescue Private First Class Jessica Lynch from captivity in a hospital in Nasiriya, Iraq. She had been captured by Iraqi forces after her unit, the 507th Ordnance Maintenance Company, was ambushed on 23 March 2003.
160th SOAR Provided Support at Lake Thar Thar. 1st Battalion provided fire support and casualty evacuation for ARSOF units in heavy contact at the Lake Thar Thar palace complex.
CJSOTF-AP Assumed Operational Control of the Majority of SOF in Iraq.
Mi-17 HIP Recovered. 2/160th SOAR recovered an Iraqi Mi-17 HIP, airlifting the helicopter out of a date palm grove.
Rangers Assaulted Objective REINDEER. Elements of 160th SOAR provided airlift to 2/75th Rangers in the assault on an Islamic terrorist training camp. More than 70 terrorists were killed.
Operation IRAQI FREEDOM Objectives Changed. CJTF-7 and JPOTF received new guidance directing them to emphasize cooperation with civil authorities and coalition forces in Iraq.
Company D, 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment transfered to Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia.
Contextual events
1 FEB 2003 U.S. space shuttle Columbia disintegrated upon reentry to Earth’s atmosphere
19 MAR 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom began with U.S. strikes on selected targets in Iraq
9 APR 2003 U.S. forces took control of Baghdad, signaling the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime
17 JUL 2003 Swearing-in of Transitional Government in the Democratic Republic of the Congo officially ended the Second Congo War
13 DEC 2003 Saddam Hussein was captured in ad-Dawr, near Tikrit, Iraq
2004
Special Operations Diver Badge Approved.
Contextual events
11 MAR 2004 Terrorists bombed four commuter trains in Madrid, Spain, killing 191 people and injuring over 2,000
30 JUN 2004 U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority transferred governmental authority to the Iraqi Interim Government, restoring Iraq’s sovereignty
2 NOV 2004 President Bush reelected
7 NOV-23 DEC 2004 U.S., British, and Iraqi forces retook Fallujah, Iraq, from Islamic insurgents
26 DEC 2004 An earthquake in the Indian Ocean created a tsunami that killed over 227,000 people in 14 countries
2005
Contextual events
30 JAN 2005 Free elections were held in Iraq for the first time in five decades; Shi’ite and Kurdish parties fared well, but many of Iraq’s Sunni minority boycotted
7 JUL 2005 Islamic terrorists conducted a series of suicide attacks targeting the London transportation system, killing 52 and injuring over 700
29 AUG 2005 Hurricane Katrina made landfall in New Orleans, Louisiana, devastating the city; in all, it killed over 1,000 people and caused over $100 billion in damage
19 OCT 2005 Saddam Hussein’s trial for crimes against humanity began in Iraq
15 DEC 2005 Sunni Iraqis, who boycotted earlier elections, participated in Iraqi parliamentary elections, raising hopes of sectarian reconciliation
2006
Special Troops Battalion of the 75th Ranger Regiment (P) Activated at Fort Benning, GA.
SSI for 95th Civil Affairs Brigade Approved.
USACAPOC Reassigned. The U.S. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command reassigned from USASOC to the U.S. Army Reserve Command. USASOC retained control over active duty CA and PSYOP elements.
PSYOP and Civil Affairs Established as Branches in the Regular Army. USASOC designated as Army Service Component Command of USSOCOM.
Valiant 41. 160th SOAR AH-6 Little Birds provided fire support to ARSOF units in contact near Balad, Iraq, preventing them from being overrun.
Contextual events
22 FEB 2006 The bombing of the Al-Askari Mosque in Samarra increased sectarian tensions and pushed Iraq closer to civil war
27 APR 2006 Construction began on One World Trade Center, the “Freedom Tower” in New York; when completed in 2014, it was the tallest building in the U.S.
7 JUN 2006 Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, was killed in a U.S. air strike
9 OCT 2006 North Korea tested its first nuclear weapon
30 DEC 2006 Saddam Hussein was executed at an Iraqi army base outside of Baghdad
2007
95th Civil Affairs Brigade Reactivated at Fort Bragg, NC. The 97th Civil Affairs Battalion was also activated.
Media Operations Complex Dedicated. The 1LT Michal A. Merkel Special Operations Forces Media Operations Complex was dedicated at Fort Bragg, NC. Merkel was killed in action in Pleiku, South Vietnam, on 24 March 1968.
Special Forces Table of Organization and Equipment 31-815G Adopted. This included the addition of a fourth and support battalions and established a four digit numbering system for Operational Detachments - Alpha.
Contextual events
10 JAN 2007 President Bush announced a temporary surge of troops to stabilize the situation in Iraq
23 MAR 2007 Iranian forces seized 15 British Royal Navy personnel in disputed waters and held them for 13 days
17 AUG 2007 Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the resumption of strategic bomber flights
6 SEP 2007 Israeli aircraft bombed a suspected nuclear weapons facility in Syria
DEC 2007 After the collapse of a “housing bubble,” the U.S. economy slipped into a recession, which lasted until June 2009
2008
98th Civil Affairs Battalion Activated at Fort Bragg, NC.
The First Special Operations Resuscitation Team (SORT) Deployed to Afghanistan. Belonging to the 528th Sustainment Brigade’s Special Troops Battalion, the first Special Operations Resuscitation Team deployed to Afghanistan, supporting Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.
Operation COMMANDO WRATH. Operation COMMANDO WRATH in the Shok Valley, Afghanistan, was conducted by three 3rd SFG Special Forces Operational Detachments - Alpha and an Afghan National Army Commando Company. Staff Sergeant Ronald J. Shurer, II, later received the Medal of Honor for gallantry during this action.
4th-5th SFG Activated at Fort Campbell, KY. Each year thereafter, a 4th Battalion was added to 3rd, 10th, 1st, and 7th SFG, respectively.
Special Operations Theater Support Elements Officially Discontinued and Army Special Operations Forces Liaison Elements Formally Activated.
528th Sustainment Brigade Activated. Formed at Fort Bragg, NC, and assigned to USASOC. Replaced the Special Operations Support Command (SOSC). Subordinate units of the 528th Bde included the Special Troops Battalion (Special Operations) and the 112th Signal Battalion (Special Operations).
Contextual events
24 FEB 2008 Raul Castro officially succeeded his brother, Fidel, as President of Cuba
20 SEP 2008 Suicide truck bomb destroyed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan, killing more than 50 people, and injuring over 250 others
3 OCT 2008 President Bush signed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act granting the federal government authority to purchase and insure troubled assets to stabilize the economy
4 NOV 2008 Barack H. Obama elected U.S. President
26-29 NOV 2008 Pakistani-based Islamic terrorists conducted a series of attacks in Mumbai, India, killing over 160 and injuring over 300
2009
91st Civil Affairs Battalion Activated at Fort Bragg, NC. Lineage was taken from the 1st Civil Affairs Battalion.
RRC Team 1 Conducted a Combat MFF Parachute Infiltration Onto Raker Drop Zone in Afghanistan. Its mission was to emplace vital tactical equipment and included inserting a tandem parachutist.
Team Darby Conducts a Clearing Mission at Objective BERLIN, Afghanistan. Elements of 1st Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment conducted a clearing mission at Objective BERLIN, Afghanistan, killing 35 enemy soldiers.
Contextual events
18 JAN 2009 Israel announced a unilateral ceasefire, ending 22 days of war in Gaza between Israeli Defense Forces and Palestinian paramilitary groups; 13 Israelis and over 1,200 Palestinians were killed
11 JUN 2009 World Health Organization declared “Swine Flu” a pandemic
13 JUN 2009 Protests erupted in response to disputed results of the presidential election in Iran; they lasted into early 2010
28 JUN 2009 Honduran President Manual Zelaya was overthrown in a military coup
2010
Operation UNIFIED RESPONSE. After Haiti suffered an earthquake, an element from the 98th CA Battalion deployed to coordinate the humanitarian response. Soldiers from the 7th SFG, 9th Psychological Operations Battalion, 112th Signal Battalion, and 528th Sustainment Brigade also deployed to support the effort.
USCENTCOM JPOTF Renamed the Joint Information Support TF (Special Operations). The JISTF (SO) was located in Qatar, as the JPOTF had been since 2005.
7th SFG Relocated to Eglin AFB, FL.
USASOC Cultural Support Team (CST) Program Began. This four-year long USASOC program involved the assessment, selection, training, and deployment of seven groups of female soldiers to support Special Operations Forces in Afghanistan by interacting with host nation women and children in order to gather information and build rapport.
‘PSYOP’ vs ‘MISO’. The Secretary of Defense ordered the functional term ‘PSYOP’ replaced with ‘Military Information Support Operations’ (MISO). On 15 February 2011, USSOCOM provided implementation guidance. Army directed completion by September 2011.
Contextual events
12 JAN 2010 A 7.0 magnitude earthquake hit Haiti, devastating the country
FEB 2010 WikiLeaks began releasing large numbers of sensitive U.S. documents, and continued throughout the year
26 MAR 2010 Republic of Korea naval vessel Cheonan was torpedoed and sunk, killing 46 sailors
31 AUG 2010 Operation IRAQI FREEDOM ended; Operation NEW DAWN began the next day
23 NOV 2010 North Korean artillery shelled Yeonpyeong Island, killing two South Korean marines, in one of the worst clashes since the 1953 armistice
17 DEC 2010 Anti-government protests erupted in
|
|||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 72
|
https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_bases/leeuwarden.htm
|
en
|
Air Forces Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmacht)
|
[
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_head.gif",
"https://www.milavia.net/airforces/netherlands/rnlaf_logo.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Netherlands",
"Dutch",
"air",
"force",
"RNLAF",
"Nederland",
"Luchtmacht",
"Royal",
"Koninklijke",
"NATO",
"Europe",
"Leeuwarden",
"Twenthe",
"Volkel",
"military",
"aviation",
"air arm",
"armed",
"forces",
"F-16",
"NF-5",
"C-130",
"KDC-10",
"Fokker",
"Cougar",
"Chinook",
"BO-105",
"F-35",
"JSF",
"aircraft",
"milavia"
] | null |
[
"Niels Hillebrand"
] | null |
Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) with information, history, airbases, inventory and dedicated picture gallery.
| null |
Airbases/Stations: Leeuwarden AB
Leeuwarden air base is located in the northern province of Friesland, as the name suggests the base is in close proximity to the provinces capital city of Leeuwarden. The airbases history can be traced back to 1938 when the glider field was officially opened as Leeuwarden airfield. In those years, the field was primarily used by the KLM airlines until the German invasion in May 1940. The Germans quickly recognized the fields strategic location and transformed the basic field into a proper fighter base for the Luftwaffe. After having been abandoned and mostly demolished by the Germans in September 1944, the base was rebuilt and officially named Vliegbasis Leeuwarden (Leeuwarden airbase) in 1949. Concurrently Leeuwarden became the home of the RNLAFs first jet fighter, the Gloster Meteor. By 1956 it was joined by the Hawker Hunter. These early jets were flown by 324, 325, and 326 Squadron. When in 1964 the new F-104 Starfighter arrived at Leeuwarden, the historically significant 322 and 323 squadrons (former RAF squadron numbers for the Dutch squadrons flying with the RAF during the 2nd World War) were re-established to fly the 104. Besides the fighter-jets, Leeuwarden became the home of the air forces sole SAR unit, 303 Squadron. The unit was established at Soesterberg airbase, but moved in 1977 to Leeuwarden because of the bases close proximity to the weapon ranges on the northern islands.
In 1979, the first two F-16s arrived at Leeuwarden to start the replacement of the F-104. 322 Squadron became the first operational F-16 squadron of the RNLAF in October 1980, 323 Squadron followed one year later. In late 1993, the SAR unit received its first AB-412SP to replace the Alouette III, becoming fully operational in May 1994 with three helicopters of the new type. In addition to the traditional SAR and Tactical Air Rescue tasks, the unit also provides transportation of patients from the island to the mainlands hospitals.
Leeuwarden air base is home to the Future Weapon Instructor Training (FWIT) course for the EPAF nations that are participating in the F-16 Mid-Life Upgrade program. Leeuwarden also hosts exercise Frisian Flag, a large scale annual flying exercise which has seen the participation of many European air forces, even including Finland, and also the US Navy and USAF attended some editions.
In close proximity to the North Sea and the Vliehors weapons range, Leeuwarden air base probably has a secure future as RNLAF fighter base and will welcome the F-35 Lightning II in a few years as the fifth fighter type to be based there in its history.
|
|||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 86
|
https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/nl~minis.html
|
en
|
Defense Department (The Netherlands)
|
[
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/linea2.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^mindf.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^minn.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^minnp.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^minw.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^sosn.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^sosw.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^stsll.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^stslm.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^stslu.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^stsdf.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^cos.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^cos1.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^cgs.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^cds.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^1ccc.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^igk.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^md1.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl~km1.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^kl1.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^klm1.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^cdc.gif",
"https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/n/nl^dmo.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
Ministerie van Defensie
Last modified: 2018-12-15 by rob raeside
Keywords: defense |
Links: FOTW homepage | search | disclaimer and copyright | write us | mirrors
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
Minister of Defense
2010 flag change
Minister of Navy
Flag and pennant of the Minister of Navy (1816-1928)
Minister of War
Secretary of State for Navy
Secretary of State for War
Secretary of State of Defence (1959)
Secretary of State of the Army (1963)
Secretary of State of the Air Force (1963)
Secretary of State of Defence (1971)
Chief of Staff flag - former flag - c. 1939 flag - c.1930 flag
Commander-in-Chief, First Netherlands Corps
Inspector General
Department of Defense
Royal Navy (Koninklijke Marine)
Royal Landforce (Koninklijke Landmacht)
Royal Airforce (Koninklijke Luchtmacht)
Command Service Center (Commando DienstenCentra)
Defense Material Organisation (Defensie Materieel Organisatie)
Other Defense pages:
Military Colors and Standards
Military Police (Koninklijke Marechaussee)
See also:
The Netherlands
The Netherlands - Index of all pages
Minister of Defense
Information based on Album 2000 with details VVKM9 (official flag regulations for the Dutch navy).
The Minister of Defence (Dutch: Minister van Defensie) uses a white flag (2:3) with along the top and the bottom three horizontal stripes red, white and blue, each 1/12th of the flag height. At the centre of the flag a foul anchor with on top of it the lion from the national arms. Placed under it the motto "Je Maintiendrai" (that is French, meaning: I shall maintain) in latin letters. Placed above this the air force eagle, all in gold.
Adopted by Order in Council on 10 April 1957.
The emblem is taken (and modified a little) from the image at the Shipmate site.
About <nl~mindf.gif> at <nl~minis.html>: this was the flag of the Minister of Navy (Minister van Marine). In 1958 the Ministry of War (Ministerie van Oorlog) and Ministry of Navy were merged to form the Ministry of Defense. The title Minister of Defense was introduced in 1956, both ministries were already lead by the same person from 1947.
Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
2010 flag change
The Ministry of Defence has now changed its flag to a generic flag for all Dutch governmental agencies.
Wim Schuurman, 26 January 2018
"12-01-2010 - Bij het ministerie van Defensie is sinds gisteren het nieuwe Rijkslogo officieel in gebruik. Op het ministerie in Den Haag werd dit zichtbaar door het hijsen van de vlag, voorzien van het nieuwe logo."
https://www.defensie.nl/actueel/nieuws/2010/01/12/vlag-uit-voor-nieuwe-rijkslogo-defensie
12 January 2010 - For the Ministry of Defence the new State logo is officially in use since yesterday. At the building of the ministry in The Hague this became visible through the hoisting of the flag, provided with the new logo.
Peter Hans van den Muijzenberg, 3 March 2018
Flag of the Minister of Navy (1931-1957)
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Nov 2006
Minister of the Navy - Source: Flags of All Nations [hms58].
Miles Li, 23 Aug 2005
In september 1928 the Ministry of Navy was merged with the Ministry of War to form the Ministry of Defence.
A flag for the Minister of Defence was adopted by Order in Council of 20 July 1931. This Order in Council does not have a description but only refers to the accompanying plate (with some details for the dimensions).
The flag has a ratio of 2:3 and is white with along the top and the bottom three horizontal stripes red, white and blue, each stripe 1/12th of the flag height. At the centre of the flag two crossed black anchors.
In July 1941 the ministry was split up again, the Minister of Navy continued the flag of the Minister of Defence.
By Order in Council of 1 October 1945 the Order in Council of 20 July 1931 was amended to read "Minister of Navy" instead of "Minister of Defence".
In 1958 the two ministries were merged once more. A new flag for the Minister of Defence (a title re-introduced in 1956 for the combined minister of war and navy) was adopted in 1957. This is flag is still in use.
Mark Sensen, 5 Nov 2006
Flag and pennant of the Minister of Navy (1816-1928)
images by Mark Sensen, 5 Nov 2006
In Order in Council of 16 March 1816 concerning the regulations for marks of honour and salutes, for the Minister of Navy is given: the ordinary Dutch flag with the ordinary pennant (i.e. a red-white-blue pennant) flown above.
<nl^minnp.gif> (pennant) and <nl^.gif> (flag) attached.
(Note: I included <nl^.gif> because <nl.gif> has a bit different shades of red and blue than all other GIFs).
Mark Sensen, 5 Nov 2006
Flag of the Minister of War
image by Mark Sensen, 8 Nov 2006
Minister of the War - Source: Flags of All Nations [hms58].
Miles Li, 23 Aug 2005
A flag for the Minister of War was adopted by Ministerial Order of 12 July 1934.
The flag has a ratio of 3:4 and is white with along the top and the bottom three horizontal stripes red, white and blue, each stripe 1/12th of the flag height. At the centre of the flag the lion from the Dutch coat of arms in red.
Mark Sensen, 8 Nov 2006
Secretary of State for Navy
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Nov 2006
Minister of the Navy - Source: Flags of All Nations [hms58].
Miles Li, 23 Aug 2005
In 1948 the office of Secretary of State was introduced. A flag for the Secretary of State for Navy was adopted by Order in Council of 3 September 1949. This Order in Council does not have a description but only refers to the accompanying plate.
The flag has seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue. At the centre of the flag a white disk, the height nearly equal to three stripes, charged with two crossed black anchors.
Mark Sensen, 5 Nov 2006
Secretary of State for War
image by Mark Sensen, 8 Nov 2006
Secretary of State for War - Source: Flags of All Nations [hms58].
Miles Li, 23 Aug 2005
A flag for the Secretary of State for War was adopted by Ministerial Order of 26 July 1949.
The flag has a ratio of 3:4 and has seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue. At the centre of the flag a white disk, the height nearly equal to three stripes, charged the lion from the Dutch coat of arms in red.
Mark Sensen, 8 Nov 2006
Flag of the Secretary of State of Defence (1959)
image by Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
By Order in Council of 31 December 1959 a flag was adopted for the Secretary of State for Defence in charge of affairs concerning the Royal Netherlands Army and Royal Netherlands Air Force.
The flag has a ratio of 3:4 and has seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue. At the centre of the flag a white disk, the height 96/100 of three stripes, charged with the lion from the Dutch coat-of-arms in gold, accompanied at the top with the air force eagle in gold, and at the bottom the motto "Je Maintiendrai" (also from the Dutch coat-of-arms) in capital latin letters in black on a scroll of gold.
Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
Flag of the Secretary of State of the Army (1963)
image by Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
In 1963 this secretarial department was split, and on 13 December 1963 flags were adopted for both the Secretary of State for Defence in charge of affairs concerning the Royal Netherlands Army, and the Secretary of State for Defence in charge of affairs concerning the Royal Netherlands Air Force.
The flag of the former has a ratio of 3:4 and has seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue. At the centre of the flag a white disk, the height 96/100 of three stripes, charged with the lion from the Dutch coat-of-arms in gold and at the bottom the motto "Je Maintiendrai" (also from the Dutch coat-of-arms) in capital latin letters in black on a scroll of gold.
Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
Flag of the Secretary of State of the Air Force (1963)
image by Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
The flag of the Secretary of State for Defence in charge of affairs concerning the Royal Netherlands Air Force has a ratio of 3:4 and has seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue. At the centre of the flag a white disk, the height 96/100 of three stripes, charged with a flying eagle in gold, at the top the royal crown in gold.
(The wings of the eagle extending a little outside the disk).
Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
Flag of the Secretary of State of Defence (1971)
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
In 1971 the three separate secretaries of state for navy, army, air force were replaced by a single secretary of state.
A flag of seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue was adopted by Order in Council on 20 October 1971.
Mark Sensen, 12 Nov 2006
Chief of Staff
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
Chief of Defence Staff (Chef Defensiestaf). Seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue, with in the centre a green circle with a diameter 4/10th of the flag height. In this circle four swords.
Adopted with three sword by Order of the Minister of Defence on 13 December 1974.
I assume the swords stand for the military branches: navy, army, air force and (service independent from the army in 1998) marechaussee (military police).
Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
In Vexilla Nostra [vxn] 238 (July-September 2003) I found the confirmation that the swords stand for the military branches, and that the marechaussee became independent from the army in 1998.
However, it also says that the the handles of the old version were brown, while at the new version they are yellow. At my GIFs I had them both light brown. The blades are white, which I forgot to mention.
Mark Sensen, 18 Oct 2003
Since monday 5 september 2005, the "Chef Defensiestaf" ("Chief of Defence Staff") of Dutch defence has a new title, namely "Commandant der Strijdkrachten" ("Commander of the Armed Forces").
See "Chef Defensiestaf nu Commandant der Strijdkrachten".
As far as I know the flag hasn't changed.
Mark Sensen, 6 Sep 2005
Chief of Staff former flag
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
Chief of Staff c. 1939 flag
image by Jarig Bakker, 31 May 2005
"Wie, Wat, Waar? 1940", an annual published by the Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad in Nov. 1939, shows a flag for the "Chef v.d. Generale Staf": white, bordered orange; in center a white 4-pointed star fimbriated orange, charged with a lion rampant with in its left paw a bunch of arrows and in its right paw a sword, all orange. The star is surrounded by four three-pointed crowns, and c. 16 spots arranged circularly, all orange.
At the time General Reynders was the Chief of Staff. After the second world war this flag was apparently replaced by another one - less conspicuous.
Jarig Bakker, 31 May 2005
Are you sure that the proportions are NOT 2 to 3?
Miles Li, 23 Aug 2005
Chief of Staff c. 1930? flag
image by Jarig Bakker, 23 Jun 2005
In "The International Flag Book in Colour", by Pedersen, 1971 [ped71] is a flag for the Chief of the Defense Staff:
white field, bordered orange, charged with two olive branches in saltire, enclosing 4 6-pointed stars, placed 1,2,1, all yellow.
Pedersen explains: or Joint Services Commander-in-Chief - introduced c. 1930.
Derkwillem Visser, in "Gemeentevlaggen en Wapens Koninkrijk der Nederlanden", 2001, has the same image, attributed to "Opperbevelhebber Land- en Zeestrijdkrachten - omstreeks 1939" (commander in chief Land and Sea forces, c. 1939).
Jarig Bakker, 23 Jun 2005
Chief of Defence Staff ("Commanding General, Netherlands and National Sector" according to [hms58]).
Miles Li, 23 Aug 2005
Commander-in-Chief, First Netherlands Corps
image by Miles Li, 24 Aug 2005
Commander-in-Chief, First Netherlands Corps - Source: Flags of All Nations [hms58].
Miles Li, 24 Aug 2005
Inspector General
image by Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
Inspector General Armed Forces (Inspecteur-Generaal der Krijgsmacht).
Seven equal horizontal stripes red-white-blue-white-red-white-blue, with in the centre a circle with a diameter 4/10th of the flag height. This shows in circular form the emblem of the Inspector General, which is orange with a blue cross over all, the lion from the national arms on the centre of the cross.
Adopted by Order of the Minister of Defence on 26 March 1982.
The Inspector General of the Netherlands Armed Forces is the ombudsman for the Defence organisation. The functions of Inspector General for the Army (est. 1945), Inspector General for the Navy (est. 1946) and Inspector General for the Air Force (est. 1953) were merged on 1 January 1970. All these functions were until 1976 held by Prince Bernhard. I've seen photos of Prince Bernhard with the badge on his uniform. I don't know if the similarity between the emblem and the royal flag is a coincidence or not.
Mark Sensen, 5 Oct 2003
Department of Defense
image by Stefan Lambrecht, 17 Jan 2008 http://www.flagchart.net
Mark Sensen spotted this link.
Info: On all military establishments on which daily the Dutch flag is hoisted it is allowed to hoist the flag of the military division. This flag is hoisted immediately after the national flag and lowered immediately before the national flag, if it is impossible to hoist and lower them simultaneously.
The measurements have to be equal or smaller than the national flag. The divisional flag may be used also at public presentations outside the military establisments. They have been included in the flag-catalogue.
It is allowed to use old divisional flags, but only in the military establishments.
Defense Department (Ministerie van Defensie (including the Central Organisation))
Stefan Lambrecht, 19 Mar 2005
Royal Navy (Koninklijke Marine)
image by Stefan Lambrecht, 17 Jan 2008 http://www.flagchart.net
Royal Landforce (Koninklijke Landmacht)
image by Stefan Lambrecht, 17 Jan 2008 http://www.flagchart.net
Royal Airforce (Koninklijke Luchtmacht)
image by Stefan Lambrecht, 17 Jan 2008 http://www.flagchart.net
Command Service Center (Commando DienstenCentra)
image by Stefan Lambrecht, 17 Jan 2008 http://www.flagchart.net
This used to be Defense Interservice Command (Defensie Interservice Commando)
Defense Material Organisation (Defensie Materieel Organisatie)
image by Stefan Lambrecht, 17 Jan 2008 http://www.flagchart.net
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 33
|
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/lockheed-martin-and-royal-netherlands-air-force-celebrate-rollout-of-the-first-dutch-operational-f-35-300786894.html
|
en
|
Lockheed Martin and Royal Netherlands Air Force Celebrate Rollout of the First Dutch Operational F-35
|
[
"https://www.prnewswire.com/content/dam/prnewswire/homepage/prn_cision_logo_desktop.png",
"https://www.prnewswire.com/content/dam/prnewswire/homepage/prn_cision_logo_mobile.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company"
] | null |
[
"Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company"
] |
2019-01-30T13:28:00-05:00
|
/PRNewswire/ -- Dutch and American officials celebrated the roll out of the first operational F-35A Lightning II for the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) at...
|
en
|
/content/dam/prnewswire/icons/2019-Q4-PRN-Icon-32-32.png
|
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/lockheed-martin-and-royal-netherlands-air-force-celebrate-rollout-of-the-first-dutch-operational-f-35-300786894.html
|
FORT WORTH, Texas, Jan. 30, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Dutch and American officials celebrated the roll out of the first operational F-35A Lightning II for the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) at Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) in Fort Worth, Texas, commemorating a transformational leap in capability for the future of the Netherlands' national defense.
"Receiving this F-35 at Leeuwarden Air Base later this year is going to be a huge driver for change for our Air Force and will have tremendous impact on the relevance of our Air Force as part of the coalition," said Lt. Gen. Dennis Luyt, Commander, RNLAF. "We want to be among the best air forces of the world, and the platform of F-35 allows us to do that."
Various distinguished government, military and industry guests joined Luyt in attendance at the ceremony including Lockheed Martin Chairman, President and CEO Marillyn Hewson; State Secretary, the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs Mona Keijzer; and Special Envoy F-35, the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs Maxime Verhagen.
"From the very beginning of the F-35 program, the Netherlands has been a key partner in developing, testing, improving, and maintaining this remarkable aircraft," said Hewson. "Dutch suppliers have provided high-volume production, structural-design support, and advanced technologies, and Dutch aircraft and personnel continue to support ongoing testing and operations for the worldwide F-35 fleet. As we look to the future, the Netherlands will serve as a sustainment hub in the European region for maintenance, repair, overhaul, and upgrade projects."
Following the ceremony, the aircraft is scheduled to ferry to Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, where F-35A pilot training takes place. The aircraft is the first operational F-35 and the third Netherlands jet delivered to date. The first two Dutch F-35s were delivered in 2013 and are at Edwards AFB, California, supporting operational testing. The RNLAF plans to acquire 37 F-35As.
F-35 Program Economic Impact in the Netherlands
Dutch industry, including 25 suppliers to date, have benefitted from the F-35 program with contracts awarded for high technology work. As estimated by the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs, the F-35 program has already generated more than $1 billion USD in contracts for Netherlands industry, creating thousands of direct and indirect jobs for the Netherlands over the life of the program.
To date, more than 360 F-35s have been delivered and are now operating from 16 bases worldwide. Ten nations are flying the F-35, seven countries have F-35s operating from a base on their home soil, five services have declared Initial Operating Capability, and two services have announced their F-35s have been used in combat operations.
With stealth technology, supersonic speed, advanced sensors, weapons capacity and increased range, the F-35 is the most advanced, survivable and connected aircraft in the world. More than a fighter jet, the F-35's ability to collect, analyze and share data, is a powerful force multiplier that enhances all airborne, surface and ground-based assets in the battlespace enabling men and women in uniform to execute their mission and return home safely.
For additional information, visit our website: www.f35.com/netherlands.
About Lockheed Martin
Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 105,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services.
SOURCE Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company
Related Links
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 90
|
https://www.govisland.com/history
|
en
|
The History of Governors Island
|
[
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1177268595783098&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/nut.png",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/joost-hartgers-map.png",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Judgement-of-Wouter-van-Twiller.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Howard_Pyle_2.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/A-view-of-NY-Governors-Island-the-River-andc-from-Long-Island.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/New-York-from-Governors-Island.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/ar114400-cropped2_2021-07-14-214821_vukv.png",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/Wilburgovernor.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/09245u-2.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Bowling-Alley.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Burger-King.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Bus-Stop_moore.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/96A09.002.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/96A09.152-1_2021-07-15-134406_boog.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/ESTO-_Copyrighted2.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/SoissonArrival3crop.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Opening-Weekend-027.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Friday-June-11-068-4.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/150711_73729.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Schenck-Govs-Island-2013_06_09-_DSC4090.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Schenck-Governors-Island-2013_09_28-DSC_2996.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Schenck-Governors-Island-2013_09_28-DSC_3265.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/150711_73610.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/150711_73677.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/150712_75032_Comp.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/2015DS34.403_2021-07-15-135548_lknk.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/Schenck-Governors-Island-2015_10_15-DSC_1644.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/DG-TGI-7-18-15-8310.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/DG-TGI-7-18-15-8296.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/TGI10-16-Trey_Pentecost-181028-gi-trick-or-treat-84.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/TGI10-21-Trey_Pentecost-190531-gi_new_ferry-240-1.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/TGI10-24-acgi19_NewEarthCeremony_BrianJGreen_22.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/05_Southeastern-Promenade.jpeg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/_historyImage/DJI_0051-copy-2.jpg",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/snow-discovery-hill.png",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/schenck-moving-chains-web-2.png",
"https://gov-island-site.s3.amazonaws.com/history/_historyImage/climate-sized-for-web.png",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=447185458957932&ev=PageView&noscript=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Governors Island is a 172-acre island in Upper New York Bay, approximately 800 yards from the southern tip of Manhattan.
|
en
|
../../favIcon_32x32.ico?v=2
|
Governors Island (en-US)
|
https://www.govisland.com/history
|
THE BRITISH COME TO THE ISLAND
1664
In 1664, the English captured New Amsterdam, renamed it New York, and took Nutten Island (the British mispronunciation of the Dutch name). The city and the Island switched hands between the British and the Dutch over the next decade until the British regained exclusive control of the Island for “his majesties fort and garrison."
BRITISH GOVERNOR'S RESIDENCE
1699
The Island was renamed “Governors Island”, and reserved for the “benefit and accommodation of His Majesty’s Governors.”
BECOMING PART OF NEW YORK
1750
Governors Island was made part of the British territory of New York County under the Montgomerie Charter. The Charter was a typical method of colonial governance that expanded the city’s powers under British rule. The Charter gave the city some judicial powers and control over the establishment of ferries, docks and construction of public buildings.
THE BEGINNING OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
1776
On June 7, 1775, just two months after the first major dissent in the colonies, the British were unable to continue occupying New York. British forces withdrew to Canada to replenish supplies and forces before attempting to retake the city, including Governors Island.
BATTLE AGAINST THE BRITISH
1776
After the British withdrew from the Island, continental troops fortified the Island for fear of advances by the British Royal Navy. At the Battle of Brooklyn, the British Army overpowered General George Washington and his men, and American forces retreated from Long Island and Governors Island. The city and the Island were occupied by the British and used as their North American military headquarters for the rest of the American Revolution.
BRITISH WITHDRAWAL
1783
At the end of the Revolutionary War, British troops withdrew from the city on November 25. This date would be celebrated as "Evacuation Day," a city holiday for the next century. The British Royal Navy departed the Island on December 4th, and the Royal Navy surrendered to the Continental Army.
FORTIFYING A NEW REPUBLIC
1794 - 1800
After the American Revolution, the state of New York inherited all lands owned by the British, including Governors Island. In 1794, with the country in need of a system of coastal defenses, the fledgling government began to fortify the Harbor, including construction of a fort, later to be named Fort Jay, on high ground in the center of the Island. In 1800, New York transferred the Island to the U.S. government for military use.
FORT JAY, CASTLE WILLIAMS AND SOUTH BATTERY
1806 - 1812
Between 1806 and 1809, the U.S. Army reconstructed Fort Jay and renamed it Fort Columbus (in 1904, the name would be changed back to Fort Jay). Castle Williams, the second of three historical forts, was built on a rocky outcropping facing the harbor. In 1812, the South Battery, the third fort on the Island, was constructed. During the War of 1812, artillery and infantry troops were concentrated on Governors Island. The recently built fortifications deterred a British invasion, sparing New York the fiery fate that befell Washington, D.C.
ISLAND EXPANSION
1912
Physically, the Island changed greatly during the early 20th century. Using rocks and dirt from the excavation of the Lexington Avenue Subway and dredge from New York Harbor, the Army Corps of Engineers supervised the deposit of 4,787,000 cubic yards of fill on the south side of Governors Island. This fill was used to add 103 acres of flat, treeless land, increasing the size of the Island to 172 acres by 1912.
WORLD WAR I
1917
In the first act of the war by U.S. armed services, the 22nd Infantry Regiment stationed on Governors Island seized all German-owned cruise ships and ship terminals in the Hudson River in Manhattan and Hoboken. Within weeks, the ships would be used to transport most of the two million American soldiers to France to fight in the war.
The 22nd Infantry stayed on the Island for the duration of the war, protecting the supply depot and vital infrastructure between New York City and Washington, D.C.
CONNECTION TO THE CITY
1922
With the arrival of the 16th Infantry Regiment on Governors Island and Fort Jay in 1922, a strong connection was forged between the U.S. Army and the citizens of New York City. The regimental band marched in the city parades and had an Army camp at the 1939 World's Fair, while the public was invited to watch polo matches and mock battles staged on the Island.
WORLD WAR II
1941
Between the two world wars, the Island served as an important headquarters for Army ground and air forces. By World War II, the U.S. First Army used it as its headquarters. Originally established in Europe in 1919, the First Army initiated their planning efforts for the D-Day invasion on Governors Island. The D-Day invasion led to the American landing in Normandy, and the liberation of Europe.
THE ARMY DEPARTS
1965
In the 1960s, U.S. Army continued to construct barracks and apartment buildings on the southern portion of the Island. The Island remained an army post and quiet neighborhood for military families until November 1964. In response to changing military technology and budget constraints, the U.S. Department of Defense announced the pending closure of Governors Island and the Brooklyn Navy Yard.
COAST GUARD INSTALLATION
1966
In 1966, the Island was transferred to the United States Coast Guard. The Island became the Coast Guard's largest installation, with a self-contained residential community of approximately 3,000 and a commuting population of another 1500. Under the Coast Guard, the Island was the home of the Atlantic Area Command, the Maintenance and Logistics Command, and the Captain of the Port of New York.
A BACKDROP FOR HISTORY
1986-1993
Over the years, Governors Island served as the backdrop for a number of historic events. In 1986, the Island was the setting for the relighting of the newly refurbished Statue of Liberty by President Ronald Reagan. In 1988, President Reagan hosted a final meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev on Governors Island, and in 1993, the United Nations sponsored talks on the Island to help restore democratic rule in Haiti.
THE FIRST VISITORS
2003
National Park Service rangers gave the first guided tours of the Island to approximately 4,000 visitors between June and October.
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
2006
8,000 visitors came to Governors Island during 2005, the first year the Island was open to the public.
STARTING WITH PARKS AND PUBLIC SPACE
2007
The decision was made to start the redevelopment of Governors Island with a design competition for new parks and public open space. The acclaimed landscape architecture firm West 8 was selected to design the Governors Island Park and Public Space Master Plan, which marked an important first step in the transformation of Governors Island.
That same year, GIPEC demolished a derelict Super 8 Motel on the Parade Ground, opening up more green space for the public to enjoy.
PICNIC POINT AND FERRIES FROM BROOKLYN
2009
Ferries began running from Brooklyn for the first time. Picnic Point opened on the southern tip of the Island and the 2.2 mile promenade was opened to pedestrians and cyclists. With more to do and see than ever, the Island welcomed more than 275,000 people in 2009.
FIRST YEAR ROUND TENANTS
2010
The Urban Assembly New York Harbor School and the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council Art Center became the first year-round tenants on Governors Island. The Harbor School, a New York City public high school, restored Building 555 on the Island’s western shore to provide a college-preparatory education built on New York City’s maritime experience. The Lower Manhattan Cultural Council restored a large portion of Building 110 near Soissons Landing as a year-round shared, multidisciplinary space providing a retreat style artist residency and public exhibitions.
A PUBLIC SPACE MASTER PLAN
The West 8-designed Governors Island Park and Public Space Master Plan was released in 2010. The plan encompasses 85 acres of public open space on the Island, including new visitor amenities and improvements to the landscapes of the Historic District, a new park on the Island’s southern end, and a new 2.2 mile promenade around the perimeter.
THE CITY TAKES RESPONSIBILITY FOR GOVERNORS ISLAND
In April 2010, Mayor Bloomberg and Governor Paterson reached an agreement on the future of Governors Island. The City of New York, now responsible for Governors Island, created the Trust for Governors Island and charged it with the operations, planning and redevelopment of the Island.
CASTLE WILLIAMS OPENS TO THE PUBLIC
2011
After an extensive rehabilitation project in 2011, the National Park Service opened Castle Williams to the general public for the first time in the fort's 200-year history.
PARK GROUND BREAKING
2012
The Trust broke ground on the first phase of construction for the Island’s new park and public spaces, along with an ambitious capital program to bring the Island’s infrastructure into the 21st
century.
IMPLOSION!
2013
In the early morning of June 9, 2013, Building 877 was imploded with 200 lbs of dynamite. The derelict 11-story apartment building on the southern end of Governors Island, where Outlook Hill and the ballfields now stand, had been vacant since 1996. Demolition debris was later used in the construction of The Hills.
NEW PARK
2014
The first 30 acres of new park opened to the public in May 2014. On land that was once flat and featureless, visitors were now able to enjoy a meal in Liggett Terrace, play or nap in Hammock Grove, or play sports on the Play Lawn. Potable water was restored as well, which was another major milestone readying the Island for its future.
THE HILLS ARE ALIVE
2016
The Hills, the culminating feature of the new park and public spaces, opened to the public nearly one year ahead of schedule.
EXPANDING THE PUBLIC SEASON
2017
In 2017, Governors Island remained open to the public through October for the first time, allowing visitors to experience its scenic settings in a new season.
GOVERNORS 1 LAUNCHES
2019
The Trust for Governors Island commissioned Rhode Island-based Blount Boats to construct a brand-new vessel, the Governors 1, to increase service between the Island and Manhattan during the public season. The 400-passenger new ferry launched in summer 2019.
LMCC'S ARTS CENTER OPENS
2019
Following its use as a venue for artist studios, Lower Manhattan Cultural Council and the Trust partnered on a renovation of Building 110 into the first permanent home for the arts on Governors Island. LMCC’s Arts Center includes galleries for exhibitions and installations, space for public programs, year-round studio areas for up to 40 artists, and a café.
A CENTER FOR CLIMATE SOLUTIONS
2020
In September 2020, Mayor Bill de Blasio and the Trust for Governors Island announced plans to develop a Center for Climate Solutions as part of the Mayor’s Recovery Agenda. The Center would bring together a cross-disciplinary community of researchers, educators, advocates, innovators and policymakers to create, test and implement the solutions our urban environments need today and in the decades to come. With its millions of visitors and unique waterfront and ecological resources, Governors Island can serve as an inspiring example of sustainable and resilient urban development and an unparalleled destination for broad public participation and engagement.
GOVERNORS ISLAND ARTS LAUNCHES
2022
In 2022, the arts and cultural programs presented by the Trust officially launched as Governors Island Arts, and the program debuted two ambitious commissions—Moving Chains by Charles Gaines (pictured) and The Open Orchard by Sam Van Aken, each years in the making.
THE NEW YORK CLIMATE EXCHANGE SELECTED TO ANCHOR THE CENTER FOR CLIMATE SOLUTIONS
2023
In April 2023, following a two-year competitive process, New York City Mayor Eric Adams and the Trust for Governors Island announced the selection of the New York Climate Exchange, led by Stony Brook University, as the anchor institution for the Center for Climate Solutions. The Exchange, scheduled to open in 2028, will be a first-of-its-kind, cross-sector nonprofit organization dedicated to climate research, solution development, education, workforce training, and public programs on Governors Island.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 92
|
https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/category/exhibition-review/
|
en
|
exhibition review – alexanderadamsart
|
[
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/cropped-bookshelf.jpg",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/salvador-dali_lenigme-du-desir-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/salvador-dali-soft-construction-with-boiled-beans-1936-c2a9-philadelphia-museum-of-art-philadelphia-pennsylvania-the-louise-and-walter-arensberg-collection-c2a9-fundacio-gala-salvador-da.jpg?w=832",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/paul-delvaux-pygmalion-1940-royal-museums-of-fine-arts-of-belgium-brussels-photo-dart-speltdoorn-fils-bruxelles-c2a9-foundation-paul-delvaux-sint-idesbald-sabam-belgium-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/jackson-pollock-the-moon-woman-cuts-the-circle-1943-paris-centre-pompidou-musee-national-dart-moderne-centre-de-creation-industrielle-c2a9-centre-pompidou-mnam-cci-dist.-rmn-grand-palais.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/img_0042-7.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/img_0050-7.jpg?w=734",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/img_0045-8.jpg?w=596",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/zdzislaw-beksinski-polish-art-1.jpeg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/800px-untitled_painting_by_zdzislaw_beksinski_1984-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/untitled-174-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/e9e13366d9f4e033d13b3a9186da15aa-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1_popr_low_res-1.jpg?w=792",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/joy-gerrard_abortion-rights-protest-after-roe-versus-wade-falls-philadelphia.-june-24-2022_2022_hi.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/joy-gerrard_women-rights-freedom-rally-for-protestors-in-iran-berlin-october-22-2022_hi.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/paula-rego_untitled-8_2000_hi.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/paula-rego_death-goes-shopping_2009-10-_hi.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/cosimo-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/dsc_8023-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/dsc_8061-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/nils-jendri-1-1.jpg?w=800",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/blavatar/0291ae2b54039af55be40b3f17d0b8cf23a6354a56134dc35a4614f6b8576d41?s=48",
"https://attackthesystem.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/cropped-il_794xN.994005672_egjg-1.jpg?w=48",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cropped-img867.jpg?w=48",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cropped-img867.jpg?w=50",
"https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cropped-img867.jpg?w=50",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Alexander Adams"
] |
2024-07-04T09:33:34+01:00
|
Posts about exhibition review written by Alexander Adams
|
en
|
alexanderadamsart
|
https://alexanderadamsart.wordpress.com/category/exhibition-review/
|
Since 1988, I have seen plenty of exhibitions of Surrealist art, perhaps more than the curators of “Imagine: 100 Years of Surrealism” (21 February-21 July 2024, Royal Museums of Fine Art, Brussels). Every time the subject comes up in an exhibition schedule, I experience weariness tempered by anticipation at the chance to see iconic works. Institutions must consider how to come up with an attractive display with suitable pieces that will appeal to visitors. Adding some scholarship helps, as does including rare works and unfamiliar names. Attaching the event to an anniversary implies some significance. The current exhibition in Brussels marks a century since the publication of André Breton’s first Surrealist manifesto and includes all these aspects. The result is a solid survey of the movement with plenty to distinguish it from previous thematic.
Brussels was one of the centres of Surrealism. French-speaking Belgians received Parisian publications as they appeared and quick trave between the capitals meant that as soon as Surrealism was defined, it was disseminated and adopted by a handful of Belgian poets and artists. There were two or three different Belgian groups active within a few years of the emergence of Surrealism in 1924. In addition to René Magritte (who would spend three years in Paris working with the core of the Paris Surrealists), there was collagist-poet ELT Mesens and writers Paul Nougé, Louis Scutenaire and Paul Colinet. Later, artists Paul Delvaux and Marcel Mariën joined the movement, although Delvaux was always more detached than the others.
The exhibition (organised in collaboration with the Centre Pompidou, Paris) draws on the collection of the collection of Belgian Symbolism held by the Musée Fin-de-Siècle. While the Surrealists were a little reticent about declaring their affiliation to such a recent movement (with some Symbolists still working as late as 1950), there are many parallels, as well as outright borrowings. All the talk of Freud, Marx and Trotsky made this group of self-declared revolutionaries self-conscious about acknowledging the fantasies of the dusty decadents they grown up imbibing. In fact, some of them were taught at art school by Symbolists.
Including the full Glove suite of etchings (1881) by Max Klinger is very welcome, reminding one of Klinger’s consummate technical brilliance and the inventiveness of the compositions. Jean Delville (1867-1953) has a distinctive dreaminess and a propensity towards Medieval imagery, much in the line of the Pre-Raphaelites. There is Fernand Khnopff’s Caress of the Sphinx (1896) – considered beguiling or risible by various observers – and number of other pictures from Musée Fin-de-Siècle. Léon Spilliaert is more of a stretch, stylistically speaking, but his nocturnes with an air of mystery align well with Magritte and Leonor Fini.
Max Ernst is shown extensively, with works of all periods and styles coming from multiple lenders (Brussels museums not having many Ernsts). He is considered the quintessential Surrealist due to his productivity, the range of his styles, his influence and his status as one of the founders and prime movers of the Paris group. The Birth of the Galaxy (1969) is an impressive late painting; its force comes about through its simplicity and the obviousness of its creation – spraying stencils that are constructed (lower) and trouvé (upper). It is part of Ernst’s cosmological preoccupations that coincided with the rise of abstraction as the dominant language of the avant-garde. It would be enlightening to show the late (post-war French) Ernsts alongside some abstract art by contemporaries (Gottlieb, Francis, Still, etc.). Arp, Bellmer, Masson, Brauner, Miró, Lam, Matta, Ray and other familiar Surrealists are shown, if not in depth then with characteristic pieces. Tanguy comes out well. In particular an early, rough canvas suggests that my coolness towards his earliest phase could well be misplaced. Tanguy, who never went to art school and had to teach himself painting, started his artistic career as a Surrealist and was exhibiting as he was learning his craft and repertoire. Tanguy became formidably consistent and skilful in a short time, which seems to have left his early work treated as juvenilia by most commentators.
Given current attitudes, it would be easy to look at large reproductions of pieces by Nusch Éluard, Jacqueline Breton is an feminist attempt to insert Surrealist wife-muses as overlooked artists. Actually, they were included in a set of postcards issued in 1937. However, women artists are more apparent here than in the earliest compendia of Surrealists. Tanning is well represented, as is Toyen.
Mercifully, British Surrealists are virtually omitted. Additions of new names are (on the whole) disappointing. Marion Adnams has a good Magrittean painting of stone-lamps, but the evidence of the examples included demonstrates exactly why you have never heard of Rita Kernn-Larsen (1904-1998), Jane Graverol (1905-1984), Valentine Dobrée (1894-1974) and Judit Reigl (1923-2020). (No Louise Bourgeois? No Leonora Carrington?) A strong painting (A Pair of Anthropomorphic Birds (1944)) by Belgian Suzanne van Damme (1901-1986) whets the appetite. Leonor Fini is good as an image maker, albeit not a subtle one; Dorothea Tanning has two substantial canvases from the 1940s and 1950s, which confirm her status as a major Surrealist painter. Dora Maar is included by Lee Miller omitted. Three unpersuasive paintings by Toyen do not live up to the crispness of her drawings. Toyen is no painter. The single painting by Kay Sage (1898-1963) is a rather lifeless affair, which suggests that her painting lacks the delicacy of Tanguy and energy of Tanning.
Did I say that I enjoyed the exhibition? Seeing good work and bad (alongside new work) gives the exhibition an enervating impact. Certainly, indifference would be the worst possible response to such provocative material.
Viewing paintings first hand allows one to spot details easily overlooked in reproduction. For example, in The Robing of the Bride (1940) by Ernst, the green imp who I assumed was crying is more likely to be picking his nose. The bride herself has a multiple head, with the bird head/mask facing us and a woman’s eye visible lower down, in a gap in the feathers. Likewise, Dalí’s Premonition of Civil War: Construction with Boiled Beans (1936) (which has travelled from Philadelphia) displays its astonishing qualities – combining magically smooth blending, persuasive modelling, microscopic detailing, a wide range of mark-making and intensity of colour (especially in the sky) – are not fully appreciable in reproduction. While it is not the last great painting Dalí made, it surely must be the apex of his achievements as a Surrealist.
Salvador Dali, Soft Construction with Boiled Beans (1936) © Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) The Louise and Walter Arensberg collection © Fundació Gala-Salvador Dalí, Figueres Sabam Belgium
Magritte’s Empire of Lights (1954) is a sublime expression of the liminal – the edges of day and night, nature and civilisation, comprehending and feeling – literally using its serrated foliage edge to hypnotise the eye. The great stillness – a profoundly meditative quality – infuses this haunting image. A masterpiece by Francis Picabia (1879-1953) is The Worship of the Golden Calf (1941-2), with a cow’s head on top of a cloaked torso, acclaimed by the upraised hands in the foreground. The colour and paint handling is wonderfully fresh and unlaboured. It does not matter that Picabia filched the motif from a published photograph; he made it his own and imbued it with ecstatic potency, giving the painting its ominous quality. Painted during the era of dictators, it seems a cutting critique of the adulation of the masses.
Delvaux has three classic paintings from the 1930s (including a loan from the Peggy Guggenheim Collection, Venice), the most fascinating of which has to be the rarely seen Visitation (1939). Formerly in the Baron Urvater collection, it is now in a private collection, this painting is the most psychologically potent picture that Delvaux ever made. A voluptuous nude woman is seated on a stool; a nude boy enters the room, stepping in from a rural street. He gazes at her and she eyes his genitals while proffering her breasts. It is a profane annunciation loaded with nascent sexuality and forbidden carnal excitement.
Paul Delvaux, Pygmalion (1940) Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium, Brussels, Photo d’art Speltdoorn & Fils, Bruxelles © Foundation Paul Delvaux, Sint-Idesbald – SABAM Belgium
It is exciting to see Pollock’s Moon-Woman cuts the Circle (1943), which is not all overworked. Suffused by a Matissean blue, its stenographic calligraphy is roughly filled, feeling airy rather than leaden. An early Barnett Newman shows the future gnomic elder of inscrutable abstraction wrestling with totemic vertical presences – somewhere between trees and personages – and a rough application of paint. Rothko might also have been included to good effect.
Jackson Pollock, The Moon-Woman Cuts the Circle (1943), Paris, Centre Pompidou, Musée national d’Art moderne – Centre de Création industrielle © Centre Pompidou, MNAM-CCI, dist. RMN-Grand Palais, Philippe Migeat, Sa
I unfortunately missed the recently closed exhibition “Histoire de ne pas rire: Le Surréalisme en Belgique” (BOZAR, 21 February-16 June 2024), although I have seen the catalogue (Xavier Cannone, Bozar Books/Fonds Mercator, €49, French or Dutch). That exhibition featured some of the same artists as “Imagine”, as well as others omitted. As any exhibition of Belgian Surrealism should, it includes art and manifestoes by proto-Surrealism of Magritte confreres Pierre-Louis Flouquet and Victor Servranckx. Collages by the Surrealist poets feature heavily. E.L.T. Mesens’s collages are bold and intense; those by Max Servais feature women cut from pornographic publications. Servais’s Equinoxe (1935) is disturbing scene of a beach intruded upon by écorchés, a female nude and a bloody corpse. The drawings of Armand Simon and photographs and collages of Marcel Lefranq (Leo Dohmen less so) make a creditable case for these artists and we may see them appear in future exhibitions (should there be space enough, given the glut of rediscovered female Surrealists).
Raoul Ubac’s photographs, which involve extensive studio work of solarisation and montage, are more complex than paintings by some of the more recognised Surrealists. Magritte’s work plays a dominant in this show, especially his Vache and Renoiresque periods, which are often excluded from group exhibitions as being discordant. In spirit, both periods are fully Surrealist in character, although the pictures painted in Renoir’s style are less effective than the regular and Vache works. This deep selection was made possible by borrowing from Musée Magritte (in Place Royale, literally 50m away from BOZAR) has the best collection of Magrittes in the world and has a particularly strong holding of pieces from these brief periods of aberration. The paintings did not sell, so Magritte gave the majority to Louis Scutenaire and Irene Hamoir, the latter of whom donated them to the Belgian state.
Evidence of paintings by Rachel Baes, Jane Gaverol and Roger Van de Wouwer are that they are low-talent followers of Magritte. The last named caused a minor scandal by depicting an ancient Greek statue wearing a soiled sanitary towel and who faced prosecution. Known most for his japes and fractious relationship with Magritte, Marcel Mariën looks better every time I see more of him – a serious and deep artist, when he overcomes a certain flippancy that can intrude.
The BOZAR exhibition included leaflets, periodicals and information related to Surrealism in Belgium, making the catalogue a very useful source for researchers. “Imagine” is a good overview of Surrealism of Paris, Brussels and Europe and an indication of what Surrealism would sow in New York.
Francisca Vandepitte, Didier Ottinger, Marie Sarré, Paolo Scopelliti, Imagine! 100 Years of Surrealism, 2024, Ludion, hardback, 240pp, fully illus., €35, versions in French, Dutch and English
Xavier Cannone, Histoire de ne pas rire: Le Surréalisme en Belgique, Bozar Books/Fonds Mercator, 2024, €49, French or Dutch versions
Recalling Echoes (19 May-1 July 2023, Hales Gallery, London, E1) is the current exhibition of art by Basil Beattie (b. 1935). It is his third solo exhibition at Hales, his London representative. The large works, all made over the last ten years, display new elements as well as familiar ones. The floating steps, rudimentary ladders, roads, caverns and simple tower blocks come from the last 25 years. They show no sign of tiredness nor complacency; the retain their freshness because they are so primal and universal, notwithstanding the personal significance the artist attaches to the motifs. There is plenty of risk here; the exhibition is seething with invention, motival and technical.
The exhibition consists of seven large canvases and 18 untitled charcoal drawings, made over the period 2020-3, using wash, arranged in a block six sheets high and three wide. This assemblage of identically sized sheets (all 14” x 10”/35.5 x 25.5 cm) acts as a treasury of compositions and motifs already established, as well as recording new ones, such as pseudo-hieroglyphs. There are new leads and (perhaps) the promise of firmer, more complicated drawings of definite things in the world, as indicated by the largest canvas in the display. There are also foreboding hints. Ladders here have broken rungs or appear ramshackle; one ladder has split completely asunder. These sturdy primal frames become catastrophically unreliable imply awareness of bodily frailty and ultimate mortality.
A drawing with a meandering, looping heavy line recalls Brice Marden; the buildings echo the paintings of the Metaphysical artists and Guston’s termite-built slabs. Beattie is an admirer of Guston and may be taking from his own memories of a residency in New York City. Other drawn forms stand more aloof, ur-images of steps, ladder, buildings, passages, caverns, roads, grids. In one drawing, a set of stairs enters a welter of dashes, which hangs like a cloud. At least three drawings relate directly to Ladder Red (2021), which is, along with In the Ascendancy (2015), are the most powerful and satisfying paintings here. Ladder Red features grey over painting on a diagrammatic frame, similar to sprues designed for casting. It recalls the paintings Beattie was making in the late 1990s.
Painted over two large canvases placed together, the large In the Ascendancy features a platform – for hunters or perhaps as one finds in railway signal boxes. (The artist’s father worked in the railways.) That structure surmounts a network of bricks/mesh, recalling sturdy constructions, lushly painted, tactile; they are the sorts of forms that the mind’s imaginary hand can reach out and grasp firmly. The tightness of the draughtsmanship of the platform is counterpointed by the janky, skewed outlines of bricks below. The crisp asperity and confidence of the tight drawing makes one wish to have more of such drawing in the paintings. Beattie is such a fluent master of the cursive description that he never needs to be literal or pedantic; however, In the Ascendancy shows that when he chooses to be, he can build wonderful linear structures.
Steps over Fiery Waters (2022) has his sequence of ascending (descending?) grey steps crossing an aerial view of magma-like pools of orange and red. This was perhaps created under the influence of reports of extreme summer weather of high temperature and drought, broadcast last year. The psychedelic light show of puddles of acrylic soaked into the cotton duck links to Beattie’s past – he used colour-field technique in the 1960s and 1970s, with its ethos of soaking, organic forms and absence of distinctive brushwork.
The gestural space-filling scribbles in oil stick (of Close to Beyond (2014)) seem a nod to Pollock’s Stenographic Figure (1942). Beattie was greatly excited to encounter American Abstract Expressionist painting when it reached London in the 1958-62 period, something that would see him begin the first half of his career as an abstract painter working on a large size. Top Up (2013) is a classic example of Beattie juxtaposing fields of a single colour, repeated motifs and outlines. The interaction between solid and hollow forms, recognisable images and abstract elements provides a clear demonstration of Beattie’s pictorial thinking.
Sgraffito incisions in the black overpainting of Outreach (2017) creates a neon effect by revealing pink-and-ochre underpainting, making a wire-like drawn form to balance the impasto. Elsewhere in the painting, black spray paint is used extensively. The qualities of aerosol paint (diffuse, flat, matt) make it often disappointingly insubstantial and difficult to integrate into the facture of an oil painting on canvas. It is best used sparingly (a la Bacon) or used delicately in very controlled compositions (a la Pasmore). Beattie does not seem to have overcome (or at least harnessed it) the void-like effect of black aerosol paint in two paintings where it is deployed (the other is Beyond the Ladder (2022)), as it tends to drain the paintings’ surfaces of liveliness and tension.
A third canvas, Close to Beyond (2014) has less intrusive use of spray paint, not noted on gallery label. Artists often use their corpus as a larder from which they take liberally. Beyond the Ladder is perhaps the only misfire in the show – it is not bad in itself but a recollection of the Circus series of the 1980s. That series, full of geometric forms and primary colours, often floating untethered, always seems less weighty, less profound and irksomely jaunty compared to the art that followed, with its muted colours and earth hues. The floating dab of cadmium yellow and the black triangle feel applied to the surface, not animating or directing the rest of the elements. The playfulness of the Circus paintings is adjacent to arbitrariness and Close to Beyond comes perilously close to that.
The only disappointment is that this exhibition is limited by the relatively modest confines of Hales Gallery and is not the full retrospective at a major venue that the artist’s stature deserves. Given the politics and blind spots of administrators of major metropolitan public galleries today, this is sad but unsurprising. Beattie’s achievements have long been denied the respect and exposure they are due. In any other European country, a painter as great as Beattie would a towering public figure. The urgency, rawness and plangent poetry of Beattie’s images are too potent for apparatchiks who direct our public art spaces – which is exactly what commends his powerful art to all who have eyes to see.
This exhibition – a masterclass in invention and vigorous execution – is highly recommended.
A weighty and disturbing exhibition is The Painter was Kneeling When Painting, a solo exhibition of paintings by Ignacy Czwartos (b. 1966) (24 January-28 May 2023). Czwartos works as both an abstract painter and as a painter of the figure using highly schematised settings for semi-realistic figures. The two areas use the same grounds and devices: muted colours, symmetry, geometric devices, smooth surfaces. The figures are generally taken from photographic sources, rendered accurately but without illusionism, the bodies generic. The first gallery is given to portraits of artists, friends and Czwartos and are modest in ambition and effect, but they prepare us for the following galleries.
The next gallery includes more complex allegorical paintings, again featuring artists such Malevich and Rothko. There are also figures from World War II and references to the German occupation and the death camps. There is a certain amount of queasy wit apparent, with disparate figures juxtaposed to create scenes the resemble Nineteenth Century folk art. Soldiers are painted with bases that are given to toy soldiers. Declarations in German in the Gothic script welcome viewers to the (death-camp) showers. Czwartos takes care with abstract elements to frame his paintings in the manner of devotional prints or altarpieces. It is as if Czwartos had unconsciously prepared himself to become a painter of the images in the final gallery.
The culmination of the exhibition is where Czwartos hits his stride. In the newest paintings the artist blends strikingly stark imagery, Polish history and the iconography of saints, martyrs and Christ. The final room is dedicated to a set of recent paintings about the “cursed soldiers”. These were Poles who fought not only the Germans but also the Soviet and Polish Communists, seeking an independent non-socialist country. As it was, they were not only cursed by Polish Communists and Soviet occupying forces but also by history. So, Polish nationalists supportive of democracy, monarchy, Church and Polish nationhood, became “enemies of the people”. The last resistor was captured and beheaded in 1963; thereafter, all mention of them was deleted from Polish history. Only in recent years has action taken place to research the episode and inform the public about this history – this re-examination is facing entrenched opposition from Communists and descendants of Communists today.
The resistance fighters are painted from passport or service photographs, treated as family trees in a Nineteenth Century book, in oval frames with dates written below. The last fighter is shown carrying his own head, like a martyred saint, flanked by his executioners. Other fighters are depicted chopped into pieces; the faces are accurate depictions based on photographs the Communists took after the executions. These paintings relate to a history not yet absorbed by the population and involves the apparent rehabilitation of “enemies of the people” and so are tremendously controversial. It is in effect, history still in the making. No wonder the paintings, stark and vivid as they are, provoke strong reactions. The earlier paintings are perhaps a little too ludic and caught up in questions of art-world taste and the biographies of artists to be of lasting interest to the average viewer, but the last group is shocking and profound.
Has Czwartos solved the problem that faces any modern History painter in the era of irony? Namely, how can one paint a didactic and narrative account of a historical event in a language that is appropriate, effective, moving, articulate and not anachronistic? Assuming one cannot simply adopt the style of Rubens and start making a traditional narrative painting à la Paul Delaroche, one has to find a way of making art that is true to oneself and one’s time whilst dealing frankly with iconography and morals that conveys clear meaning. This is exactly what has been forbidden us by the norms of contemporary art, which dictate non-narrative art and lack of engagement.
Czwartos has made his History paintings frank it by not hiding his debt to photographic sources, his love of abstract art and his admiration for the effects of devotional painting. He can speak about history in ways that use historical devices (Nineteenth Century photographic presentation, religious art, folk art, documentary photographs) and these become part of the meaning; on top of which, he can push us towards pity, condemnation, curiosity, anger, sadness, all without falling into the trap of ironic distance. For no History painter can eschew the moral message, even if that message is just to enjoin the viewer to look, remember and consider an image. There is distance in Czwartos’s approach – a distance he acknowledges – but not one that makes his involvement with the subject and his whole-hearted engagement with the topics any less true.
To read to this review in full with images, become a paid subscriber on Substack here: https://alexanderadamsart.substack.com/
[Zdzislaw Beksiński, oil on panel, not exhibited]
Last week I visited the Museum of the Archdiocese of Warsaw (www.maw.art.pl), which has a varied and interesting collection of art, antiques, liturgical regalia and church-related archive material. This is a review of only two temporary exhibitions at the museum.
Beksiński from the Anny and Piotra Dmochowskich Collection (June 2021-June 2024) is the group of notable paintings by Zdzislaw Beksiński (1929-2005) paintings, owned by his French dealers. The paintings range from 1970 to the year before the artist’s murder, which was a senseless impulsive killing of an elderly man over a trivial sum. It is hard to detach appreciation of Beksiński’s paintings with the difficult life of the painter. The death of the artist’s wife, the suicide of the artist’s son and the trauma of war, economic decline and social turmoil, which spanned Beksiński’s adult life – as well as his violent death – all seem in congruence with his images of suffering, desolation and entropy. Crucifixes abound, as do mummified personages, bandaged figures. Bones of strange creatures litter misty plains, tendrils of crimson vegetation expand like bloody stains, as powerful winds shred cloths as large as buildings. Bodies exist but we have no inkling of their existence outside of the singular images. Do they have language? What do they eat and how do they reproduce? Are they in pain? Is what we see normal in their world? Who built the strange structures that fill the vistas? So alien are these personages that we cannot map on to them motivation or even agency.
Beksiński loved to describe surfaces in intricate detail, especially the vegetable, textile and petrological. The flatness of figures in the 1990s is an affinity with the immediate post-war style of Modernists, found in Poland and elsewhere. Lighting effects can be somewhat cursory and the ubiquitous smoke/cloud/mist effects are an easy way of concentrating attention on to motifs, which are the sole objects within some paintings. With Magritte, we get the mundane made magical; with Beksiński, we get the macabre made real. The fantastic has wrinkles, texture and discoloration.
Beksiński trained in architecture and the interface between buildings, plants and bodies are a staple of the paintings; they are in some ways close to his contemporary H.R. Giger, best known for his visual conceptualisation of the creatures and environments of the original Alien movie (1979). Beksiński is drawn to the monumental, with the inclusion of tiny figures or trees that turn the central personage into a giant or a structure into a colossal edifice, tall as a mountain. These are scenes that defy reason and explanation, which adds to their cheerless quality, although we may be thrilled at the sublime spectacle of strangeness and massiveness.
[Zdzislaw Beksiński, oil on panel, 1985, 100 x 98 cm, exhibited]
When intimacy appears in Beksiński’s oeuvre, it is of a particularly poignant sort. A 1984 painting here shows two humanoids embracing; they are gnarled, naked and vulnerable, finding solace in one another. We cannot help but think of them as outcasts, using our own bodies as references points. A point of comparison might be the graphic art of Hans Bellmer, whose art featured figures with rearranged anatomies engaging in sexual congress. We do best to class Beksiński as a latter-day Surrealist, as his art involves the incongruous, the fantastic, the sexual and impossible; it is troubling and opens up to us alternative worlds, drawing out unobvious connections. Connections between Beksiński and Bellmer are numerous, ones I would like to discuss at length in future.
[Zdzislaw Beksiński, oil on panel, 1984, 100 x 97 cm, exhibited]
Beksiński’s fantastic faces with deformities or odd combinations are generally the weakest of his art; they seem five-finger exercises in variant making, with relatively little thought given to the impression of the finished painting. What are his weaknesses? Cheap sensationalism, reversion to the familiar, the tendency to obscure as a way as avoiding problem solving, a jejune proclivity to provoke. There is entropy and decay but little we can see that could be called action or dynamic energy. However, the better qualities of his art – its emotional force, inventiveness, memorability, originality, consistency of worldview, congruence of technique, image and mood – surpass those failings.
[Zdzislaw Beksiński, oil on panel, 1979, 73 x 87 cm, exhibited]
These 27 paintings are all oil on board, mainly rectangular, roughly 80 x 60 cm to 130 x 100 cm. The surfaces are quite smooth, in contrast with Beksiński’s early paintings, which were standard Modernist painterly pictures with sgraffito. The surfaces are not inert, as image-driven (rather than material-driven) art often is, with a pleasing attention to the qualities of paint – smooth but not slick. His palette is effectively varied, with earth and cold hues predominating. It is never lively or pretty. Beksiński’s art lacking all humour or wit, but that comes with a refreshing earnestness and absence of irony.
The paintings are accompanied by an exhibition of photographs, taken by Beksiński early in his career, mainly in the 1950s and 1960s (9 March-11 June 2023). These range from the quirky to bleak. There are portraits, some using special effects and montage, some head shots set against large areas on blank space. There are some female nude torsos and some images of industrial entropy, such a mangled chain-link fence. It is not difficult to discern continuation of themes, images and mood from these photographs in the later paintings. I do not know photography well enough to state whether these examples are very distinguished but they do seem typical of mid-century avant-garde photography and reference points for Beksiński’s visual thinking and preferences.
Beksiński was relatively reclusive and did not travel much. Much of his work was sold via his Paris gallery. None of the paintings have titles and Beksiński was reluctant to discuss the interpretation of his art and here we encounter a fault line in the reception. Art critics are wary about discussing what they call art that is not truly fine art because it is too popular, too involved with traditional technique, too close to genre culture in terms of imagery (and fanbase). The interiority of Beksiński’s world – and the very fact it does seem a world – places Beksiński outside the arena of fine art. There are a number a reasons why Bosch is taken seriously but Beksiński is not. One is simply time; Beksiński is simply too close to us to have artistic weight. Another reason is that Bosch’s visions are connected to an obscure aspect of Christian theology, whereas Beksiński’s cosmology (if he has one) is private and unarticulated, without the sanction of religion or spirituality. Also, it has to be said that Beksiński’s art is limited by its lack of potential redemption, joy and emotional range.
This is the first time I have seen Beksiński’s paintings or photographs face to face, despite him being a well-known and influential contemporary artist for decades. You would not encounter this art in any ACE-funded venue in Great Britain. The tyranny of good taste keeps from us art that has been pigeonholed as popular and genre. That might be unremarkable where you had thriving independent venues that bucked such standards and was willing to explore art not approved by the curatorial class, but in our country there is little independence, outside of some commercial galleries and a handful of co-operative spaces. Yet, viewed in its own terms, why should Beksiński be beyond the pale? I take Glenn Brown to be one of the best of living painters and there are more than a few parallels between his painting and that of Beksiński: the technical accomplishment, faultless technique, a preference for smooth grounds, a use of indeterminate pictorial depth, lack of ironic distance, a taste for the bizarre. Is it so gauche to compare the pair? Personally, I would rather spend an hour with Brown or Beksiński’s paintings than with that by any of the Turner Prize nominees of the last decade.
[Zdzislaw Beksiński, oil on panel, not exhibited]
Why should a conceptual stunt be any more highly regarded than the powerful images and strange worlds of Beksiński? Accepting the seriousness of Beksiński and H.R. Giger does not mean accepting Beryl Cook and Jack Vettriano. We should not automatically accord to the painter of fear and bleakness a greater degree of respect than that to a satirical, decorative or comfort-producing painter, that would be just another form of unthinking snobbery. We should not shy away from being discriminating and from shunning and ridiculing art that we find execrable, but only acting like so once we have thought through our objections. It is commonly assumed that we act on emotion and deep affinity and that we rationalise our taste only post hoc with intellectual explanations. That may be so, but such discussion at least helps us (and others) to comprehend what might be our values and taste, even if we come to such understanding in a veiled indirect manner.
Is Beksiński taken less seriously as an artist because he is classed as a horror or sci-fi artist than a fine artist? Does his lack of formal training – especially when coupled with his masterful technique – irk mainstream critics? Doubtless the advent of the internet was both the best and worst thing that happened to the reception of Beksiński’s work. It allowed his imagery to circulate widely and led to recognition, but it also spawned a host of inferior imitators, most amateur (all distributing their work on social-media and art-sharing website) which led to fatigue with Beksiński-type imagery.
It seems that not only snobbery but the self-consciousness of critics that prevents us from expanding our definitions of fine art to encompass the popular painter. “Fine Art” is now in the hands of administrators who loath technical accomplishments and consider aesthetics an imaginary game played by connoisseurs. Why not look to image makers of distinction now that State Art has adopted Amnesiac Art as its vehicle for soft diplomatic power (abroad) and demoralisation of the population (domestically)? We are despised by this cadre. We have nothing to lose in throwing off the shackles of “good taste” of those apparatchiks, if compliance means denying the better part of what art is capable, namely, its capacity to transport us emotionally, the aspiration towards beauty, the development of craftsmanship, the value of the canon, the primacy of the art not the artist (and his skin colour). All these things delighted our forebears and draw derisive coldness from apparatchiks. Keeping the self-conscious, conspicuously educated art-appreciators corralled in this zone of Fine Art (one subject to constant adjustment) is a way of preventing them from forming their own taste, expressing their values, rejecting arbitrary administrative authority and laughing at what appears in State Art venues.
We art lovers are now unpersons; it is time we took up the freedom of the unperson, that is, to have our own standards and be unafraid to express them. After all, who among us will be invited to teach at university, helm a civic museum, advise a government body or become a director of the Arts Council? Why should we care what such officials think about our views? Shouldn’t we want to distance ourselves as much as possible from those gimlet-eyed fanatics and thoughtless drones? Refusing to become independent even after the ritual humiliation of our craft and tradition is the sign of a broken hopeless people. Against all evidence, I hope we are not at that debased level.
To read more of my thoughts on Beksinski follow this link to my Substack channel: https://alexanderadamsart.substack.com/p/the-art-of-beksinski-and-the-tragic
[Image: Joy Gerrard, Abortion Rights Protest after Roe versus Wade falls, (Philadelphia. June 24 2022), 2022 / Ink on paper / 24.4 x 37.5 cm. Courtesy Joy Gerrard and Cristea Roberts Gallery, London © Joy Gerrard]
Art grounded on political protest by Irish artist Joy Gerrard (b. 1971) and Dame Paula Rego RA (1935-2022) is being exhibited in Image as Protest, at Cristea Roberts Gallery, London. Rego’s prints are on the subject of back-street abortions and female genital mutilation (FGM or female circumcision). Gerrard’s paintings in black and white are of crowds, after source photographs that are taken from a high vantage point, including aerial photography. At a distance, the multitudes become cloud-like or similar to pebbles on a beach, occupying a street, scattered over a road junction or public square. Only when the fray at the edges do they gain more recognisably human form. Otherwise, the group remains a pullulating mass, dehumanised at a distance.
In some, we get to see simple faces, mouths caught open in the act of chanting. Her technique is effective. Colour would distract and confuse us. The care taken to depict the settings (buildings, street markings, skies) gives the crowds greater veracity, as we see the phenomenon occurring in a convincing setting. There is talk in a recent catalogue of the influence of Constable. That is not convincing. What happens is that any skilled artist who lavishes care and time on making art must seem to have some commonalities with preceding artists. There are large paintings on canvas and some articulated screens, called “barriers”. These larger paintings are less effective. Ink-wash/watercolour always works better in a reduced field and compressed space; on a large scale, its unsubstantiality is unsatisfying. It is something to do with the ratio of medium presence to ground presence.
Gerrard’s art reminds us of the surveillance of the state (official as well as covert), as well as the medium of the mass broadcast media, which is how the spectacle of the crowd is recorded and transmitted nationally and internationally. It is primarily through spectacle that the mass gathering operates and that is done through recorded media of the photograph and video recording. The disruption, violence, graffiti and closure of thoroughfares is an additional element but it is impact of the visual that lasts longest and becomes an argumentation element. For example, the nationwide demonstration against the proposed allied invasion of Iraq in 2003 is cited as the largest ever public demonstration (dispersed over numerous locations) and the force of the argument is amplified by the sheer numbers present at those events, supported by pictorial representations of it. It supports the argument that the legitimacy of a cause is indicated by the number of supporters, the visual density of the crowd, its capacity to fill and immobilise major streets and squares in a modern city. It is rhetorical device, as are these paintings of crowds and Rego prints centred on lone figures.
[Image: Joy Gerrard, Women, Rights, Freedom, Rally for protestors in Iran (Berlin, October 22, 2022), 2022 / Ink on paper / 29 x 34 cm. Courtesy Joy Gerrard and Cristea Roberts Gallery, London © Joy Gerrard.]
Gerrard’s images of crowds often lack pictorial context. At a great distance, an aerial photograph cannot distinguish between an anti-lockdown protest and the Capitol Building 6 January gathering from a pro-abortion rally or BLM protest. Unless slogans are placed in the painting on visible placards or banners or identifiable flags are shown, context only emerges in titles or captions. So the art is visually ambiguous. It is not generally inherent in the composition of the elements or their handling. In a painting without visible slogans, flags, symbols or individual personnel, the meaning of the gathering is not only ambiguous, it is actually irrelevant. More than that, it is interchangeable and manipulatable. There is a reliance of title to supply meaning. (‘Our Abortions’ (Brooklyn Bridge, New York. May 14, 2022); Women, Rights, Freedom, Rally for protestors in Iran (Berlin, October 22, 2022), etc.) Change the caption from “pro-BLM rally” to “anti-lockdown protest” and you have changed the connotations of the event depicted. Only with careful research (by comparing the painting with source photographs) would the deception be detectable. Art, rather than holding up a true mirror to reality – the verum speculum advocated by the Schoolmen philosophers – becomes a tool for lying.
[Image: Paula Rego, Untitled 5, 1999, Etching / Paper and Image 38 x 48.0 cm / Edition of 17. © Ostrich Arts Ltd. Courtesy Ostrich Arts Ltd and Cristea Roberts Gallery, London]
Rego’s eight Untitled etchings (1999-2000) are small and show pregnant women posed in position they would adopt while trying to induce a miscarriage. Women spread their legs around chair, squat over bowls, lie awkwardly with a wristwatch nearby. Blood trickles from their vagina. The squalor of the women and the indomitability of the metal pail awaiting its contents makes a strong impression. Rego elicits sympathy by showing the rough indignities of approximations of back-street abortions. This is done by portraying the suffering as wholly the mothers’. The blood is her blood, the pain is her pain, she is made ugly and animal like by these processes. The child’s suffering is not quantified because it is invisible, literally hidden within the woman. Visually, it does not exist, therefore is hard to care because of the leap of imagination that would be required. The counter argument – that the injustice is not illegal abortion but abortion itself – is not approached. This partial argument (concealing the full consequences or the other parts of the consideration) extends to the unseen undepicted corollary of clean, clinical, anaesthetised abortions – something that requires no fewer pails of blood and body parts than illegal abortions do.
The series was made to be reproduced in the Portuguese press in the run up to the referendum on the legalisation of abortion. It is claimed that the illustrations were powerful enough to sway the electorate, who voted in favour of legalisation. It would take a tough opponent of abortion not to feel pity for the subjects here. In other prints, the danger to women’s lives from botched abortions is presented in the form of puppet theatres, with caricatural figures and dolls, including real people. The series is joined by two large colour aquatint etchings. In one, a group of grotesque figures, some based on dolls or puppets, is heaped up in a nocturnal scene. One female figure has her legs cruelly trussed together. The artist has dripped red watercolour on it to imply blood.
[Image: Paula Rego, Little Brides with their mother, 2009-2010, Etching with aquatint and spit-bite, Paper and Image 46.4 x 55.4 cm / Edition of 35. © Ostrich Arts Ltd. Courtesy Ostrich Arts Ltd and Cristea Roberts Gallery, London]
Circumcision (2009) is Rego’s depiction of a child undergoing FGM shows the girl being held down while the three women impassively undertake their task. The characters’ expressions are akin to those of women doing the unpleasant but necessary acts of slaughtering of an animal or gutting a carcase. It is an image that provokes a reaction of repulsion and anger, doing so because it refuses to directly depict the bloody violence, which would repulse the viewer into averting their gaze. Through modulation Rego implies but does not describe. However, notice a telling sleight of hand. In Great Britain, FGM is a practice primarily carried out by migrants of sub-Saharan African descent. The child is black but the three women holding her and damaging her genitals are white. In truth, these women would almost always be black. Yet, Rego must have realised that picture of a black child being mutilated by black woman would have presented FGM as an act done by black African adults to black African children, which (in statistical terms) it is. Rego’s liberal conscious prevented her from showing the truth – that FGM (by geographic and religious distribution) is overwhelmingly a black African practice. Rego’s deliberate distortion unwittingly reveals a truth. Namely, that it is precisely the fact that it is migrant groups and non-white individuals who perpetrate this crime that has meant that there are so few prosecutions by the English system where white liberals (who staff the majority of positions in public education, social services and the judiciary) are terrified of being accused of racial insensitivity.
Long practice instilled in Rego absolute confidence in herself and in the commanding presence that well-executed figure drawing has. She had limitations, but within her chosen field she was successful. Gerrard’s paintings also work but obliquely and in ways that are more out of the control of the artist. Whereas Rego made her images from nothing other than her imagination and good use of experience, models and materials, Gerrard finds her images and recognises their potential, perhaps not understanding the mechanisms that operate upon her instincts. Either approach – to summon out of nothing or to find and adapt something pre-existing – is legitimate for an artist, though it tends to impart different qualities.
I would urge everyone interested in rhetoric in the visual arts to visit the exhibition, setting aside their personal views on the subject of abortion. Cristea Roberts Gallery are to be commended for putting on such a show, which is a touch more controversial than perhaps the staff realised in the planning.
Image as Protest: Joy Gerrard & Paula Rego, Cristea Roberts Gallery, London (27 January-4 March 2023)
To read my article “Rules for Rhetorical Art” visit my SubStack blog here: https://alexanderadamsart.substack.com/p/rules-for-rhetorical-art
(c) 2023 Alexander Adams
To see my art and books https//:visit http://www.alexanderadams.art/ To support my work visit https://linktr.ee/alexanderadamsartist/
New exhibition “Post-Vandalism” blends Street Art and fine art in a vigorous, discordant blend.
As Matt McMurry shows me around the gallery he co-founded, he speaks passionately and eloquently about the art around us, which blend fine-art detachment and Street-Art attitude. McMurry talks about the boldness and grasp of colour that graffiti artists acquire and says this is what excited him about the work he chose for Post-Vandalism (Omni Gallery, 56-7 Eastcastle Street, London, W1, 20 October-12 November 2022).
“These artists have gone beyond the street. They’ve left that behind but you can see it even though these are definitely gallery pieces.” We are standing in front of Moses & Taps’s spraypainted tarpaulin concertinaed over a metal footstep that you would find on a van. It has the appearance of a graffer’s intervention in a haulage yard but after contemplation seems more of a knowing reference to John Chamberlain’s crushed-car sculptures of the Sixties.
Occupying territory, promoting personal brands
McCurry talks about Street Artists occupying territory and promoting personal brands. In his previously gallery (in Seattle) he collaborated with Street Artists; in Omni, located just north of Oxford Street and split over two floors, he sees the opportunity to display art that is more ambitious and considered than what is usually found on the street.
The artists selected here carry a punchy no-holds-barred attitude but apply it to work that is more reflective and allusive than what is limited by temporary surface or hasty execution. Openness to material is apparent in the use of found objects and repurposed grounds. Most of the work bridges the space between sculpture and painting. Bram Bram has taken a slice of wall with bathroom tiles and applied paint and stickers; the printed text has degraded to the equivalent of visual static or Francis Bacon’s meaningless Letraset characters. In this piece – as in many of the others – there is a wilful distancing effect. The artists do not hit you with messages or theses, preferring to remain indirect. There is as much obscured, scoured and eroded on these surfaces as there is assertive paintwork.
When political references come, they are oblique. Ricardo Passaporte’s spraypainted scene of politicians fighting in parliament takes the specificity out of the situation, laconically reducing the struggling figures to fuzzy flat shapes. This instance of sordid degeneration of civic life acquires a comforting decorative quality. His painting of cartoon children dancing in a circle appears like a food dye sprayed on to cake icing. Distanced by not diminished, it still has the charm of an illustration of an idealised childhood. A ceramic bust of a Putin-like figure sports a Pinocchio liar’s nose. Perhaps an understandable swipe – the artist is a Ukrainian refugee, now based in France.
Industrial Rococo
Alexandre Mosa Bavard’s Double Goose (2019) is a cement and resin cast of a puffer jacket, part-horror-movie effect, part rococo ceramic. The rococo comes to the fore in Stephen Burke’s freestanding painting-sculpture This Guy Loves His Job 2 (2022), which is equally playful and aggressive. A simple geometric painting is mounted in a section of railing; around the outside are different repelling devices (spikes, hooks, bladed wheels) that act like decorative flourishes one can find in rococo panels or picture frames. McMurry could have easily named this exhibition “Industrial Rococo”.
In another wall piece by Bram Bram – chain-link and tubular steel enlivened with applied stickers – seems a raffish take-off of 1980s Neo-Geo abstraction. More patterning comes in Bavard’s Auber (2022), which has sprayed paint recording where a (now absent) mesh had been draped as a distorted stencil over the canvas surface. Christopher Stead (part of a South London collective) appropriates Jackson Pollock’s spatter in an assemblage that affixes swatches of linen to the support canvas with eyelets. It is as if the artist is making survival raft out of the revered wreckage of Abstract Expressionism, not at all mocking.
Matt McCormick’s 2001 short film The Subconscious Art of Graffiti Removal presents us with a proposition more outright humorous. The film follows the work of municipal workmen overpainting graffiti in Portland, Oregon. The simple effacement of vandalism is presented as an art movement, which – in its deployment of rough, floating patches of paint – echoes the High Modernism of Mark Rothko, Hans Hofmann and the Russian Constructivists. It is thought-provoking in its thesis that the creative drive emerges unconsciously even in the act of covering vandalism and that these blocks of colour have their own muted poetry.
Abstract Expressionism echoed
A more involved engagement with the Abstract Expressionism (in particular, Willem de Kooning’s black period of the 1940s) comes in Nils Jendri’s Ying Ying (2022). Jendri has used areas of black-and-white spray paint, partially masked to introduce unsettling optical effects. The patches, similarity of marks and consistent palette of black and white combine to fool the mind and eye. The calligraphic tautness and austerity make this the most rewarding picture in the exhibition.
Moritz Neuhoff’s large canvas of gestural space-filling is the least successful piece here, precisely because it seems preoccupied with the abstract painting of the 1990s and 2000s. It fills space rather than occupying it.
Post-Vandalism gathers a very wide array of artists from many countries, including Germany, France, Italy, the USA, Ukraine and the UK. It may not be a movement but it has real vitality and edge and that alone is valuable. On top of which, the art itself is playful and striking. It makes a strong overall impression, one not of unity but of shared attitudes. Omni is a gallery to keep an eye on.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 64
|
https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2020-04-03-Boeing-Delivers-First-CH-47F-Chinook-to-Royal-Netherlands-Air-Force
|
en
|
News Releases
|
[
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/737ng.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/737max.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/747-8.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/767.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/777.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/777x.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/787.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/freighters.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/boeing-edge.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/boeing-business-jets.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/flight_testing_the_737max_400x255.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/ah-6-light-attack-reconnaissance-helicopter.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/ah-64-apache.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/airborne-early-warning-and-control.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/air_force_one_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/b-1b-bomber.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/b-52-bomber.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/tx_meganav_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/c-17.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/c-40a.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/ch-mh-47-chinook.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/data-analytics.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/ea-18g-growler.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/f-a-18-super-hornet.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/f-15e-strike-eagle.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/gss_meganav_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/kc-46-tanker.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/maritime-surveillance.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/missle-defence.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/jstars_meganav_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/phantom-badger.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/phantom-eye.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/unmanned-little-bird-h-6u.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/v-22-osprey.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/weapons.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/advanced-space-access.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/boeing-satellite-family.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/crew-space-transportation.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/gps.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/international-space-station.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/path_to_mars_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/sls_meganav_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/united-launch-alliance.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/nav_220_mile_high_lab_400x225.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/kc-tanker-3d-390x220.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/innovation_insitu_390x220.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/innovation_converted_freighters_390x220.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/your_story_our_story.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/centennial_merchandise.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/above_logo_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/history.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/archive_vids_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/boeing_100_70x52.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/100_days_large_right.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/australia.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/brazil.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/canada.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/china.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/france.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/germany.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/india.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/israel.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/italy.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/japan.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/middle-east.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/russia.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/south-korea.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/spain.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/turkey.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/united-kingdom.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/vision.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/bsb-global-engagement-summary.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/environment-eco.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/ethics-compliance.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/human-rights.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/diversity.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/employee-safety.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/education.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/transitioning-military.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/community-engagement.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/100_days_large_right.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/career-areas.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/life-at-boeing.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/benefits.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/college-early-career.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/transitioning-military.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/events.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/my-account.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/search-jobs-lrg-image-link.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/general-information.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/executive_bios.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/company_corp_gov.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/boeing-commercial-airlines.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/boeing-defense-space-security.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/key-organizations.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/tours.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/sign-up_390.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/images/Media_Room_Header_1500x466.jpg",
"https://boeing.mediaroom.com/file.php/97228/320550-RNLAF-309-med-res.jpg?thumbnail=asset",
"http://prnewswire.122.2o7.net/b/ss/boeing.mediaroom.com/1/H.24.3--NS/0",
"https://stats.drivetheweb.com/piwik.php?idsite=1670&rec=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Boeing",
"BDS",
"Boeing Defense Space & Security",
"Chinook",
"CH-47",
"CH47",
"Royal Netherlands Air Force",
"RNAF",
"H-47",
"Cargo & Utility Helicopters",
"Netherlands"
] | null |
[] |
2020-04-03T00:00:00
|
PHILADELPHIA, April 3, 2020—Boeing [NYSE: BA] recently delivered the first CH-47F Chinook to the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF), continuing a track record of on-time deliveries to customers. The RNLAF will operate a fleet of 20 CH-47F Chinooks, the newest configuration in use by countries around the world.
|
favicon.ico
|
MediaRoom
|
https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2020-04-03-Boeing-Delivers-First-CH-47F-Chinook-to-Royal-Netherlands-Air-Force
|
PHILADELPHIA, April 3, 2020—Boeing [NYSE: BA] recently delivered the first CH-47F Chinook with an upgraded cockpit to the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF), continuing a track record of on-time deliveries to customers. The RNLAF will operate a fleet of 20 CH-47F Chinooks, the newest configuration in use by countries around the world.
“The RNLAF made it clear to us that they need the advanced, proven capability of the CH-47F now,” said Andy Builta, vice president of Cargo & Utility Helicopters and H-47 program manager. “I want to thank our phenomenal team for working hard during a difficult situation to safely deliver these aircraft. This is a reminder to all of us of how important Chinooks are to our customers.”
The 20 CH-47F Chinooks will be a fleet equipped with the same state-of-the-art technology as the U.S. Army, including digital automatic flight controls, a fully-integrated Common Avionics Architecture System (CAAS) glass cockpit, and advanced cargo handling capabilities. The common configuration leads to lower overall life cycle costs.
The RNLAF currently flies a mix of F-model Chinooks with the Advanced Cockpit Management System (ACMS) and CH-47D Chinooks.
“It has been a pleasure to work closely together with the U.S. Army and Boeing teams to achieve this milestone,” said Col. Koen van Gogh, Netherlands Defence Materiel Organisation. “The Chinook helicopter is a vital asset for our missions and the in-time delivery certainly supports our operational planning. I salute the Boeing workforce for their continued efforts to make this happen in these troubling times, as well as the U.S. Army officials that helped keep us on track.”
Deliveries to the RNLAF are expected to continue into 2021. Chinooks are currently in service or under contract with 20 international defense forces, including the U.S. Army, U.S. Special Operations Forces and eight NATO member nations.
Boeing is the world’s largest aerospace company and leading provider of commercial airplanes, defense, space and security systems, and global services. As a top U.S. exporter, the company supports commercial and government customers in more than 150 countries. Boeing employs more than 160,000 people worldwide and leverages the talents of a global supplier base. Building on a legacy of aerospace leadership, Boeing continues to lead in technology and innovation, deliver for its customers and invest in its people and future growth.
# # #
Contact
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 31
|
https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/military-note
|
en
|
The World Factbook
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
/the-world-factbook/favicon-32x32.png?v=c3853bf09f084a8b1f66c6c2685054a1
| null |
This entry includes miscellaneous military information of significance not included elsewhere.
|
|||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 53
|
https://pacificwrecks.com/douglas/articles/neiaf.html
|
en
|
The Dutch Air Forces in the Pacific War
|
[
"https://pacificwrecks.com/airfields/australia/pearce/pearce-neiaf-buffalo.jpg",
"https://pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/os2u/A48-2/kingfisher-jig-sideview.jpg",
"https://pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b-25/iafm/b25-nose45.jpg",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/top/donate_now.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/facebook.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/twitter.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/youtube.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/instagram.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
by John Douglas
The Dutch Air Forces were one of the minor players on the Allied side in the Pacific War. Their involvement came from the current country of Indonesia, which at the time of World War II, was administered by the Netherlands, and known as the Netherlands East Indies (NEI). The administration of N.E.I had two colonial air forces, the Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service (MLD) or more often the RNN; and the air service of the Royal Netherlands Indies Army (The MLKNIL). The Royal Netherlands Indies Airline (KNILM) had a Fleet of transports as well.
Netherlands Aircraft
As of December 7, 1941:
Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service (MLD)
33 Dornier flying boats
35 Catalina flying boats
6 Fokker T-IV float planes
Royal Netherlands Indies Army (KNIL)
83 Glen Martin B10 bombers
71 Brewster Buffalo F2A Fighters
17 Curtis Wright W21 Fighters
13 Curtis 75A Fighters
40 Various recon and trainers
The Royal Netherlands Indies Airline (KNILM)
4 Douglas DC-2 Transports
18 Lockheed Lodestar Transports
Other planes were on order but not delivered at this date.
Note: - the number of planes varies, according to the reference.
These planes were disposed throughout a number of locations in the N.E.I.. The first loss to Japanese aggression occurred at Pearl Harbour, when a RNN Catalina was destroyed. 3 Glen Martin Bomber Squadrons and a Buffalo Squadron were posted to the defense of Singapore. Additional Glen Martin Bombers and the Dornlers were deployed to the defense of British Borneo. After a series of battles the survivors of the Dutch Air Forces escaped to Australia. The battle for the defense of the NEI saw Dutch Air Forces lose nearly 300 planes.
Netherlands Aircraft To Australia
That fled to Australia at the fall of the Netherlands East Indies were:
Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service (MLD)
6 Dornier Flying boats
9 Catalina Flying boats
The RAAF acquired 5 of the Dornier flying boats (the other was retained by the MLD/RNN for their use within Australia). 1 Catalina was purchased by the RAAF, as were 28 Ryan STM Trainers and 18 Vought Kingfisher reconnaissance seaplanes. The Dormer (X-24) was used not only for activities within Australia, but also for occasional supply runs up into Dutch New Guinea (Tanoh Merah and Wissel Lakes) as were the two Catalinas, Y-86 and Y-87.
Royal Netherlands Indies Army (KNIL)
1 Glen Martin B10
The sole Glen Martin Bomber was also sold to the US Air Force, and was used operationally by them until August 1944, when it was scrapped.
The Royal Netherlands Indies Airline (KNILM)
3 Douglas DC2
11 Lockheed Lodestar
The 11 Lockheed Lodestars were sold to the US Government, for use as local transport.
Netherlands Regroups & Rearms
31 Bostons and 17 Buffalos, all of which had been ordered by the Dutch government for the defense of NEI, and which were diverted to Australia on the fall of the N.E.I.
These were 5 Mitchell B-25s also intended for the ML-KNIL that were shipped to Australia at this time. Including other B-25s there were a total of 54 Mitchells ordered by the NEI Government. The USAAF took over 49 of these planes, leaving only 5 for the NEI - MLKNIL. These remaining 5 B25s were ultimately transferred to the USAAF as well. The aircrew that arrived in Australia on the fall of the NEI were allocated to 3 different locations and activities.
The RNN/MLD Air Force Crews were sent to Colombo where they formed the Dutch No. 321 Squadron. One RNN air crew was retained in Australia to fly the sole Dornier and later on, two Catalinas that were taken into the fleet of transports use by the N.E.I. Government-in-exile.
The ML-KNIL air crew were sent initially to Amberley, and then on to Canberra, when they helped form a B25 Squadron, 18 (NEI) Squadron, flying under RAAF Operational Control. Ultimately the Dutch were not able to provide enough ground crew or extra gunners to fully staff this Squadron, so the RAAF made up the numbers needed.
18 (NEI) Squadron in effect was a mixture of Australian and Dutch personnel, with a Dutch Commander and an Australian liaison officer commanding the Australian Squadron members. As much as possible Dutch identity was retained (the NEI. Members used Dutch salutes etc).
The initial B-25s were all reallocated to the USAAF and 18 Bostons were supplied in their place. A month later these Bostons were replaced with 18 Mitchells, which took the Squadron some re-equipping to bring them up to a satisfactory standard. 18 (NEI) Squadron transferred to the Northern Territory Australia, in December 1942, operating out of Bachelor A/S for most of the war.
They were in action by February 1943 making raids on Japanese installations in the occupied. Netherlands East Indies and in Timor.
The KLM air crews was send to the US for further training in military aircraft.
In September 1943 new more heavily armed and better equipped B-25s were allocated to 18 (N.E.I) Squadron, replacing their warn out aircraft.
Another group of new B-25s were issued in March 1944 to 18 (NEI) Squadron to replace the B25s then in use.
In February 1945 18 (N.E.I.) Squadron was reassigned to Jaquinot Bay Airfield, immediately to the south of Rabaul in New Britain; which had just been captured by Australian ground forces. The Squadron ground parties had just arrived at Jaquinot Bay, when the squadron was reassigned to Balikipapan. They arrived there in July 1945.
A further B-25 Squadron (119 (NEI) Squadron) was formed in September 1943 but quickly dissolved when manpower shortages become apparent in December the same year. These planes were transferred to the RAAF.
A third NEI Squadron (No. 120) was formed in Canberra in December 1943, flying P40s. It also had the same mixture of Australian and Dutch aircrew and ground staff as 18 (NEI) Squadron. In May 1944 this Squadron began operations in Merauke, Dutch New Guinea. Some of these P40s were posted to the North Coast of DNG, operating out of Noemfoer.
In March and April 1945 18 (NEI) Squadron begin its transfer to Jaquinot Bay, New Britain. In May the transfer was cancelled and the Squadron posted back to the Northern Territory of Australia. 18 (NEI) Squadron finally reached Balikipapan on 14th August 1945.
One 120 (NEI) Squadron Wirraway was lost near Kikori in PNG and several P-40s were lost over the North Coast of DNG. 120 (NEI) Squadron arrived at Jaquinot Bay in May 1945; and was promptly transferred to back in DNG. The RNN Dornier was transferred to the RAAF in October 1944.
Immediately prior to the end of the war, a 4th (19 NEI) Squadron was formed in Canberra. This was a transport squadron, using Lodestars, Dakotas and surplus B-25s plus the two RNN Catalinas. These aircraft had all been on strength for some time and the Squadron establishment was a formality.
In June 1945 120 (NEI) Squadron commenced operations out of Biak. 6 of their P40s were lost over Manokwari in a one week period in early August 1945. By the end of the war 120 (NEI) Squadron had lost 14 pilots and 11 aircraft. 18 (NEI) Squadron lost 112 aircrew and 21 B-25s. Several support aircraft were lost as well, including a Dakota which was found 44 years later near Mossman in New South Wales.
What remains of the Dutch Air Force in the Pacific today?
The Buffalos have all vanished, except as future rebuilt projects, including one rebuild currently underway at the Military Aviation Museum RNIAF, at Soesterberg in the Netherlands. The Dorniers are all gone, but a few B25s remain. Some of the earlier B-25s when decommissioned by the 18 NEI Squadron, had a further life with American and Australia air forces, and may still remain in other markings as wrecks.
Of the pre war fleet, a number of the Ryan trainers have survived and can be seen at air shows in Australia. Several are flying today, and others are under restoration. There is a OS2U Kingfisher being rebuilt at Wangeratta that was probably one of these purchase by the RAAF for the NEI order. Charles Darby noted one KNIL A-20C at Vivigani in the early 1970s, later served with the RAAF and recovered and restored by them.
The Indonesian Armed Forces Museum in Jakarta has a B-25 on display from this era, whilst in Holland, a group of enthusiasts (Duke of Brabant Air Force) flies a B-25 marked in the colours of 18 NEI Squadron.
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 51
|
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/104487
|
en
|
Counter-Memorial submitted by the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
|
https://www.icj-cij.org/themes/custom/icj/images/favicon.ico
|
https://www.icj-cij.org/themes/custom/icj/images/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.icj-cij.org/themes/custom/icj/logo.png",
"https://www.icj-cij.org/themes/custom/icj/images/logo_un.png",
"https://www.icj-cij.org/themes/custom/icj/images/badge-google-play-en.png",
"https://www.icj-cij.org/themes/custom/icj/images/badge-app-store-en.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
1968-02-20T12:00:00+00:00
|
en
|
/themes/custom/icj/images/favicon.ico
|
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/104487
|
COUNTER-MEMORSUBMITTEDBY
THE GOVERNMENTOF THE KINGDOMOF
THENETHERLANDS
Wderal Republic of Germany/Netherlands)
I. This Cuunter-hlemorial is submitted to the international Court of
the duties of President of the Court under Article 12 of the Rules of Court,
the Federal Republic of Germany for the submission to the Internationalial
Parties, of the continental shelf in the North Sea.elimitation, as between the
thoftlay daim to areas of the continental shelf beneath the North
dtoof the Fawhich, naturally, are considered by thethe Netheriands than they
has ~Court because the Federal Republic, whileinvoking the recog- dispute
dect~tcknuwltdgetldelimit hsr ~untineiitalsadjaccnt to its cnast, hnsf the
Cnnfcrcnw in ~hatsaii-icCuaventinn. And nuw the crux of the ilis~iutebcfor~
incnt's uwn ircttinCaveboriu,is due to thc Feden.l Kepublis
accwdfirice iviththc pnerally rccognized priiiciples and riiles of iiitcrnlitional
l3.tcnnvothe Court, and Iiavingregard to Article 42 of the
parts asthe Mernorial submittedon21 August 1967bythe Agent for the Goverii-
appeared necessary to observe two guiding principles. On the one hand theas
pardArticle 42 of the Rules of Court, which prescribes that a counter-ond
faccs stated in the memorial, and observations concerning the statement of
forth before the Court the opinion of the Kingdom of the Netherlands on thet308 NORTH SEACONTINENTAL SHELF
matter in dispute. This results from Article 2ofthe above-mentioned Special
Agreement, wherein the Parties to the dispute, pursuant to the provisions of
Article 37 of the Rula of Court, have agreed that, without prejudice to any
question of burden of proof, a Memorial shall be submitted to the Court only
by the Federal Republic of Germany, and a Counter-Memorial onfy by the
Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Consequently, the present Counter-Mernorial contains:
in Part 1,an exposition of the relevant facts and of the history of the dispute,
supplementing and correcting the exposition given in the Memorial of the
German Federal Government ;
in Part II, the legal considerations which in the opinion of the Government
of the Kingdom of the Netherlands are of importance for the present case,
and the Netherlands observations on the legal position taken by the German
Federal Government in Part II of the Memorial;
in Part III, the submissions to the Court asto what principles and rules of
international law are applicable to the delimitation, as between the Parties,
of the areas of the continental shelf in the North Sea which appertain to
each of them.
4, The Memorial contains numerous references to writers, which references
wil1,onlyoccasionally be commented upon in this Counter-Memorial. Several
quotations, however, appear out of context. Annex 16 will illustrata number
of instanceswhere quotations s&m to be incomplete. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THENETHERLANDS 309
PART 1. FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE DISPUTE
CHAPTER 1
THE CONTINENTAL SHELF BENEATH THE NORTH SEA
5. The geographical description of the North Sea as given in paragraph 7
of the Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany does not call for any
particular comment. It should, however, be noted that, contrary to the state-
ment in paragraph 7 of the Mernorial, test dfillings in the subsoil under the
North Sea had been made before 1963 and were not carried out directly or
merely as a result of the discoverof the natural gas fieldnear Slochteren.This
subject will be reverted to in detail in Chapter 2 of this Part of the Counter-
Memorial (see infra, para. 11).
In order to provide the Court with a convenient geographical view of the
North Sea the map enclosed inside the back cover of the Counter-Mernorial
(Annex 17) shows, among other things, those continental shelf boundaries on
which agreement has already been achieved-in al1cases on the basis of equi-
distance-as well as the boundaries of the North Sea under the North Sea
Fisheries Convention of 1882 l.
6. With reference to paragraph 8 of the Memorial, it must be remarked that
the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf of 29 Aprjl 1958 does not
embody the concept of a singlecontinental shelfto be dividedamongthecoastal
States, but, on the contrary, recognizes the exclusive sovereignrights of every
single State over the seabedand subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to its
coast, the boundaries of these areas being determined by Articles 1 and 6 of
the said Convention. lt would, therefore, seem somewhat misleading touse the
terminology "the continental shelf of the North Sea"; the title of the present
Chapter, accordingIy, refers to the continental shelf beneath the North Sea.
7. Admittedly, the delimitation of continental shelf areas by application of
the equidistance principle results, as far as the continental shelf beneath the
North Sea jsconcerned, in different total areas appertaining to the various
States adjacent to the North Sea. Indeed, the very legal basis of the sovereign
rights of a coastal State over the continental shelfarea adjacent to its coast being
the concept of contiguity or propinquity, it is only to be expected that some
States, by reason of their geographic location, are in a better position in this
respect than other States. Thus, while al[ States have an equal right to use the
high seas for the purposes of navigation, fishing and other lawful activities,
only States that border on the seacan havesovereignrights (whichare exclusive)
in respect of the natural resources of the seabed and subsoil adjacent to their
coasts. Furthermore, while the submarine areas adjacent to some coastal
States are, or, very near the coast, become, so deep that they are, for the time
being, not exploitable, other coastal States border on large areas of shallow
sea. Finally, some submarine areas, shallow or not, are richer in natural
resources than others. But then again, geographical location, including the
l Convention for regulatingthe policeof theNorth Sea Fisheries,concludedat
The Hague, 6 May 1882; text printedinDe Martins'Nouveau Recueil Généradle
rraitPs, Second SerieVol. 9, p. 556.310 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
configuration of the coast, always brings benefits and disadvantages. For a
srnaIland densely populated country like the Netherlands, almost 50 per cent.
of whoseterrajirmalies below sea-level,itis certainly noan undivided blessing
to have a very long coastline and a direct "frontage" with the North Sea!
8. Furtherrnore, the staternent in paragraph 8 of the Memorial to the effect
that "the North Sea represents a special case" is unfounded. Chapter 4 of the
Second Part of the Counter-Mernorial will go further into this subject (see
infra, paras. 127etseq.).
9. With regard to paragraph 9 of the Memorial the following facts are
submitted :
(a)The angle of the German North Sea coast isapproximately 100'.
(6) Neither the Federal RepubIic of Germany nor the Kingdom of the Nether-
lands have, sofar,established straight base-lines along those parts of their
coasts which are involved in the determination of the boundary on the
continental shelf. There is no dispute between the Parties on this particular
aspect of the delimitation.
(c) The Island of Heligoland is of no significanceto the present disputesince
it exercises no material influence, if indeeany influence at ali,,on the
equidistance line. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OP THE NETHERLANDS
CHAPTER 2
THE ATTITUDE OF TWE KINGDOM OF THE NETNERLANDS
IN RESPECT OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
10. Not only does the Netherlands border on the North Sea, but a con-
siderable part of her territory has even, in the course of time, been reclaimed
from the sea. The history of the "LowCountries by the Sea" has been marked
by constantand multifariauscontacts with the sea.On the one hand, there is
the incessant struggle to reclaim land, to protect it against the water and to
prevent salt water from causing salinization of the soilA few figures will
illustrate the relative position of land and water in the Netherlands:
acres
total area of the Netherlands (1967) 10,090,000
total water area (water surfacemore than 6 m. in width) 1,840,000
--
total land area 8,250,000
land subject to flooding if there were no sea or river dykes 4,200,000
land lost since the 13th century 1,400,OOO
land reclairned since the 13th century (up till 1900) 1,280,000
land reclaimed since 1900 (up till 1967) 300,000
On the other hand, there are the unrelenting efforts to make sea and its
resources serve the national economy-through shipping, fishing,etc.-sothat
this country, which, after such miniature States as Monaco and Vatican City,
is the most denselypopulated country in the world, may provide its population
with the necessary means of subsistence, which are not to be found in its own
soi1and subsoil.
The foregoing may explain the considerable interest in such matters as the
structure of the seabed and subsoil of the North Sea, which the Netherlands
hashadfromearliest timesand must needshave in the future ifsheisto continue
to exist. Sedimentological investigations in the North Sea were bepn in 1933
with the assistance and financial backing of the Netherlands Ministry of
"Waterstaat". On government instructions gravimetric research in the North
Sea was conducted for the first time in 1938from a Netherlands subrnarine by
Professor F. A. Vening Meinesz. A general gravimetric survey of the whole
North Sea area was carried out from 1955to 1957with the assistance of the
Royal Netherlands Navy.
11. Apart from one well in 1938(which demonstrated for the first time the
presence of oil in the western part of the Netherlands), Netherlands and foreign
oil companies have drilled some 30 deep boreholes with a total drilled footage
of 185,875feet, on NetherIands territory, namely in a strip along the North Sea
coast and in the Wadden Islands. In 1956 the NederlaradseAardolie Maat-
schappij (N.A.M.) started detailed gravity measurements in the North Sea,
outside territorial waters. Since 1959the N.A.M. has been exploring with the
seismicmethod in the North Sea throughout the area which, on the basis of the
equidistance principle,constitutes the Netherlands part of the continental shelf;
since 1960, these activities have been especially concentrated on the northern
part and up to the median lines which separate the Netherlands part from the
German and Danish parts of the shelf. The above-mentioned exploration has
continued to date.312 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
In 1961the first wellwas drilled in the North Sea. The operation was carried
out by the N.A.M. in the Netherlands territorial sea off Kijkduin. It shouldbe
noted that, besides other borings in territorial waters, the N.A.M. in 1962
made three borings on the continental shelf,representing a total drilled footage
of 23,302feet.
Particularly after the discovery in 1959of the "Slochteren" natural gas field
in the province of Groningen, expectations grew that the continental shelf in
the North Sea might contain this minera1in commercial quantities. In anticipa-
tion of the entry into force of NetherIandslegislationconcerningthecontinental
shelf (seeinfra,para. 15),requests from various companies for permission to
conduct seismic operations have been granted. In addition to two licences
granted to the N.A.M., in virtue of which.the said Netherlands Company has
been able to carry out the above-mentioned exploration activities since 1959,a
total of 24 licences have been granted during the penod from August 1962to
1966to about 19cornpaniesor groups of cornpaniesrepresenting rnainlyforeign
interests (Arnerican, Belgian,British, French, German and Italian), which have
thus been given the opportunity to prepare for drilling activities on the Nether-
lands part of the continental shelf. The licences in question cover al1of thal
part of the continental shelf which cornesunder the jurisdiction of the Nether-
lands on the basis of the equidistance principle.
After the Netherlands legislation in respect of the continental shelf had corne
into effect inearly 1967,reconnaissance licencesweregranted on the basis of the
new Act on seven occasions. The licenceswent to three American, one Nether-
lands and one French applicants.
Under the said Iegislation 20 applicants, representing 63 companies, sub-
mitted applications for prospecting licences on 15 November 1967.
12. In October 1957 the Netherlands Governrnent, in a ietter addressed to
the Secretary-General of the United Nations, commented on the draft articles
of the Law of the Sea, drawn up by the International Law Commission at its
eighth session (1956).The following passage from the Netherlands comrnents
may be cited here:
"Continental Shei'f
Article 72
As in thecase of the boundaries of the territorîaI s.a..the Netherlands
Government supports the principles embodied in article 72 with regard to
the delimitation of the continental shelf. The Netherlands Government
would like to emphasize the necessity of an internationally accepted rule
for these delirnitations, together with adequate safeguards for impartial
adjudication in the case of disputes, as it will not be sufficient simply to
express the hop that the States concerned will reach agreement on this
matter."
13. During the Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958, the
Netherlands delegation voted in favour of, inter aliaA ,rticle 6 (Art. 72 of the
draft) of the Convention on the Continental Shelf.
14. The Convention on the Continental Shelfwas ratified by the Kingdom of
the Netherlands on 18 February 1966 without any reservation. Seeing that
certain other States had for their part made reservations, the Government of
the Kingdom deemed it necessary to comment on some of those reservations.
In this connection mention should be made of the Venezuelan and French
reservations to Article 6, the contents of which are reproduced in Annex 3 of
this Counter-Memorial. The Netherlandç Government declared, when deposit-
ing their instrument of ratificatiointer dia: COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 313
"... that they do not find acceptable ... the reservations made by the
Government of the French Republic to Articles .. ,6, paragraphs 1 and 2.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands reserve al1rights
regarding the reservations in respect of Article 6 made by the Govern-
ment of Venezuelawhen ratifying the present Convention" (full text in
Annex 3 III).
It should here be stated that, contrary to the supposition expressedin the Iast
sentence of paragraph 55of the Memorial (p. 58,supra), under general interna-
tional law the declaration cited, like other declarations rejecting a reservation
made to an international convention, does indeed have legal eRect. Firstly,
the declaration has an incontestable effect upon the conventional relation be-
tween the party that formulated the reservation and the party that objected to
it. Secondly, the declaration deprives the reservation of the effectwhich an ex-
press or implied acceptanm of the reservation otherwise could have upon the
interpretation of the conventional provision affected by it.
15. In paragraphs 10 and 15,the Memorial of the Federal Republic correctly
mentions the Netherlands "Continental ShelfMiningAct" (Actof23September
1965regulating the exploration for and the production of rninerals in oron the
part of the continental shelf situated under the North Sea) as the iïrst Nether-
lands legislative rneasure pertaining to the exerciseof sovereign rights over the
continental shelf. However, this Act did not "claim" any rights, as is stated in
paragraph IO of the said Memonal, but simply enacted regulations for the
realization of the sovereign rights already vested in the Kingdom under inter-
national law.
Nor isparagraph 15 of the Mernorial entirely correct without further ex-
planation. It is true that the Continental Shelf Mining Act does not definethe
boundaries of the Netherlands part of the shelf,but it defines the Netherlands
shelf asfollows in Article1, paragraph 1:
"For the purposes of the provisionslaid down in or pursuant to this Act,
the following expressions shall have the meanings hereby respectively
assigned to them:
'continental shelf' means that part of the seabed and the subsoil thereof
situated under the North Sea in respect of which the Kingdomhas sover-
eign rights in accordance with, interaliat,he Convention on the Con-
tinental Shelf concluded at Geneva on 29 April, 1958 (Netherlands
Treaty Series 1959,No. 126)and whichliesseawards of the line determined
in pursuance of para. 2." (Translation.)
(The dividing line determjned under para. 2 approximately coincides with tlie
outer lirnits of the territorial sea.)
Moreover, when this Act was in the preparatory stage, a rnap of the North
Sea showing the boundaries of the Netherlands continental shelf (see fig. 1)
was submitted to the States GeneraI on 19February 1965and reproduced in the
Parliamentary Documents (1964165-7670,nr. 7). Apart from some additions it
isthis same map, showing the same outer-limits of the Netherlands continental
shelf, that was reproduced later in the Bulletin of Acts, Orders and Decrees,
together with the Royal Decree (nat a Govemment Resolution) of 27 January
1967referred to in the Memorial (seefig. 2).
16. In the absence of special circumstances the Netherlands Government,
when preparing or takingmeasures relating to the continental shelf under the
North Sea, has been able to baund the area of application of these measures314 NORTH SEA CONTINENTALSHELF
Figure 1(February 1965)Figure 2 (January 1967)316 NORTH SEA CONTMENTAL SHELF
by the lines which, drawn on the basis of the principle of equidistance, form
the delimitation in space of the sovereignrights which the Kingdom, by virtue
of international law, has over that shelf. As already stated in this Chapter, the
Netherlands Government has adopted that basis in particular when granting
licences (see supra, para. 11) and when preparing the Bill, submitted to the
States General in June 1964, that was later to becorne the Continental Shelf
Mining Act (see supra, para. 15).
At one place, however, a special circumstance does in fact prevail that, in
the opinion of theNetherlands Government, affectsthe position oftheboundary
line dividing the continental shelf: at the place where the Ems, flowing into the
North Sea, forms the boundary between the territory of the Kingdom and that
of the Federal Republic, there is, for historical and other reasons, no agreed
boundary line between the two States. This circumstance has an effect on the
starting-point of the line that constitutes the eastern boundary of the Nether-
lands part of the continental shelf. This special circumstance, which will be
reverted to in Chapter4 of this Part (seinfrapara. 29), prompted the Nether-
lands Government to rnake known its standpoint on the said starting-pointto
the German Federal Government in a Note Verbale on 21 June 1963.The text
of the Note Verbale is reproduced in Annex 2 to the Memorial of the Federal
Republic. The English translation, embodied in Annex 2 A to the Memorial
(p.97,supra), isnot entirelycorrect, namely wherethe words "Hoheitsrechte zur
Geltung bringt" have ben translated as "(it) claims sovereign rights". The
Netherlands Government did not claim sovereign rights; its statement con-
cerned the part of the continental shelf where it exercises the sovereign rights
enjoyed in virtue of international Iaw. A corrected translation of the Nether-
lands Note Verbale is attached to this Counter-Mernorial as Annex 8
(p. 378, infra).
17. However, also at places whereno specialcircurnstancesentail a departure
from the principle ofequidistance,there are advantages to be had in establishing
the boundary line in agreements with the other States whose rights over the
continental shelf adjoin, territorially, those of the Kingdom. Article 6 of the
Geneva Convention of 1958 (Counter-Memorial, Annex 1, p. 377, infra) inti-
mates that the establishment of boundariesby agreement isto be preferred; fur-
thermore, it is desirable to avoid uncertainty as regards the exact course of the
boundary and to prevent the course of the boundary from being subject to auto-
matic displacementsshould natural or artificialchanges be madein the baselines
that determinetheequidistanceIine. TheNetherlands Government ha,therefore,
shown itself prepared to collaborate in the realization of agreements with each
of the other States whose part of the continental shelf adjoins the Netherlands
part. These endeavours have had the following results:
(a) With the Federal Republic of Germany, a partial delimitation: Treaty
concerning the lateral delimitation of the continental shelf near the Coast,
concluded at Bonn on 1 Decernber1964.(Textand translation in Memorial,
Annexes 3and 3A,pp. 98-101,supra.) For the significanceofthis Treaty and
the negotiations which led up to its conclusion, reference should be made
to paragraphs 28, 29 and 30 below.
(b) With the United Kingdom of Great Brila~nand Northern Ireland:Agree-
ment relating to the delimitation of the continental shelf under the North
Sea between the two countries, concluded at London on 6 Qctober 1965.
(Text in Memorial, Annex 9, pp. 116-120,supra.) The dividing line agreed
uponis based on the princjple of equjdistance.
(c) With the Kingdom of Belgiurn,negotiations were conducted during 1965. COUNTER-MEMORIAI , F HE NETHERLANDS 317
These led, in the first instance, to a statement by the Belgian Government,
in which it affirmed:
"the concurrence of opinion between the two countries on the principle
of equidistance and the practical application thereof" (translation),
and in which it further declared that it had no objections to the point of
intersection of the dividing lines between the Belgian, Netherlands and
British parts of the continental shelf, as calculated on the basis of the
principle of equidistance by the Netherlands and the British Govemment.
The statement in question is contained in a Note dated 15 September1965
from the BelgianEmbassy at The Hague, the text and translation of which
are appended to the Counter-Mernorial as Annexes 13and 13A (pp. 385-
387, infra).
The negotiations with Belgium also resulted, at the end of 1965, in
agreement, in principle, as to the exact course of the dividing Iine between
the two parts of the continental shelf. This lateral delimitation is based on
the principle of equidistance. For reasons connected with Belgiandomestic
legislation, ashas already appeared from the above-mentioned Note of
15 September 1965, the conclusion of this Agreement has so far been
deferred l.
(d) With the Kingdom of Denmark:Agreement concerning the delirnitatian
of the continental shelf under the North Sea between the two countries,
concluded at The Hague on 31 March 1966. (Text and translation in
Mernorial, Annexes 14 and 14 A, pp. f33-138, supra.) The dividing line
agreed upon is based upon the principle of equidistance.
18. The Netherlands Government, in its domestic legislation as wellas in its
agreements with other States, takes into account the possibikityof the presence
of single geologicalstructures extending across the dividing line betweenparts
of the continental shelf under the North Sea. Article 11 of the Continental
Shelf Mining Act mentioned in paragraph 15 above provides in subpara-
graph 2 lb): .
"2. To a production licence for a minera1 may aIso be attached the
conditions that, if in rnaking use of that licence oa prospecting licence
the holder has proved the presence of that mineral in an economically
producible quantity, the holder shall:
(a) .. .
(b) if that mineral is present in a deposit which, in the opinion of Our
Minister, extends beyond the boundary of the relevant part of the
continental shelf, render the CO-operationrequested by Our Minister
in concluding an agreement between the holder and the Party entitled
to produce that mineral in an adjoining area, under which agreement
production shall be effected in joint consultation." (Translation.)
On the same subject an Agreement wasconcluded with the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 6 October 1965. This Agreement
gives rules for cases in which the part of a geological structure or field which
is situated on one side of the dividing line proves to be exploitable from the
other side of the line. The English text of the Agreement is appended to this
Counter-Mernorial as Annex 12.
In the meantime,on 23 October 1967,a Billhas beensubmittedto the Belgian
Parliament, The Bill and Exposédes Motifs,whichillustrate once again that the
in AnnexGo14.nmentbases itselupon the principleof equidistance.are reproduced NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
CHAPTER 3
THE ATTITUDE OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF
GERMANY IN RESPECT OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
19. At the 1958 Geneva Conference the Federal Republic of Germany
submitted a memorandurn to the Fourth Committee (the Continental Shelf
Cornmittee) advocating freeutilization for everyoneofthenatural resources of
the continental shelf, reseming only certain controliing rights to the coastal
State closest to the installations in question.
20. The Federal Republic's proposa1 received no support, however, from
the other States participating in the Conference, the preponderant view being
that an exclusive right to the natural resources of the shelf was vested in the
coastal State.
21. The position of the Federal Republic at the various votes taken during
the Conference presents the following picture:
(a) at the vote taken inthe Fourth Committee (the Continental Shelf Corn-
rnittee) on Article 6 (at that time Art. 72) the Federal Republic voted in
favour thereof (United Nations Conferenceon the Law of the Sea, Vol. VI,
p. 98).
After the vote the representative of the Federal Republic said: "that, in
view of the inexact nature of the outer limit of the continental shelas
defined by Article 67, his delegation would havepreferred the adoption of
the Venemelan amendment '.When that amendment was rejected, the
delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany had accepted the views of
the rnajority of the Committee, subject to an interpretation of the words
'specialcircumstances' as meaning that any exceptional delimitation of
territorial waters would affect the delimitation of the continental shelf"
(ibid.para. 38).
(6;) At the ninth plenary meeting on 22 April 1958, Article 6 (at that time
still Art. 72) was adopted. The Federal Republic of Germany did not
vote against the Article and it seems reasonable to assume that she was
notamong those abstaining.
(cl At the eighteenth plenary meeting on 26 April 1958the Convention as a
whole was adopted. The Federal RepubIic of Germany voted against for
reasons not connected with Article 6, a matter that will be further dealt
with below (see idru, para. 73) (United Nations Conferenceon theLaw of
the Sea, Vol.II,p. 57).
Wavingthus voted against the adoption of the Convention on the Continental
Shelf, the Federal Republic of Gerrnany nevertheless signed the Convention
l Under this amendmentArticle6 would read as folIows:
"1.Where a continental shelf is adjacent to the territories ofor more
Stateswhosecoastsare oppositeto each,other,the boundary of the continental
shelf appertaining to such States shall be determined by agreement between
thern orby other meansrecognizedin internationallaw.
"2. Where the same continental shelf isadjacent to the territoriestwo
adjacent States, the boundary of the continental shelf shall be determinedin
the manner prescribedin paragraph 1 of this Article,"on 30 October 1958-which was the Iast day but one on which it was open
for signature-making a reservation only in respect of Article 5 on fishing
rights.
22. When replying to the Netherlands Note Verbale of 21 June 1963 (see
supra, para. 16), the German Federal Government confirrned its intention to
ratify the Geneva Convention on the Continental SheIf. As the reply of the
German Federal Government, contained in a Note Verbale dated 26 August
1963, has not been reproduced in the Memorial of the Federal Republic, the
text and a translation of that reply are annexed tthepresent Counter-Mernorial
(Annex 9). The significant passage in this connection reads:
"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (at Bonn) has the honour also to
inform the Netherlands Embassy that the Federal Governrnent, too, is
preparing forthe ratification of the Convention on the Continental Shelf."
(Translation; words between brackets added.)
23. About the turn of the year 1963-1964,it was reported in the press that
an American oil Company had announced its plans to cany out drillings off
the German territorial sea. It would have been no more than a natural reaction
on the part of the Federal Republic of Germany to take adequate measures to
protect its national interests, and this, apparently, was what prompted it to
issue the Government Proclamation of 20 January 1964.
24. Only fragments of the text of this Proclamation appear in the German
Memorial. In view of the relevance of this document, the full text has been
reproduced as Annex 10.
As will be seen, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany States
in this Proclamation :
(1) that "the Federal Government will shortly submit to the Legislature an
AccessionBill on this Convention" with a view toGerman ratification;
(2) that it deems exploration and exploitation of the seabed and subsoil to be
the sovereign right of the Federal Republic, and that tl~isright is based on
"the development of general international law as expressed in recent State
practice and, in particular, in the signing of the Geneva Convention on the
Continental Shelf ".
25. No accession billwas, however, presented to the Legislature by the
Federal Government. On 15 May 1964a Bill was submitted with a viewonly
to establishing a statute relating to the activity in the German shelf area.
But, in the motivation to the Bill (Annex 1l), the Federal Governrnent stated
that the statute was to be "the municipal supplement to the effects of the
Proclamation in the field ofinternational law". It will further be seen from the
text that once again the Federal Government of Germany acknowledges the
Geneva Convention as an expression of customary international law.
26. The Parliament ("Bundestag") of the FederaI Republic of Germany
responded favourably to the Government Bill, adopting it unanimously at the
third reading on 24 June 1964. In its report as well as in its recommendation,
the Parliamentary Cornmittee concemed advocated an early German ratifica-
tion of the Geneva Convention, and this recommendation was endorsed by
Parliament.
27. Why, then, was the ratification of the Convention never carried out by
the Federal Republic of Germany? The Governrnent announced it in its Note
Verbale to the Netherlands Government and advocated it jn its Proclamation,
and Parliament recommended it. But the Federal Republic never proceeded320 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
to ratificatioand when the Nethedands-Germanand theDanish-German
agreements on delimitationof the continental shin thNorth Sea nearthe
coast were placed before Parliamentin December 1964 and October 1965
respectively, no referencwhatsoever was made to ratifying the Geneva
Convention. COUNTER-MEMORVL OF THE NETHERLANDS
THE NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE
RELATINGTO THE DELIMITATION OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
BENEATH THE NORTH SEA
Section A. BilateraiNegotiations
28. To the Netherlands Note Verbale of 21 June 1963, mentioned at the
end of Chapter 2 (sesupra,para. 16),the Government of the Federal Republic
of Germany replied in a Note Verbale dated 26 August 1963,claiming that-
"sowohl historische Gründe als auch weitere besondere Umstande eine in
mehrfacher Hinsicht von der Auffassung der Koniglich Niederlandischen
Regierung abweichende Grenzziehung rechtfertigen".
(Translation: "there are historical reasons and other special circurnstances
that justify adoption of a delimitation line, the position of which differs
in more than one respect from that claimed by the Royal Netherlands
Government.") (Fu11text and translation in Annexes 9 and 9 A to this
Counter-Memorial.)
29. In this connection mention should bemade of the specialsituation which
exists in the Mouth of the Ems in respect of the boundary-in the itaternaand
territorial waters-between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Federal
Republic of Germany. The course of the international frontier in this area has
been disputed for centuries. On 8 April 1960 the two States concluded the
Ems-Dollard Treaty lthe purpose of which was to eliminate a11questions that
existed or might arise on account of the absence of an agreed frontier.Article 46,
paragraph 1, of this Treaty provides:
"The provisions of this Treaty shall not affect the question of the
international frontier in the Ems Estuary. Each Contracting Party reserves
its legal position in this respect." (Translation by the United Nations
Secretariat.)
When it appeared that the subsoil of the Ems Estuary might contain mineral
resources, the two States concluded on 14 May 1962 a Supplementary Agree-
ment in order to provide for the regulation of this question too, again without
fixin tge course of the international frontier. The text and a translation of the
Supplementary Agreement are reproduced as Annexes 16 and 16 A of the
Mernorial of the German Federal Government.
This special situation in the Ems Estuary and its particular effect upon the
delimitation of the parts of the adjacent continental shelf appertaining to the
one and the other State, are cfearly demonstrated by the chart reproduced on
page 100, supra, of the Memorial. The shading on the southern part of the chart
indicates the area where, failinan agreed frontier, conventional rules onCO-
operation between the Parties are applicable.
As there is no agreed frontier between thg Parties in this area, there is in
consequence no agreed point of intersection of such a frontier with the outer
limits of the territorial sea, i.e.,no starting point for the delimitation of the parts
of the continental shelf appertaining to the one and the other State.
l Text printed in UnitedNations Treaty SerieVol. 509.322 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
30. Following the exchange of the Notes Verbales of 21June and 26 August
1963, bilateral discussions took place between representatives ofthe Kingdom
of the Netherlands and representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany on
3 and 4 March 1964.During these discussions iternergedfor the fiwt tirnethat
the Federal Republic of Germany not only disagreed with the Kingdom of the
Netherlands in respect of the point on the outer limit of the territorial waters
from whichthe boundary line onthe continental shelfshould bedrawn (puncturn
a quo) but also in respect of the method of determining that boundary line.
In the course of the same discussions, the representatives of the Kingdom of
the Netherlands declared with regard to the method of determining the bound-
ary line that, sinceArticle 6 of the Geneva Convention was to be regarded as an
expression of existingrules of international law, they were not in a position to
negotiate a contractual arrangement determining a boundary line which would
not be based on the equidistance principle. Accordingly,further discussionsand,
later on, negotiations were conducted on the subject of the punctum a quo and
these eventually resulted in the initialling, on 4 August 1964, of the text of the
Treaty concerning the lateral delimitation of the continental shelf near the
Coast l.As stated in the Joint Minutes of that date2,this Treaty was based on
Article 6 of the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf and took into
account the "special circumstances" prevailing in the Mouth of the Ems. As
stated in the Memorial, paragraph 16 (p. 21, srrpra),the partial boundary line
agreed upon does in fact follow between the last three seaward points the
equidistance line and deviates from the equidistance line only as regards the
points nearer to the coast-line where the disputed frontier in the territorial sea
comes into question.
Section B. TripartiteNegotiations
31. Only after these bilateral talks and the conclusion of the bilateral Treaty
of 1 December 1964, did tripartite talks take place, at the instigation of the
Federal Republic of Germany, between representatives of Denmark, of the
Federal Republic and of the Netherlands, The firstroundtook place on 28 Feb-
ruary 1966in The Hague. Second and third rounds of tripartite talks were held
in Bonn and Copenhagen in May and August 1966 respectively. Since the
Netherlands delegation stated at the beginning of these talks that its Iegal
standpoint was still the same as that recorded at the end of the bilateral dis-
cussions(Joint Minutes of 4 August 19154~),the negotiations were concerned
with finding a method for the settling of the dispute. They resulted eventually
in the initialling, 1nAugust 2966in Copenhagen, of the two bilateral Special
Agreements andthe tripartite Protocol, whichwere,after signature, transmitted
to the Court in February 1967.
Treaty signed on 1 December 1964; Annexes 3 and 3 A of the Memorial,
pp. 98-101, supra.
Annexes 4 and 4 A of theMemorial, pp. 102-104, supra. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS
PART II. THE LAW
CHAPTER 1
THE QUESTION SUBMITTED TO THE COURT
32. The question which, under the terms of the Compromis (the "Special
Agreement" of 2 February 1967),the Court is called upon to decide is:
"what principles and rules of international law are applicable to the
delimitation as between the Parties of the areas of the continental shelf in
the North Sea which appertain to each of them beyond the partial bound-
ary determined by the (Netherlands-Geman) Convention of 1 December
1964".
The Federal Republic, in its Subrnissions and in Part II of the Mernorial,
asks the Court in eKectto declare that the only applicable pnnciple or rule of
law is an alleged principle that each coastal State is entitled to ajust and equi-
table share; and that neither the equidistance method nor any other methodis
a fit and proper method of delimitation in any circumstances, unless it is
established by agreement, arbitration or otherwise that the particular method
will "achieve ajust and equitable apportionment arnong the States concerned".
33. The claim thus formulated by the Federal Republic seemsto the Nether-
lands Government to be nothing less than a request to the Court to Iay down
that, as between the Netherlands and the Federal Republic, the delimitation of
the continental shelf in the North Sea should be settled ex aequo et bono.
Without a framework of legalcriteria to determine what is "just and equitable",
the concept of a "just and equitable apportionment" lacks any legal content.
Indeed, as the very terms of the Compromis show, it was precisely in order to
obtain the Court's directions regarding the applicable framework of legal
criteria that the Netherlands and the Federal Republic have submitted the
dispute to the Court. Accordingly,the claimformulated by the FederalRepublic
appears to the Netherlands Government not to fa11within the terms of the
question put to the Court in the Compromis.
34. In any event, the thesis put forward by the Federal Republic reflects a
concept of the coastal State's rights in the continental shelf which has no basis
either in the terms of the Compromis or in the applicable rules of international
law.
35. The Compromis doesnot request the Court to decidewhat principlesand
rulesof international lawshouldgovem the sharingoufbetweenthe Netherlands
and the Federal Republic of areas of the continental shelf in the North Sea.
Tt requests the Court to decide the principles and rules applicable to the
delimitation as berween the Nerherlands and the Fedcral RepubEicof the areas
of the continental shelf in the North Sea whichappertain ro each of thenabeyond
thepartial boundary olreadyfixed bythe1964 Treaty I.short, the question put
to the Court in the Compromis concerns the principles and rules applicable for
completing the delimitation of the boundary running between the areas of
continental shelf which appertaiir to each of two adjacent coastal States.
36. The manner inwhich the question for the Court's decision is framed in
the Compromis also corresponds to the way in which the question of delimita-
tion presents itself in State practice, in the propofathe International Law324 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
Commission and in the provisions of the1Geneva Convention of 1958on the
Continental Shelf.
37. Al1the pre-1958 texts of Proclamations or Decreesgivenin paragraph 31
(p.31,supra) of the Memorial viewthe question as one of boundary delimitation
in accordancewith equitable principles. The proposals of the International Law
Commission in both paragraphs of Article 72 of the draft submitted by it to
the General Assembly were also framed entirely as rules for delimiting the
boundariesof the areas of coniinentalshelfoppertaining fo coastal States (Year-
book of theInternationalLaw Commission,1956,Vol.II, p. 300).Article 6 of the
Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, which reproduces the Commis-
sion's textsalmost word for word, is similarly couched entirely in terrns of the
delimitation of continental shelf boundaries. Thus, the text of Article6reads:
"1. Where the sarne continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of
two or more States whose coasts are opposite each other, the boundaryof
the continentalshev apperrainingto such States shall be determined by
agreement betweenthem. In the absence of agreement, and unless another
boundary line is justified by special circumstances, the boundary is the
medianline,every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points of
the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seof each State is
measured.
2. Where the same continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of two
adjacent States, the boundaryof the continental shev shall be determined
by agreement between them. In the absence of agreement, and unless
, another boundary line is justified by special circumstances, the boundary
shall be deterrninedby application of theprinciple of equidistaitcefrom the
nearest points of the baselinesfrom which the breadth of the territorial sea
of each State is measured.
3. In delimiting the boundaries of the continental shelf, any lines which
are drawn in accordance with the principles set out in paragraphs 1and 2
of this article should be defined with referenceto charts and geographical
features as they exist at a particular date, and reference should be made to
fixed permanent identifiable points on the land." (Italics added).
38. The same is true of the State practice after the 1958Geneva Conference,
and especially that relating to the North Sea itself, as clearly appears frorn the
terrns of the unilateral acts and bilateral agreements cited in Chapter II of
Part 1of the Memorial. Thus, the Norwegian Proclamation and Decree, of
1963, speak of Norway's submarine areas having a boundarymidway between
Norway and other countries. The Danish Decree and Note Verbale, both also
of 1963,echoing the language of the Convention, speak in terrns of boundary
delimifation. The Federal Republic's own Proclamation of 20 January 1964
(Counter-Memorial, Annex 10) speaks of the delimitation of the German part
of the continental shelfin relation to the parts of the continental shelfof foreign
States. The United Kingdom's Continental Shelf (Designation of Areas)
Order of the same year refers to certain areas as subject to the exercise of its
continental shelf rights "pending agreement with other Powers on the bound-
aries of thecontinentalshelfappcrrainingto ~heUnitedKingdom".As to Belgium,
its Billof 23October 1967speaksin Article 2 of the delimitation of the Belgian
continental shelf (Counter-Mernorial, Annex 14, p. 388,below).
Lastly the Netherlands, in its Note Verbale of 21 June 1963 (Counter-
Memorial, Annex 8),notified the Federal Rtpublic that thepart of the conti-
nentalshelfof theNorrhSea over whichrheNerherlandsexercises sovereignrights
in conformity with the Convention- COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 325
"is defimitedto the east by the equidistance line beginning at the point
where the thalweg in the mouth of the Ems reaches the territorial waters".
(Italics added.)
39. Particularly striking is the fact that al1the bilateral agreements hitherto
concluded between North Sea Powers are expressed as delimitationsof bound-
aries between the parts of the continental shelf appertaining to the respective
countries, not as agreements for sharingour the continental shelf. Thus, the
UnitedKingdom-NorwayAgreementof 10 March 1965(Memorial, Annex 5)
has a preamble which proclaims that the two States-
"Desiring to establish theboundarybetweenthe respective portsof the
continentalsheif
Have agreed as follows." (Italics added.)
And then the operative clause of Article 1 of the Agreement reads-
"The dividing linebetween thatpart ofthe continentalshelfwhichapper-
tains to the UnitedKingdonaof Great Britain and Northern Ireland and
fhatpart whichappertainsfo the Kingdomof Norway shall bebased .. .",
etc. (Italics added.)
The sameforms of preamble and operative clauseappear alsointhe Nerherlands-
UnitedKingdomAgreementof 6 October 1965(Memorial,Annex 9). Similarly,
the Denrnark-United KingdomAgreementof 3 March 1966(Memorial, Annex 12)
has apreamble in the tems that the two States-
"Have decided to establish their common boundary between the parts
of the continental shelf overwhich the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland and the Kingdom of Denmark respectively exer-
cise sovereign rights for the purpose of the exploration and exploitation of
the natural resources of the continental shelf,"
And the operative clause of Article 1 of the Agreement then takes the same
form as in the United Kingdom-Norway and the Netherlands-United Kingdom
Agreements. The Denmark-NorwayAgreementof 8 December 1965(Memorial,
Annex 11A)hasa preamble and operative clausewhich,ifthewording isslightly
different, are inspired by preciselythe same conceof the purpose and effectof
the Agreement.
40. The Treaties of the Federal Republic itself with the Netherlands of
1 December 1964(Memorial, Annex 3 A) and with Denmark of 9 June 1965
(Memorial, Annex 6 A) for the delimitation of the continental shelf near the
Coastare equalfy expressed in terms of the partial delimitation of the boundory
of the continentalshelfodjacenttothe territoriesof the States concerned,More-
over, eventheJoint Minutes andthe Protocol (Memorial,Annexes4A and 7A)
accornpanyingthoseTreaties and reservingtheposition ofthe Partieswithregard
to thefurther courseofthe boundary recognizedthat the question at issuewasthe
determination of the cornmonboundarybetween the respective Parties. True,
the delegation of the Federal Republic in the Joint Minutes accompanying the
Treaty with the Netherlands announced that the Federal Government was-
"seeking to bring about a conference of States adjacent to the North Sea
with a view to arriving at an appropriate division of the continental shelf
situated in the middle of the North Sea".
But it referred to a divisionin accordance withthe firstsentencesofparagraphs 1
and 2 of Article 6 of the Geneva Convention which speak expressly of the
determination of the boundary of the continental shelf appertaining to the
States concerned. Nor did the FederaI Government pursue the idea of a con-
ference. On the contrary,inidenticAide-Mémoires of25 May 1966(MemoriaI,326 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
Annex 15A) addressed sirnultaneousIyto the Netherlands and Danish Govern-
ments concerning their Agreement for the delimitation of their respective parts
of the North Sea, the Federal Republic contented itself with underlining that
the arrangement made in that Agreement-
"cannot have any effecton the question of the delimitafionof the German-
Netherlands or the German-Danish parts of the continental sheIf in the
North Sea" (italics added).
Furthermore, in its two identic Aide-Mémoires of12July 1966, addressed by
the Embassy of the Federal Republic to the United'Kingdom Government with
reference to the conclusion of the United Kingdom-Netherlands and the
United Kingdom-Denmark Agreements for the delimitation of the continental
shelf, the Federal Government reserved its position expressly in terms of the
delimitation of its boundaries with the Netherlands and Denmark (Memorial,
Annexes 10 A and 13A):
"the Federal Government wishes to point out to the British Government
that the final setrlement of the question of the lateral deiimitation the
continentalshelfintheNorth Seabetweenthe Federal Republic ofGermany,
the Kingdom of Denmark and the Kingdom of the Netherlands is still
outstanding. The Federal Government would morcover bring the Aide-
mémoireof 25th May 1966, a copy of which is attached, to the attention
of the British Government andwould add that the arrangement made in
the aforementioned Agreementcannot prejudice thequestionof thedelimita-
rionof the continentalsheifbetween theFederaIRepublicof Germanyandthe
Netherlands (De~zrnark)in the eastern part of the North Sea" (italics
added).
41. Lastly, it is noteworthy that in the Protocol of 9 June 1965 on the
deiimitation of the continental shelf in the Baltic Sea the Federal Republic
together with Denmark again dealt with the question purely and simply as one
of the delimitation of baundaries,not of the sharing out of areas between the
littoral States of that sea (Memorial, Annex 7 A):
"With respect to the continental shelf adjacent to the coasts of the
Baltic Sea which are opposite each other, it isagreed that the boundary
shall bethe median line. Accordingly, both Contracting Parties declare
that they will raiseno basic objections to the other Contracting Party's
delitnitingitsparof thecontinentalsheyof the Baltic Sea on the basis of the
median line." (Italics added.)
42. Accordingly, the practice of States-in their unilateral acts, their bilateral
agreements and in the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf-affords
no support whatever for the conclusion which the Federal Republic seeks to
draw from it in paragraph 38of its Memorial (p. 36, supra):
"Where the same continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of
several States, each of these States is entittedatjust and equitable share
of thutcontinentalshelf,irrespectiveof themethodusedfor thedetermirration
of the boundurksbetween the States concerned."
On the contrary, that conclusion isin direct contradiction both with the existing
practice of a large number of States and with the rules adopted in the Geneva
Convention on the Continental Shelf.
43. Nor is the Federal Republic's thesis made any more compatible with
State practice or with the Geneva Convention by framing it in the truncated
form in which it appears in the Federal Government's first Submission (p. 91,
supra) : COUNTER-MEMORIALOF THE NETHERLANDS 327
"The delimitation of the continental shelf between the Parties in the
North Sea is governed by the principle that each coastal State is entitled
to a just and equitable share."(Italics added.)
This proposition startsfrom theinadmissible basis of sharingoutrhecontine~tal
shewlike a cake instead of from the basis of determining, as between opposite
or adjacent States, what are the boundaries of the areas of continental shelf
appurtenant to the coasts of each State and delimitingtheboundary accordingly.
When the FederaI Republic states in paragraph 30 of the MemoriaI (p. 30,
supra)that-
"if,by virtue of their geographic position, two or more coastal States
can claim that a continental shelf 'appertains' to each of them, the neces-
sity arises of apportioning that common continental shelf between them"
this is amanifest misrepresentation of the legal situation under positive inter-
national law. In the first place, this statement confuses thegeoiogicoi concept
of the continental shelf with the entirely different legal concept of sovereign
rights of a State over the continental shelf. There are, perhaps, reasons for
considering a continental shelf as a"unit" from the geological point of view,
There is, however, no more reason to regard that geological unit as a legal
entity than there isto consider the "continent of Europe" or the "low countries"
as such. From the legal point of viewthe continental shelf, like land, sea and
air, is primarily "space" wherein activities take place and objects are found,
and space is a priori susceptible to any limitation or division. Secondly, the
mere fact that two or more States each lay a daim (or even "can"lay a claim)
to the samespace doesnot make that spacecornmonspaceto be dividedbetween
them. Indeed the normal legal situation in respect of, for instance, a disputed
territory is not that the territory is divided but that the better claim prevails.
Nor have any of the other North SeaStates sought to treat the continental shelf
beneath that sea as legallya unity. On the contrary, every singleone of them-
with the exception of the Federal Republic of Germany-has demonstrably
regarded its claim as limited to that part of the continental shelf every point
of which is nearer to its Coastthan to that of any other State.
Equally, the reference in paragraph 35 of the MemoriaI to the use of the
waters of international rivers is entirely beside the point. The rkgime for the
utilization of the waters of international rivers is a quite different question
which does not concem the delimitation of boundaries.
44. No doubt, when the determination of the boundaries of the areas of
continental shelf appertaining to each coastal State has been made, the result
may be spoken of as constituting an "apportionment" of the continental shelf
among the States concemed or as a determination of their "shares". But there
is a fundamental difference between a principle which starts from the basis
that the continental shelf is the cornmon property of the littoral States, each
of whorn is entitled to an "equitable and just share"of the common property,
and one which starts from the basis that each littoral State is entitled to the
areas which appertain to its territory and that the boundaries betweenthese
appurtenantareas are to be delimited on equitable principles. If these two
principles may not always have been clearly distinguished by some writers,
there can be no doubt that it is the latter principle which is found in State
practice and expressed in the Geneva Convention, not the principle formulated
in the Federal Government's first Submission.
45. Furthermore, the Federal Republic's submission that the defimita-
tion of the continental shelf in the North Sea as between the Netherlands and
the Federal RepubIic should be govemed by the principle that each coastal3 28 NORTH SEA CONTINENTALSHELF
State is entitIed to a just and equitable share, is one which by its very nature
cannot givean adequate answer to the question put to the Court in the Com-
promis. In the first place, a delimitation of the boundary as betweenthe Nether-
lands and the Federal Republic would not by itself determine the total area
appertaining to either or both of them, since the total area of each would
be dependent upon their other boundary lines with third States not par-
ties to the present dispute. In the second place, and consequently, the
question whether such a delimitation would produce a "just and equitable
share" for the Netherlands and the Federal Republic wouldnecessarilyalso
be dependenton thedelimitationof theirboundarieswith thirdStates. Thus, the
alleged principle formulated by the Federai Republic simpiy cannot constitute
a pnnciple or rule of international .law applicable to the delimitation of the
continental shelf boundary as between the Partiesro the Compromis.
46. If there were such a principle or rule of positive international law, it
would follow logically that the delimitation of the continental shelf of each
and every North Sea coastal State could be effectedonly through a multilateral
agreement concluded between al1of thern. The Federal Republic did, indeed,
at one stage in the negotiations speak of an intention to convene a multilateral
"conference of States adjacent to the North Sea with a view to arriving at an
appropriate division of the continental shelf situated in the middle of the
North Sea" (Joint Minutes of4August 1964,Mernorial,Annex 4A, penultirnate
paragraph). But it made no effort to carry the matter further. No doubt, this
was because the Federal Government soon came to realize that not only the
Netherlands but al the States concerned would autornatically demand the
application of Article 6 of the Geneva Convention and that the only result of
such a conference must be the delimitation of the North Sea continental shelf
in accordance with the equidistance principle. Atany rate, it never adverted to
the idea of a multilateral conference again.
47. Now, however, the Federal Government shifts its ground and demands
that the boundary between the Netherlands and itself should bedetermined
bilaterally in isolation from the other North Sea States but in such a way as to
provide the Federal Republic witha shareof thetotal continental shelfbeneath
the NorthSea that it considers "just and equitable". In short, the Federal Re-
public now seeks to put the burden of providing for itself what it considers a
just and equitable share of the North Sea.shelf not on all, but on one or at
most two of the North Sea States. The very nature of this demand, in the view
of the Netherlands, is incompatibIe with the existenceof the supposed principle
which the Federal Republic invokes.
48. On this point, there is a certain consistency in the position taken up by
the Federal Republic. Prior to the Geneva Convention it advocated that the
continental shelf outside territorial waters should be regarded as common to
al1States and should be exploited in the interests of all. That concept of the
continental shelf was, however, in total conflict with the practice of States and
was completely and finally rejected at the Geneva Conference of 1958. The
pnnciple formulated in the Federal Republic's first Submission seemsto be
essentiallya relic of that very "community" concept of the continental shelf
which the Federal Govemment has itself now abandoned. Be that as it may,
the principle is certainly in conflict with the practice of States and with the
concept of the continental shelf which was adopted in the Geneva Conven-
tion and animates the provisions of Article 6 concerning the delimitation of
boundanes of the conthenta1 shelf.
49. If iisnecessary to Iook for the general concept underlying the modem COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 329
law regarding the delimitation of continentaI shelf boundaries, this is that
each State has ipsojure sovereign and exclusive rights of exploration and
exploitation over the areas of continental shea¢ to its coast and that,
in the case of two States fronting upon the same continental shelf, the areas
which are to be considered as appertaining to one or to the other are tobe
delimited on equitable principles. However, State practice and the Geneva
Convention have translated this general concept into the more concrete criteria
for the delimitation of continental shelf boundaries which are examined in the
next Chapters of this Counter-Memonal. In the view of the Netherlands
Government, it is in these more concrete criteria that the answer to the ques-
tion put to the Court in the Compromis has to be found. NORTH SEA CONnNENTAL SHELF
CHAPTER 2
THE PRINCIPLE THAT A DELlMITATION OF A MARITIME AREA
IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY RECOGNIZED RULES OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW IS PRIMA FACIE VALID AND OPPOSABLE
TO OTHER STATES
50. The Federal Republic, as pointed out in the previous Chapter, asks the
Court in its submissions to recognize only one alleged principle of law as
governing the delirnitation of the continental shelf between the Parties in the
North Sea, namely the principle that "each coastal State is entitled to a just
and equitable share". By way of clearing the ground for its alleged principle of
law, however, the Federal Republic also asks the Court expressly to deny the
status of a rule of customary law to the "equidistance" principle-the principle
applied by the Netherlands and Denmark as wellas by other North Sea States
in the delirnitatiooftheir respectivecontinental shelfboundaries. The Federal
Republic's second Submission reads :
"The method of determining boundaries of the continental shelf in
such a way that every point of the boundary is equidistant from the
nearest points of the baselines frorn which the breadth of the territorial
sea of each state is measured (equidistance method), is notP rule of cus-
tomary internationat law and is therefore not applicable as such be-
tween the Parties l."
This Submission has ta be read in the light of the Federal Republic's dis-
cussion of the equidistance line in Chapter II of Part II of the Mernorial where,
after dealing with the genesis of the equidistance method and its introduction
into Article 6 of the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, the Federal
Government asserts:
"Thus Article 6 is not a codification of already existing international
law,but it is theoutcomeof an effort to developthe existinglegalsituation,
with its demand for an equitable solution, by the establishment of a
method which it was assumed would, under normal geographical condi-
tions,lead to an equitable and just .apportionment of the continental
shelf between the States concerned, Article 6 must be interpreted in this
sense, with the consequence that an equidistance boundary rnay not be
imposed upona Stafe ivhichIiasnot accededtu the Conventiolz, so long as it
has not been proved that it would be the best method of apportioning
the continental shelf between the adjacent States in a just and equitable
manner, having regard to the specialgeographicalsituation of the individual
case 2."(Ttalicsadded.)
51. The Federal Government's contentions regarding the status of the
equidistance method are believed by the Netherlands to be based on a miscon-
ception no less fundamental than that which underiies its first Submission.
In the present instance the fundamental misconception concerns the position
of theParties in relation to the principles and rules of law expressed in the
Geneva Convention.
lP. 91, supra, of the Memorial.
Para. 53 (p. 57supra) ofthe Memorial. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 331
52. The Court itself, in itsjudgment in the Fisheriescase (Z.C.J. Reports1951,
p. 116)has stated authoritatively the position of a coastal State with regard to
the delimitation of sea areas (at p. 132):
"The delimitation of sea areas has always an international aspect; it
cannot be dependent merelyupon the will of thecoastal State as expressed
in its municipal law. Although it is true that the acr of delimitotion is
necessarilya unilaferalacr, because anly the coastal State iscompetent to
undertake it, the validity of the delimirationwifh regard tu other States
dependsuponinternationallaw." (Italics added.)
The Court did not in that passage Saythat the vaIidity of a delimitation by
a coastal State vis-A-visanother State depends on the will of that other State.
It said that the validity of the delimitation with regarto other States depends
uponinternationalIaw.
53. The situation in the present case is that, exercising the cornpetence
which they have under their respective systems of municipal law,the Nether-
lands and Danish Governments, by unilateral acts and by bilateral agreements
concluded both between themselves and separately with other North Sea
coastal States, have delimited the boundaries of the areas which they believe
properly to appertain to their respective coasts under the principles and rules
of delimitation generally recognized by States. In doing so they have sought
to base their delimitations directly on the principles and rules adopted by a
very large number of States at the Geneva Conference of 1958and embodied
in Article 6 of the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, In short,
the Netherlands and Denmark having detimited their continental shelf bound-
aries specifically on the basis of generally recognized principles and rules of
law, these delimitations are prima facie not contrary to internationa1 law and
are valid with regard to other States. Accordingly, if the Federal Republic
considers that the delimitations are invalid, the onus is on it to show why the
Netherlands or Denmark shouId not be entitled to apply the generally re-
cognized principles and rules of delimitation in delimiting their respective
continental shelf boundaries. In the present case it is not a question of the
Netherlands or Denmark seekingto imposea principle or rule upon the Federal
Republic; it is rather aquestion of the Federal Republic's seeking to prevent
the Netherlands and Denmark from applying in the delimitation of their
continental shelf boundaries the principles and rules of international law
generally recognized by States. Neither the Netherlands nor Denmark has
entered into any international engagement or otherwise placed itself under
any international obligation vis-à-vis the FederaI Republic which might
preclude either State from delimiting its maritime areas in accordance with
the generaliy recognized principlesand rules of international law. NORTH SEACONïiNENTAL SHELF
CHAPTER 3
THE STATUS OF THE PRINCIPLES EMBODIED IN ARTICLE 6 OF
THE CONVENTION ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF AS GENERAL
RULES OF LAW
54. The Federal Republic's principal contention in Chapters 1 and II of
Part II of the Memorial appears to be that,between the Parties to the present
case, delimitation on the basis ofequidistance isnot to beregarded asa principle
of Iaw but merely as one of several possible methods of deIimitation which
may corne under consideration in aiming at an "equitable and just appor-
tionment". This contention, which seeks to deprive the "equidistance" prin-
ciple of al1legal force for the purposes of the present case, conflicts with the
general recognition of the equidistance principlas a legal rule by States as
well as with the attitude adopted towards that principle by the Federal Re-
public itself othenvise than in the case of the particular boundaries now in
dispute before the Court.
55. In the State practice prior ta the Geneva Conference of 1958 the ten-
dency admittedly was to refer in general terms to the delimitation of continental
shelf boundaries on "equitable principles" without mention of the "equidis-
tance" principIein particular. But the concept afdelimitation on "equitable
principles", as already mentioned in Chapter 1 of this Part, was aftenvards
converted first through the work of the International Law Commission and
then through the Geneva Conference of 1958into the rules set out in Article 6
of the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, which accept the equidis-
tance principle as a rule of law, In addition, as is shown in Section C of this
Chapter @p.340,et seq.infra), theequidistance principleadopted in Article 6of
the Geneva Convention as applicable to the delimitation of the continental
shelfwas a principle whichhad already receivedwide recognition inthe practice
of States in connection with the delimitation of other forms of both maritime
and fresh-water boundaries. Moreover, since then no less than 37 States have
ratified or acceded to the Geneva Convention and a number of States have
already applied the rules contained in Article 6 in their practice. Finally, the
Federal Republic itself, although not yet a party, has not only placed its
signature on the Convention but has also employed the equidistance principle
in delimiting its continental shelf boundaries with the Nethedands and with
Denmark nearthe coast andagain indelirnitingits continental shelf boundary
with Denmark in the Baltic.
Section A. The International Law Commission
56. When the International Law Commission first took up the question of
delimitation in 1950 it is true that, as indicated in paragraph 48 of the Me-
morial, the discussions showed "a great deal of uncertainty regarding the way
to solve the problem of delimitation and regarding any rules which rnight be
applied". But the suggestion which also seems to be made in that paragraph
that the Commission viewed the matter as a question of apportioni ngconr-
mon area of continental shelf is quite untrue. The question put by the Special
Rapporteur to the Commission was (Yearbaok, 1950, Vol. II, p. 31): "Where
the continental shelves-or contiguous zones, as the case rnay be-overlap, COWNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 333
how should they be delimited?"This question, the record shows, had not yet
been gone into very deeplyby members of the Commission, and the discussion
was of a preliminary character. Indeed, the State practice up to that date was
not regarded by the Commission as sufficiently consistent to establish any
customary rule as already in existence with respect to the continental shelf,
and its whole discussion of the nature and extent of the rights of a coastal
State over the continental shelf was stili somewhat tentative and exploratory.
It is therefore scarcely surprising that the Commission should not at that
session have had any very clear ideas about the criteria for delimiting con-
tinental shelf boundaries; or that some members, such as Amado and Hudson,
should have doubted whether there was any generai principle applicable and
should have sirnplyfallen back upon "arbitration" or "agreement".
57. In 1951 the Commission reverted to the problem. The Special Rappor-
teur now proposed that delimitation of continental shelf boundaries should
in the first place be left to the agreement of the parties but that :
"Faute d'accord, la démarcation entre les plateaux continentaux de
deux Etats voisins sera constituéepar la prolongation de la ligne séparant
les eaux territoriales et la démarcationentre les plateaux continentaux de
deux Etats séparéspar la mer sera constituéepar la ligne médianeentre
les deux côtes." (Yearbook,1951,Vol. II, at p. 102.)
The discussion that followed was again somewhat confused: various sug-
gestions were made and it is true that again no majority was obtained for any
general principle of delimitation to determine continental shelf boundaries
between "adjacent" States. The principle mainly discussed was that of "pro-
longing" the territorial sea boundary. But members of the Commission doubted
whether any general principlehad yet ben established fordelimitingthe bound-
ary between the territorial waters of adjacent States. lndeed, in discussing
this problem at its 1950and 1951sessionsthe Commission was inthe difficulty
that it had not yet begun its study of the territorial sea. As a result, 1951ts
Report the Commission could do no more than advocate that the continental
shelf boundary between "adjacent" States should be established by "agree-
ment" and, failing agreement, by compulsory recourse to arbitration ex
aequo et bono. On the other hand, in that same report the Commission did
express itself in favour of the "equidistance" principle-in its median line
form-for "opposite"States whose territories are separated by an arm of the
sea. It conceded that in these cases the configuratioof the Coastmight some-
times give rise to difficultiesin drawing a median linand recommended that
such difficultiesshould be referred to arbitration. But it recognized that the
boundary "would generally coincide with some median line between the two
toasts".
58.The 1953 session of the Commission was a turning-point in the develop-
ment of the law regarding the delimitation of continental shelf boundaries. In
commenting upon the Commission's 1951 Report, numerous governrnents-
and particularly those of some of the smaIler States-had raised strong objec-
tions to the proposal chat disputes concerning the delimitation of continental
shelf boundaries should besettledex aequo etbono; and these governments had
urged the Commission to formulate rules of law as a basis for the settlemenof
disputes regarding the delimitation of continental shelf boundaries. (Yearbook,
1953, Vol. II, pp. 241-269.) In addition, at the wish of the Commission, a
Committee of experts had been convened by the Special Rapporteur shortly
before the 1953 session to consider technical questions connected with the
detimitation of the territorial sea. This Committee had presented a report334 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
endorsing the use of the "median line" in the case of "opposite" States and
recomrnending that the lateral boundary betweenthe territorial seas of adjacent
States should be traced according to the "principle of equidistance".
Furthermore, in doing so, the Committee had stressed the importance of
finding "a formula for drawing the international boundaries in the territorial
waters of States which could also be used for the delimitation of therespective
continental shelvesof two States bordering the same continental shelf '".True,
the experts had conceded that the equidistance method might not always give
an equitable result, and that in such a case a solution by negotiation might be
necessary. But this had not deterred them from coming down firmly in favour
of the equidistance principle as the generally applicable ruie for the continental
shelf as well as for the territorial sea.
59.Accordingly, at the 1953sessionthe Special Rapporteur submitted a new
draft article (Art. 7 of his draft)provjdingthat:
(1) in the case of opposite States, the boundary shouId be "the median
line every point of which isequidistant from the two opposite coasts";
(2) in the case of adjacent States, the boundary "shouldbe drawn accord-
ing to the principleof equidistance from the respective coast-Iines" ;
(3) disputes regarding the application of these principles should be sub-
mitted to arbitration.
Paragraph 3 was eliminated from this article by reason of the inclusion of a
general provision for arbitration applying to al1the articles. As to paragraphs 1
and 2, their essentialprinciple-an equidistance boundary-was accepted by the
Commission. But these paragraphs were amended so as: (1) to make the
application of the equidistance principle subject to any agreement concluded
between the States concerned; (2) to allow for cases where "special circum-
stances" justify another boundary; and (3) to definemore preciselythe "coast"
from which the equidistance line should be measured bysubstituting "the base-
lines from which the width of the territoria1 sea of each country is measured".
60. The Federal RepubIic in paragraph 32of the Memorial seeksto interpret
the proceedings of the Commission as showing that the equidistance method
wassuggestedbythe Rapporteur and acceptedby the Commissionasasubsidiary
rule; and also that the Commission regarded the question essentially as one of
equitable apportionment rather than of determining boundaries. Indeed, in
paragraph 50 it gives the impression that the Commission's acceptance of the
equidistance principle at the 1953 session was very half-hearted. These inter-
pretations of the Commission's attitude are, however, in plain contradiction
with the Commission's ownexplanations of its views in paragraphs 81-85 of
its Report to the General AssembIy(Yearbook, 1953,Vol. II, p. 216).
61. The Commission's commentas. begins as follows:
"Inthematter ofthedelimitarionoffheboundariesof the continentalsheff
the Commission was in the position to derive some guidance from pro-
posals made by the committee of experts on the delimitation of territoria1
waters. .." (Ttalicsadded.)
And throughout the remaining paragraphs the Commentary speaks. not of
apportionment, but of the delimitation of boundaries. Then, in paragraph 82,
the Commission expressly designates the "principle of equidistance" as the
"generalrule" and as the "majorprinciple":
"Having regard to the conclusions of the committee of experts referred
lAnnex 7 of thisCounter-Mernorial, Remark, seep. 377, infra. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETNERLANDS 335
to above, the Commission now felt in the position to formulate a general
rule, based on the principle of equidistance, applicable to the boundaries
of the continental shelf both of adjacent States and of States whose coasts
are opposite to each other. The rule thus proposed is subject to such
modi~cationsas may be agreed upon by the parties. Moreover, while inthe
case of both kinds of boundaries theruleof eauidistance istheaeneralrule.
it issubjectto modificafiunincasesinwhichan0ther boundary liieis justified
by special circumstances. As in the case of the boundaries of coastal
waters, provision must be made for departures necessitated by any ex-
ceptional configuration of the Coast, as well as the presence of islands or
of navigable channels. To that extent the rule adopted partakes of some
elasticity. In viewof the general arbitration cIau... no special provision
was considered necessaryfor submitting any resulting disputes to arbitra-
tion. Such arbitration, while expected to take into account the special
circumstancescaliingfor modificationof the majorprincipleof equidistance,
is not contemplated as arbitration ex aequo etbono. That major principle
mus?constifirtethe basis of the arbitrafion, conceivedas settfement on fhe
basis of Iaw,subject to reasonable modificationsnecessitated by the special
circurnstances of the case." (Italics added.)
In the Iight of that paragraph in the Commission's Report, it seems to the
NetherIands quite misleading to suggest that it accepted the "equidistance
principle" either half-heartedly or merely as a pureIy "subsidiary" rule.
62. When the Commission adopted the equidistance principle in 1953for the
continental shelf it had still not begun its study of the régime ofthe territorial
sea. However, like the committee of experts, it recognized that the delimitation
of the territorial seand the continental shelf should be governed by the same
principles. Paragraph 83 of the Commission's 1953Report thus records:
"Without prejudice to the element of elasticity implied in article 7, the
Commission wasof the ooinion that. where the same continental shelf is
contiguous to the territoiies of two adjacent States, the delimitation ofthe
continental shelf between thern should be carried out in accordance with
the same principles as govern the delimitation of the territorial waters
between the two States in question."
Confomably with this opinion, when the Commission did corne to deal with
the régimeof the territorial sea at its1954 and 1955 sessions, it adopted the
equidistance principle as the general rule both for opposite and for "adjacent"
States. As in the case of the continental shelf, it made the application of the
principle subject to any agreement reached betweenthe States concerned and
made allowance for "special circumstances". But both for "opposite" and
"adjacent" States the general rule whichit proposed wasa boundary determined
by application of the principle of equidistance from the respective baselines
of the States concerned. In doing so, it recailed the opinion of the Cornmittee
of Experts and underlined that it was followingthe samemethod of delimitation
for the territorial sea as for the continental shelf. (SeeArts15 and 16 of the
Commission's draft articles for 1954 on the Régimeof the Territorial Sea,
Yearbook, 1954, Vol. II, pp. 157-158, reproduced without material change as
Arts. 14 and 15of its 1955draft, Yearbook, 1955,Vol. TI,p. 38.)
63. At its 1956 session the Commission completed its work on the law of the
sea, re-examining the texts of al1 its articles. In the meantirnea number of
governments had submitted comments on the Commission's drafts. Neither in
the case of the territorial sea nor of the continental shelf did any of these336 NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
governments oppose the adoption of the equidistance principle as the general
rule for delimitingthe boundary both as betweenopposite States and as between
adjacent States, should they not agree upon the boundary. Only three States
made comments on the delimitation proposals, and one of these, Yugoslavia,
did so for the purpose of advocating the strengthening of the equidistance rule
by omitting the words "in the absence of agreement between those States, or
unless another boundary line is justified by specialcircumstances" (Yearbook,
1956, Vol. II, p. 100). Norway's comment sought only to cal1attention to the
problem of delimiting the boundary of the territorial sea in cases where the
States concerned claim territorial seas of different breadths. Having declared
her support for the "median line" principle, she suggested that the problem
might be solved by formufating the rule for the territorial sea negatively: "in
the absence of special agreement, no State is entitled to extend the boundary
of its territorial sea beyond the median line" (ibid., p. 69). This suggestion,
although not followed up by the Commission, in fact formed the basis of the
solution aftenvards arrived ai by the Geneva Conference (see infi, para. 117).
64. The third State, the United Kingdom, had no criticism to make of the
Commission'sproposals forthe delimitation of theterritorial sea and continental
shelf boundaries in the case of aa)bcewt States.Its comments were directedat
the rules proposed for "opposite" States inArticles 14and 7 of the Commis-
sion's draft, which provided that. in the absence of agreement and unless
another boundary is justified by special circurnstances, "the boundary isthe
median Eirreevery point of which isequidistant .. .",etc. In substance, the
United Kingdom proposed that instead of stating "the boundary is the median
line" the texts should read: "the boundary ... is usually determined, unless
another boundary lineisjustified by speciaIcircumstances, by theapplicationof
the prirrciple of the mediari line everypoinf of which isequidistant . ..", etc.
This proposa1 it explained as follows (Yearbook, 1956,Vol, II, pp. 85and 87):
"The application of an exact median line, which is a matter of consid-
erable technical complexity, would in many instances be open to the ob-
jections that the geographicalconfiguration ofthe coast made it inequitable,
and that the base-lines (Le., the Iow-watermark of the coast) were liable
to physical change in course of time.
In the experience of the United Kingdom Government, the rnost
satisfactory course will usuallbe to apply theprinciple of the medianlitre:
that is an approximate or simpljfied median line based as closely as
circumstances allow on an exact median line and drawn on a specificchart
of a specific date." (Italics in the original.)
Afterabrief discussion,the Commission concluded that the existingwording
of the text already met the situation sufficientlyon this point.
65. In its fina1revision the Commission slightlymodified the wording of the
provisions concerning the territorial sea and continental shelf boundaries of
"opposite" States so as to specify that, in the first instance, they should be
determined by agreement. But after weighing the comment of Governments
it reaffirmed,without any hesitation and almost without discussion, its support
for the principleof equidistance as thegeneral rule of delimitation in the absence
of agreement both in the case of "opposite States" and in that of "adjacent
States".
66. Throughout the period during which the codification and progressive
development of the law of the sea was under consideration by the International
Law Commission the whole doctrine of the coastal State's rights over the COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 337
continental shelf was stilincourse of formation. The unilateral claims which
had been made by individual States varied in their nature and extent; and many
coastal States, incIuding al1 the Parties to the present dispute, had not yet
promulgated any claim.Thework of the Commissionboth helpedto consolidate
the doctrine in international law and to clarify its content. This it did no less
in regard to the delimitation of boundaries between States on the continental
shelf than it did in regard to thenature and extent of the legatrights of coastal
States over the continental shelf. The provisions drafted by the Commission
regarding the delimitation of boundaries were part and parcel of its conso-
lidation and darification of the continental shelf doctrine.
Thus, just as the work of the Commission and the contribution tothat work
made by governments wereimportant factors in developing a consensus as to
the acceptability of the doctrine and its nature and extent, so aIso were they
important factors in developing a consensus as to the acceptability of the
equidistance principle as the general rule for the delimitation of continentaI
shelf boundaries.
67. The NetherIands Government participated in the work of the Interna-
tional Law Commission by commenting upon the Commission's proposals as
and when requested by the Secretary-General. On the question of delimitation
the Netherlands Government, in particular, expressed its support for the
principle embodied in Article 6, as has been noted in paragraph 12 (p. 312,
silpiiaabovs.
68. The Federal Republic was not among the States invited to comment
upon the Commission's proposals and did not, therefore, participate in any
way in its work. On the other hand, the proceedings of the International Law
Commission were published bythe United Nations and the FederaI Republic
can hardly have failed to know ofthem and to follow the growth of the con-
sensus among States regarding both the continental shelf and the equidistance
principle.
SectionB. The 1958 GenevaConference on the Law of the Sea
69. At the Geneva Conference of 1958the International Law Commission's
draft articles formed the basisof the work of the Conference. In the Fourth
Committee, the Committee concerned with the continental shelf, the main
focus of interest was the nature and extent of the rights to be attributed to
coastal States. On thisquestion the Federal Republic submittea memorandum
opposing "the whole conception" ofthe rules proposed by the Commission and
advocating a systemwhich would preservethe character of the continental shelf
as part of the high seas (Ofici alecords, Vol. VI, pp. 1, 71 and 125). This
memorandum attracted very little notice at the Conference, whichconcentrated
its attention on the proposafs of the Commission. Apparently recognizing that
it was swimming against an overwhelming current, the Federal Republic
participated fully in the discussion of the Commission's draft articles.
70. If the main focus of interest at the Conference wasthe nature and extent
of the coastal State's rights, there was also, as paragraph 52 of the Memorial
indicates, some discussjon and revisionof the text of Article 72 of the Com-
mission's draft concerning the delimitation of continental shelf boundaries.
The Federal Republic in that paragraph summarizes the proceedings at the
Conference as follows (p. 56, supra):
"Some attempts were made to replace the flexibIesystem contained in
Article 72 by more rigid rules. But al1amendments proposed in this direc-338 NORTH SEACONTINENTALSHELF
tion met with overwhelming opposition both in the Fourth (Continental
Shelf) Committee (8-9 April 1958) and in the Plenary Session (22 April
19581,and were rejected.
The proposal of the Yugoslav delegate, that the equidistance method
shouId be declared determinant, without reservations, for the apportion-
ment of the continental shelf, was rejected by the Plenary Session of the
Conference by 45 votes to 5(with 1I abstentions). A verylarge majority of
the States was not prepared to make the equidistance method a solely
applicable rule. Rather did the Conference recognize very clearly that the
equidistance method was suitable for the drawing of boundaries only irnder
certain circumstances." (Italics added.)
This summary, if in largemeasure true, gives asomewhat misleadingimpression
as to the outcome of the debate. If aYugoslav proposa1to delete the reference
to special circumstances and to Ieave the equidistance principle standing alone
was rejected bythe Conference, so also was a Venezuelan proposal to delete the
reference to the equidistance principle and to leave the whole rnatter to the
agreement of the States concerned. What the Conference in fact did was to
endorse the text proposed by the International Law Commission, subjectonly
to minor revisions. Under this text, in the absence of an agreement, the equidis-
tance principleis laid down as rhegeneral rule unless another boundary line is
justified by special circumstances.
71. The Federal Republic, it is interesting to note, ultimately voted with the
majority and in favour of the Commission's text, as revised in discussion
(Oficial Records, Vol. VI, p. 98). In an "explanation of vote" the delegate of
the Federal Republic stated:
"in view of the inexact nature of the outer Iimit of the continental shelfas
defined by Article 67, his delegation would have preferred the adoption of
the Venezuelan amendment. When that amendment was rejected, the
delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany had accepted the viewsof
the rnajority of the Committee, subject to an interpretation of the words
'special circumstances' as meaning that any exceptional delimitation of
territorial watersould affect the delimitation of the continental shelf '."
(Italics added.)
This "explanation of vote" isilluminating in two respects. First, the Federal
Republic's delegation voted for the Venezuelanamendment not because of any
doubts as to the merits of the equidistance principle but because of the inexact
definition of the outerIimitof the continental shelf which had been adopted by
the Conference. Secondly,the delegation'scaveat as to its understanding of the
words "special circumstances" related only to any "exceptional delimitation of
territorial waters". That caveat made no reference at aIl to any implications to
be drawn from the lengths of coastlines or to any special considerations
affecting the "apportioning" of "cornmon areas".
72. No particular significance can be attached to the fact, underlined in
paragraph 52 of the Mernorial, that the Yugoslav proposa1to makethe equidis-
tance principle the sole rule was rejected in the Plenary Meeting of the Con-
ference by 47 votes to 5 (with 11 abstentions). The provisions proposed by the
Commission and contained in Article 6 of the Convention do not, however,
make the equidistance principle the sole criterion. They make it the general
lSee also note on p. 318, supraabove. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHERLANDS 339
rule unless another boundary is justified by special circumstances. More
significanceis, therefore, be attached to the fact that in that Plenary Meeting
the text (Art. 72) containing these provisions wasfinallyadoptedby 63votes to
none with only 2 abstentions (Oficial Records,Vol. II, p. 15).
73. It is true that, when at the eighteenth Plenary Meeting the Conference
voted upon the adoption of the Convention as a whole, the Federal Republic
cast its vote against the text of the Convention; for the Convention wasadopted
by 57 votes to3 with 8 abstentions, and one of the three negative votes was that
of the Federal Republic. But each of the three States rejecting the Convention
explained its vote and it does not seem that any of them was motivated by
opposition to Article 6.Japan said that she had voted against the Convention
because no reservations were adrnitted to Articles 67and 68 (now Arts.1and 2)
and because Article 74 (compulsory arbitration) had been rejected by the Con-
ference. Belgium and the Federal RepubIic explained that they had voted
against the Convention because they objected to the criterion of exploitability
in Article 67 (now Art. 1) and equally could not support the Convention
without Article 74, Thus, at the final vote not a single voice was raised against
Article 6. Moreover, if for other reasons the Federal Republic did on 26 April
1958 cast its vote against the Convention, its rejection of the Convention was
short-lived because on 30 October of the same year it put its signature to the
text.
74. In paragraph 52 of the Mernorial, however,emphasis is also given by the
Federal Republic to the fact that Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention
allows any State to make reservations to al1 the Articles of the Convention
other than Articles 1-3,andso permitsreservations to Article 6.Thisshows,says
the Federal Republic, that "the substance of Article 6 was neither regarded as
part of customary international law nor accorded any sort of fundamental
significance". The conclusion thus drawn by the Federal Republic from the
reservations clause in Article 12 seems much too sweeping for the following
reasons.
75. A wide freedorn to formulate reservations is normally permitted in
generaï multilateral treaties, andthat even in the caof codifying conventions
largely concerned with the reforrnulation of the existing law. But this is only
for the purpose of facilitating the maximum number of acceptances of the
Convention by allowing States having special problems to make reservations,
provided that these are compatible with the object and purpose of the Conven-
tion. Accordingly, a freedom to make reservations is perfectly consistent with
the acceptance of the provisions of the Conventions as stating the generally
recognized rules of international law applicable in the matters in question.
Neither the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone nor the
Convention on the High Seas has any clause prohibiting or restricting the
making of reservations, and a number of reservations have in fact been made
to each Convention. Yet no one could deny the fundamental significance of
many of the provisions of these Conventions or the essential character of
many of their other provisions. The same observations may be made with
reference to the Vienna Convention on Diplornatic Relations.
76. A reservations clauseisintroduced prirnarily whenfor particular reasons
it is desired to prohibit altogether reservations to specific provisions of the
Convention. That this was the case with regard to Article 12of the Continental
Shelf Convention is clear from the record of the ninth Plenary Meeting of the
Geneva Conference. Reservations to Articles 1-3were excluded because some340 NORTHSEA CONTINENTAL SHELF
States considered that reservations to these Articles would really deprive the
doctrine of the continental shelf of most of its meaning and destroy the very
basis of the Convention (Oficial Records, Vol. XI,pp. 16-18).But the fact that
reservations to Articles 4-7 were not excluded by the Conference in no way
implies that these Articles werenot considered to be an integral and important
part of the Convention. The records of the Conference and of the proceedings
of the International Law Commission themselvessufficeto contradict any such
implication.
77. Furthermore, as appears from paragraphs below, none of the States
which have become a party to the Convention-already 37 in number-has
formulated a reservation questioning the validity of the rules set out in Article
6. A few States have made declarations of their understandings regarding the
application of "special circumstances" in their own cases. But there isnothing
in the practice of States since the Geneva Conference to support the idea that
Article 6 has not been generally accepted as an integral and important part of
the Convention.
Section C. The Provisionsof Article 6 Are in Harmony with State Practlce
in the Delimitation of Other Maritime and Fresh-Water Boundaries
78. The equidistance principle, proposed by the Committee of Experts and
the International Law Commission and adopted by the Geneva Conference,
was far from being a novelty invented by the Committee of Experts in 1953.
In paragraph 41 of the MemoriaI (p. 38, supra) the Federal Republic indeed
admits that the "equidistance principle" in its median line form has long been
known in international law:
"Median lines as sea, lake or river boundaries have existed for a long
time past. In most cases-leaving out of account irregularities in the
geographical configuration of the coasts opposite each other and provided
no islands lie between them-they effectuate a just and equitable appor-
tionrnent of the waters between the two States concerned."
Itis true that later, in paragraph 46 (p. 50, supra), the Federal Republic
seemsrather less generous when it asserts that-
"the occasionaldivision of rivers, lakes, or inland seas between two States
lying opposite each other by median lines isno proof of a general recogni-
tion of the so-called principle of equidistance also for other geographical
situations than those of opposite coasts" (italics added).
But an examination of the relevant State practiceamply justifies the Federal
Republic's first staternentthat "rnedian lines as sea, lake or river boundaries
have existed for a long tirne past", and shows that the use of rnedian line
boundaries has been much more than occasional.
79. In this connection the Court is asked to refto Annex 15which, without
attempting to be exhaustive, sets out a veTyconsiderable niimber d cases in
which the equidistance principle, chiefly in its median line form, has been
employed in the delimitation of sea, lake or river boundaries. The list of cases
is impressiveenough even if "thalweg" boundaries are left out of account. But
in many cases, as the Dictionnaire de la Terminologiedu Droit International
points out (p. 602), the term Thalweg is used in treaties as denoting the median
line of the navigable channel or, where the river is not navigable, simply the
median line of the river. COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE NETHEFZANDS 341
80. As to the Federal Government's contention in paragraph 46 that any
practice in regard to the use of median lineas boundaries between "opposite"
States would be no proof of a general recognition of the principle of equidis-
tance also for other geographical situations, this does not seem to be to the
point. Iisnot here a question of establishing the "equidistance principle" as a
principle universally binding in boundary delimitation and, as such, binding
on the Parties to the present dispute. Between 1945and 1958a new doctrine
developed in international law vesting new rights in coastal States over the
continental shelf adjacent to their coasts. The question here is of the general
recognition, as part of the developrnent of this doctrine, of the rule that, in the
absence of agreement, inter-State boundaries on the continental shelf are to
be de
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 12
|
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/ww2-royal-netherlands-air-force.258829/
|
en
|
WW2 Royal Netherlands Air Force
|
[
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/logo/logo-cfc.png",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/logo/logo-cfc.png",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/66/66973.jpg?1475248344",
"http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/4889/fokkerdxxikd3.th.png",
"http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/200/fokkergipx5.th.png",
"http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/217/fokkertvds1.th.png",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/90/90888.jpg?1475248353",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/96/96609.jpg?1475248356",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/goodwork.gif",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/biggrin.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/66/66973.jpg?1475248344",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/goodwork.gif",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/biggrin.gif",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/wink.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/4/4691.jpg?1475248306",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/66/66973.jpg?1475248344",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/60/60560.jpg?1475248339",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/eek.gif",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/4/4691.jpg?1475248306",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/eek.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/86/86068.jpg?1475248351",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/96/96676.jpg?1475248356",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/32/32561.jpg?1475248320",
"https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/goodwork.gif",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/342/342450.jpg?1700042303",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/342/342450.jpg?1700042303",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/342/342450.jpg?1700042303",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/157/157631.jpg?1723592105",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/122/122684.jpg?1643157742",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/240/240081.jpg?1602515837",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/170/170151.jpg?1475399212",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/112/112675.jpg?1479185610",
"https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/s/58/58536.jpg?1646553005"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2008-01-13T20:39:49-05:00
|
Fokker D.XXI:
The Fokker D.XXI fighter was designed in 1935 for use by the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Air Force (ML-KNIL). [1]As such, it was...
|
en
|
CivFanatics Forums
|
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/ww2-royal-netherlands-air-force.258829/
|
snafusmith
Unit Maker
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
1,549
Location
I've been everywhere, man
Jan 13, 2008
#1
Fokker D.XXI:
The Fokker D.XXI fighter was designed in 1935 for use by the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Air Force (ML-KNIL). [1]As such, it was designed as a cheap and small, but rugged aircraft, which had respectable performance for its time. Entering service in the early years of World War II, it provided yeoman work for both the Luchtvaartafdeeling (Dutch Army Aviation Group) and the Finnish Air Force also a few were built by the Carmoli factory before the factory fell into Nationalist hands during the Spanish Civil War.
-Wikipedia
This unit uses the fighter animations, please point there in your XML.
Poly Count: 728
Fokker G.I:
The Fokker G.I was a Dutch heavy twin-engined fighter plane comparable in size and role to the German Messerschmitt Bf 110 and the British Mosquito.
-Wikipedia
This unit uses the bomber animations, please point there in your XML.
Poly Count: 706
Fokker T.V:
The Fokker T.V was a twin-engine bomber, described as an "aerial cruiser"[1], built by Fokker for the Netherlands Air Force. It was modern for its time but by the German invasion of 1940 it was outclassed by the airplanes of the Luftwaffe. Nevertheless the T.V was used successfully against the German onslaught. The T.V and Fokker G.1 were the only aircraft of the Dutch air force that were equipped with retractable landing gear. As the T.V lacked self-sealing fuel tanks they gained a reputation for rapidly catching fire when hit by enemy fire.
-Wikipedia
This unit uses the bomber animations, please point there in your XML.
Poly Count: 744
DOWNLOAD HERE
ENJOY!
-Smitty
esnaz
King
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
708
Location
USA
Jan 13, 2008
#2
Another great looking unit, good job
Gaius Octavius
Deity
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
4,016
Jan 13, 2008
#3
Thank you!
I know several places where they will get lots of use...
snafusmith
Unit Maker
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
1,549
Location
I've been everywhere, man
Jan 13, 2008
#4
Thank you!
I know several places where they will get lots of use...
Thanks!
They'll go especially well in a WW2 Pacific mod - though the camo is appropriate for the RNAF, the markings are actually those of the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Air Force.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
Joined
Nov 12, 2001
Messages
5,689
Location
Florida
Jan 13, 2008
#5
Great Snafu... simply great. Now we have some proper Dutch Air Force units.
One special note worth mentioning... and I know it's not your fault... but when you use the "bomber" animations on a fighter (which has previously been done with the American P-38 Lightning), the interception animations get really freaky... because you'll see the twin-engine fighter go after the enemy aircraft, but instead of shooting at the enemy plane (as the fighter animation does), the twin-engine fighter will string a trail of bombs from mid air miles away from home, all the way back to his HOME BASE!
So if a twin-engine fighter intercepts an enemy plane six squares away from it's base, it will chase after the enemy aircraft then string a trail of bombs back to it's starting friendly base!
The devil is in the details, I know!
Great work as always Snafu!
snafusmith
Unit Maker
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
1,549
Location
I've been everywhere, man
Jan 13, 2008
#6
One special note worth mentioning... and I know it's not your fault... but when you use the "bomber" animations on a fighter (which has previously been done with the American P-38 Lightning), the interception animations get really freaky... because you'll see the twin-engine fighter go after the enemy aircraft, but instead of shooting at the enemy plane (as the fighter animation does), the twin-engine fighter will string a trail of bombs from mid air miles away from home, all the way back to his HOME BASE!
So if a twin-engine fighter intercepts an enemy plane six squares away from it's base, it will chase after the enemy aircraft then string a trail of bombs back to it's starting friendly base!
The devil is in the details, I know!
Yeah, I know - I don't use it as a fighter, but as a ground-pounder with good defense.
GeneralMatt
Emperor
Joined
Jul 10, 2005
Messages
1,980
Location
Canada
Jan 13, 2008
#7
Not to sound dumb, but the Netherlands had a Airforce in WWII. You learn something new ever day they say..
J/K, but very nice units nonetheless.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
Joined
Nov 12, 2001
Messages
5,689
Location
Florida
Jan 13, 2008
#8
Not to sound dumb, but the Netherlands had a Airforce in WWII. You learn something new ever day they say..
Yes... they got blown-away in Holland in a few days in 1940 by the Germans, then got plastered defending the East Indies against the Japanese in 1941/42.
They didn't have a lot of luck in WWII. Their navy didn't last much longer either. Oh, and that nice model of the USS Langley got sunk ferrying fighters to Dutch Java in 1942.
asioasioasio
Fallout Scrubber
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
3,058
Location
Poland, EU
Jan 14, 2008
#9
Beuatiful. And i love the colors
avain
(key)
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
2,770
Location
Budapest, EU
woodelf
Bard
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Messages
15,036
Location
Gallery
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 2
|
https://www.europeanairshows.co.uk/aviation-anniversaries/march/royal-netherlands-air-force-founded
|
en
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force created — European Airshows
|
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/6338a0a6905456183845cdcb/65c3fcb43cf0a73ded5188eb/1711557597174/Fokker_G.1_in_de_vlucht_%282160_033464%29-topaz-enhance-3.2x.jpg?format=1500w
|
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/6338a0a6905456183845cdcb/65c3fcb43cf0a73ded5188eb/1711557597174/Fokker_G.1_in_de_vlucht_%282160_033464%29-topaz-enhance-3.2x.jpg?format=1500w
|
[
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/60368e2c-d450-41c3-b3e0-8e492be95907/White+logo+-+no+background.png?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/60368e2c-d450-41c3-b3e0-8e492be95907/White+logo+-+no+background.png?format=1500w",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/2099625f-f281-4ca8-a29f-552ed6cd808b/Fokker_G.1_in_de_vlucht_%282160_033464%29-topaz-enhance-3.2x.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/b6a9eff0-e9e5-4860-b9ab-51cf2d3f9878/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2841%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/7adf0965-9e7e-4964-90ab-600fdd8538bc/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2863%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/88eefa71-bf5d-44d6-b0fe-a40b47493a55/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2864%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/68e8bd37-b498-4d76-b7cb-92af2d6eaa61/Malta+Airshow+Static+Logo+%2842%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/c426a272-f244-4ff3-bd19-526bbca5625a/_DSC2673-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/8ae248f7-a6da-4b11-a73b-71648b8a4349/_DSC8656-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/ea0823d8-9dab-4c3e-af20-202886518e9a/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2882%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/d7e90dcd-95d0-4776-9990-a85dd20d1e61/_DSC5451-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/b6a9eff0-e9e5-4860-b9ab-51cf2d3f9878/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2841%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/7adf0965-9e7e-4964-90ab-600fdd8538bc/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2863%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/88eefa71-bf5d-44d6-b0fe-a40b47493a55/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2864%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/68e8bd37-b498-4d76-b7cb-92af2d6eaa61/Malta+Airshow+Static+Logo+%2842%29.jpg",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/c426a272-f244-4ff3-bd19-526bbca5625a/_DSC2673-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/8ae248f7-a6da-4b11-a73b-71648b8a4349/_DSC8656-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/ea0823d8-9dab-4c3e-af20-202886518e9a/RIAT+2023+Departures+Logo+%2882%29.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/d7e90dcd-95d0-4776-9990-a85dd20d1e61/_DSC5451-DeNoiseAI-clear.png",
"https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/51455c00-009b-401c-900a-183f6fe0736d/White+logo+-+no+background.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/602531ed52cb0b327fea1168/c4209e8a-10e9-4d6f-bd29-7fe2926a824f/favicon.ico
|
European Airshows
|
https://www.europeanairshows.co.uk/aviation-anniversaries/march/royal-netherlands-air-force-founded
|
Royal Netherlands Air Force
The Royal Netherlands Air Force was preceded by the Army Aviation Group (Luchtvaartafdeling, abbreviation LVA), founded in 1913 and renamed Army Aviation Brigade (Luchtvaartbrigade) in 1939. In 1953, it was raised to the level of independent operational part of the Dutch Armed Forces and renamed Royal Netherlands Air Force (Koninklijke Luchtmacht).
Dutch air power started on 1 July 1913 with the founding of the Army Aviation Group at Soesterberg airfield (vliegbasis Soesterberg) with four pilots. When founded, the Army Aviation Group operated one aircraft, the Brik, which was supplemented with three French Farman HF.20 aircraft a few months later. These aircraft were soon outdated and the Dutch government ordered several fighter/reconnaissance Nieuport and Caudron aircraft to replace them.
The Netherlands maintained a neutral position during World War I and the Army Aviation Group did not take part in any action, instead developing the force's capabilities.
Pilot training was opened for ranks below officer, and technical, aerial photography, meteorological and navigation flights were established.
New airfields were established at Arnhem, Gilze-Rijen air base, Venlo and Vlissingen.
Because of the war, it was difficult to procure suitable aircraft. In 1917 this changed and 1918 personnel numbered 650.
After the end of World War I, the Dutch government cut the defence budget and the Army Aviation Group was almost dissolved. As political tensions in Europe increased during the late 1930s the government tried to rebuild the armed forces again in 1938 but there were many problems, not least the shortage of pilot instructors, navigators and pilots to fly the new multiple-engine aircraft. Lack of standardisation and resulting maintenance issues added to the complexity of the rebuilding task.
As war loomed, in July 1939 the Army Aviation Group was renamed the Army Aviation Brigade (Luchtvaartbrigade).
In August 1939, the Netherlands government mobilised its armed forces, but due to limited budgets the Army Aviation Brigade operated only 176 combat aircraft
In May 1940, Germany invaded the Netherlands. Within five days the Dutch Army Aviation Brigade was defeated by the Luftwaffe. All of the Brigade's bombers, along with 30 D.XXI and 17 G.I fighters were shot down; two D.XXI and eight G.I were destroyed on the ground. Two G.I were captured by German forces, one of which was later flown to England by a Fokker pilot. The Douglas bombers were used as fighters because no suitable bombs were available; these aircraft were poorly suited for this role and eight were shot down and three destroyed on the ground in the first hours of the conflict.
Despite their numerical superiority, the Luftwaffe lost 350 aircraft in the conquest of the Netherlands, many to anti-aircraft fire and crashes at improvised landing fields in the Netherlands rather than due to action by Dutch fighter aircraft. The cost was high – almost 95% of the Dutch pilots were lost. In recognition of their actions Queen Wilhelmina granted the highest Dutch military decoration, the Militaire Willemsorde (MWO), to the Army Aviation Brigade collectively.
Some aircrews escaped to England and on 1 June 1940, 320 Squadron and 321 Squadron were established there under RAF operational command. Due to a shortage of personnel, 321 Squadron was absorbed by 320 Sqn in January 1941. Although their personnel were predominantly from the Navy Air Service, Army Aviation aircrew also served with 320 Sqn until the end of the war.
In 1941, the Royal Netherlands Military Flying School was re-established, in the United States at Jackson Field (also known as Hawkins Field), Jackson, Mississippi, operating lend-lease aircraft and training all military aircrew for the Netherlands.
The separate Militaire Luchtvaart van het Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger (ML-KNIL; Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Military Air Service) continued in the Netherlands East Indies (NEI), until its occupation by Japan in 1942. Some personnel escaped to Australia and Ceylon. 321 Squadron was re-formed in Ceylon, in March 1942, from Dutch aviators.
In 1942, 18 (NEI) Squadron, a joint Dutch-Australian unit was established, in Canberra, equipped with B-25 Mitchell bombers. It saw action in the New Guinea campaign and over the Dutch East Indies. In 1943, 120 (NEI) Squadron was established. Equipped with Kittyhawk fighters, it flew many missions under Australian command, including the recapturing of Dutch New Guinea.
In June 1943, a Dutch fighter squadron was established in England. 322 (Dutch) Squadron, equipped with the Supermarine Spitfire, saw action as part of the RAF. 322 Sqn aircraft featured the British RAF roundels as well as the Dutch orange triangle. 322 Sqn was successfully deployed against incoming V-1 flying bombs. From mid-1944, during the invasion of Normandy, it executed ground attack missions over France and Belgium.
In July 1944, the Directorate of Netherlands Airpower was established in London.
In 1947, its Chief of Air Force Staff was appointed.
During the Indonesian War of Independence, the air force committed ground attacks and transported material and personnel. In 1948, transportation aircraft were used in support of the first Dutch airborne raid in southern Sumatra and Djokjakarta.
In 1951 several non-combat functions in the Army Aviation were opened to women.
On 27 March 1953, the Royal Netherlands Air Force officially became an independent part of the Dutch armed forces, rather than part of the Army.
The Air Defense Command, (Commando Lucht Verdediging, abbreviated CLV) consisting of a command unit, five radar stations and six fighter squadrons, had been established. Its radar equipment as well as its air defense fighters all came from obsolete RAF stocks.
After the Netherlands joined NATO another new command: Tactical Air Command (Commando Tactische Luchtstrijdkrachten) was established.
|
|||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 49
|
https://pacificwrecks.com/douglas/articles/neiaf.html
|
en
|
The Dutch Air Forces in the Pacific War
|
[
"https://pacificwrecks.com/airfields/australia/pearce/pearce-neiaf-buffalo.jpg",
"https://pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/os2u/A48-2/kingfisher-jig-sideview.jpg",
"https://pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b-25/iafm/b25-nose45.jpg",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/top/donate_now.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/facebook.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/twitter.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/youtube.png",
"https://www.pacificwrecks.com/nav/social/icons/instagram.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
by John Douglas
The Dutch Air Forces were one of the minor players on the Allied side in the Pacific War. Their involvement came from the current country of Indonesia, which at the time of World War II, was administered by the Netherlands, and known as the Netherlands East Indies (NEI). The administration of N.E.I had two colonial air forces, the Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service (MLD) or more often the RNN; and the air service of the Royal Netherlands Indies Army (The MLKNIL). The Royal Netherlands Indies Airline (KNILM) had a Fleet of transports as well.
Netherlands Aircraft
As of December 7, 1941:
Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service (MLD)
33 Dornier flying boats
35 Catalina flying boats
6 Fokker T-IV float planes
Royal Netherlands Indies Army (KNIL)
83 Glen Martin B10 bombers
71 Brewster Buffalo F2A Fighters
17 Curtis Wright W21 Fighters
13 Curtis 75A Fighters
40 Various recon and trainers
The Royal Netherlands Indies Airline (KNILM)
4 Douglas DC-2 Transports
18 Lockheed Lodestar Transports
Other planes were on order but not delivered at this date.
Note: - the number of planes varies, according to the reference.
These planes were disposed throughout a number of locations in the N.E.I.. The first loss to Japanese aggression occurred at Pearl Harbour, when a RNN Catalina was destroyed. 3 Glen Martin Bomber Squadrons and a Buffalo Squadron were posted to the defense of Singapore. Additional Glen Martin Bombers and the Dornlers were deployed to the defense of British Borneo. After a series of battles the survivors of the Dutch Air Forces escaped to Australia. The battle for the defense of the NEI saw Dutch Air Forces lose nearly 300 planes.
Netherlands Aircraft To Australia
That fled to Australia at the fall of the Netherlands East Indies were:
Royal Netherlands Naval Air Service (MLD)
6 Dornier Flying boats
9 Catalina Flying boats
The RAAF acquired 5 of the Dornier flying boats (the other was retained by the MLD/RNN for their use within Australia). 1 Catalina was purchased by the RAAF, as were 28 Ryan STM Trainers and 18 Vought Kingfisher reconnaissance seaplanes. The Dormer (X-24) was used not only for activities within Australia, but also for occasional supply runs up into Dutch New Guinea (Tanoh Merah and Wissel Lakes) as were the two Catalinas, Y-86 and Y-87.
Royal Netherlands Indies Army (KNIL)
1 Glen Martin B10
The sole Glen Martin Bomber was also sold to the US Air Force, and was used operationally by them until August 1944, when it was scrapped.
The Royal Netherlands Indies Airline (KNILM)
3 Douglas DC2
11 Lockheed Lodestar
The 11 Lockheed Lodestars were sold to the US Government, for use as local transport.
Netherlands Regroups & Rearms
31 Bostons and 17 Buffalos, all of which had been ordered by the Dutch government for the defense of NEI, and which were diverted to Australia on the fall of the N.E.I.
These were 5 Mitchell B-25s also intended for the ML-KNIL that were shipped to Australia at this time. Including other B-25s there were a total of 54 Mitchells ordered by the NEI Government. The USAAF took over 49 of these planes, leaving only 5 for the NEI - MLKNIL. These remaining 5 B25s were ultimately transferred to the USAAF as well. The aircrew that arrived in Australia on the fall of the NEI were allocated to 3 different locations and activities.
The RNN/MLD Air Force Crews were sent to Colombo where they formed the Dutch No. 321 Squadron. One RNN air crew was retained in Australia to fly the sole Dornier and later on, two Catalinas that were taken into the fleet of transports use by the N.E.I. Government-in-exile.
The ML-KNIL air crew were sent initially to Amberley, and then on to Canberra, when they helped form a B25 Squadron, 18 (NEI) Squadron, flying under RAAF Operational Control. Ultimately the Dutch were not able to provide enough ground crew or extra gunners to fully staff this Squadron, so the RAAF made up the numbers needed.
18 (NEI) Squadron in effect was a mixture of Australian and Dutch personnel, with a Dutch Commander and an Australian liaison officer commanding the Australian Squadron members. As much as possible Dutch identity was retained (the NEI. Members used Dutch salutes etc).
The initial B-25s were all reallocated to the USAAF and 18 Bostons were supplied in their place. A month later these Bostons were replaced with 18 Mitchells, which took the Squadron some re-equipping to bring them up to a satisfactory standard. 18 (NEI) Squadron transferred to the Northern Territory Australia, in December 1942, operating out of Bachelor A/S for most of the war.
They were in action by February 1943 making raids on Japanese installations in the occupied. Netherlands East Indies and in Timor.
The KLM air crews was send to the US for further training in military aircraft.
In September 1943 new more heavily armed and better equipped B-25s were allocated to 18 (N.E.I) Squadron, replacing their warn out aircraft.
Another group of new B-25s were issued in March 1944 to 18 (NEI) Squadron to replace the B25s then in use.
In February 1945 18 (N.E.I.) Squadron was reassigned to Jaquinot Bay Airfield, immediately to the south of Rabaul in New Britain; which had just been captured by Australian ground forces. The Squadron ground parties had just arrived at Jaquinot Bay, when the squadron was reassigned to Balikipapan. They arrived there in July 1945.
A further B-25 Squadron (119 (NEI) Squadron) was formed in September 1943 but quickly dissolved when manpower shortages become apparent in December the same year. These planes were transferred to the RAAF.
A third NEI Squadron (No. 120) was formed in Canberra in December 1943, flying P40s. It also had the same mixture of Australian and Dutch aircrew and ground staff as 18 (NEI) Squadron. In May 1944 this Squadron began operations in Merauke, Dutch New Guinea. Some of these P40s were posted to the North Coast of DNG, operating out of Noemfoer.
In March and April 1945 18 (NEI) Squadron begin its transfer to Jaquinot Bay, New Britain. In May the transfer was cancelled and the Squadron posted back to the Northern Territory of Australia. 18 (NEI) Squadron finally reached Balikipapan on 14th August 1945.
One 120 (NEI) Squadron Wirraway was lost near Kikori in PNG and several P-40s were lost over the North Coast of DNG. 120 (NEI) Squadron arrived at Jaquinot Bay in May 1945; and was promptly transferred to back in DNG. The RNN Dornier was transferred to the RAAF in October 1944.
Immediately prior to the end of the war, a 4th (19 NEI) Squadron was formed in Canberra. This was a transport squadron, using Lodestars, Dakotas and surplus B-25s plus the two RNN Catalinas. These aircraft had all been on strength for some time and the Squadron establishment was a formality.
In June 1945 120 (NEI) Squadron commenced operations out of Biak. 6 of their P40s were lost over Manokwari in a one week period in early August 1945. By the end of the war 120 (NEI) Squadron had lost 14 pilots and 11 aircraft. 18 (NEI) Squadron lost 112 aircrew and 21 B-25s. Several support aircraft were lost as well, including a Dakota which was found 44 years later near Mossman in New South Wales.
What remains of the Dutch Air Force in the Pacific today?
The Buffalos have all vanished, except as future rebuilt projects, including one rebuild currently underway at the Military Aviation Museum RNIAF, at Soesterberg in the Netherlands. The Dorniers are all gone, but a few B25s remain. Some of the earlier B-25s when decommissioned by the 18 NEI Squadron, had a further life with American and Australia air forces, and may still remain in other markings as wrecks.
Of the pre war fleet, a number of the Ryan trainers have survived and can be seen at air shows in Australia. Several are flying today, and others are under restoration. There is a OS2U Kingfisher being rebuilt at Wangeratta that was probably one of these purchase by the RAAF for the NEI order. Charles Darby noted one KNIL A-20C at Vivigani in the early 1970s, later served with the RAAF and recovered and restored by them.
The Indonesian Armed Forces Museum in Jakarta has a B-25 on display from this era, whilst in Holland, a group of enthusiasts (Duke of Brabant Air Force) flies a B-25 marked in the colours of 18 NEI Squadron.
|
||||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 52
|
https://fas.org/publication/increasing-evidence-that-the-us-air-forces-nuclear-mission-may-be-returning-to-uk-soil/
|
en
|
Increasing Evidence that the US Air Force's Nuclear Mission May Be Returning to UK Soil
|
[
"https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Lakenheath_WS3_041416.jpeg",
"https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Lakenheath-1-scaled.jpeg",
"https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Screenshot-2023-08-28-at-11.19.22-AM.png",
"https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/BudgetStatements.png",
"https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Lakenheath_WS3_041416.jpeg",
"https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/NATO_Nukes2023.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2023-08-28T15:27:22+00:00
|
New U.S. Air Force budgetary documents strongly imply that the United States Air Force is in the process of re-establishing its nuclear weapons mission on UK soil.
|
en
|
https://fas.org/wp-content/themes/fas/assets/images/favicon.ico
|
Federation of American Scientists
|
https://fas.org/publication/increasing-evidence-that-the-us-air-forces-nuclear-mission-may-be-returning-to-uk-soil/
|
08.28.23 | 4 min read | Text by Matt Korda & Hans Kristensen
New U.S. Air Force budgetary documents strongly imply that the United States Air Force is in the process of re-establishing its nuclear weapons mission on UK soil.
The Air Force’s FY 2024 budgetary justification package, dated March 2023, notes the planned construction of a “surety dormitory” at RAF Lakenheath, approximately 100 kilometers northeast of London. The “surety dormitory” was also briefly mentioned in the Department of Defense’s testimony to Congress in March 2023, but with no accompanying explanation. “Surety” is a term commonly used within the Department of Defense and Department of Energy to refer to the capability to keep nuclear weapons safe, secure, and under positive control.
The justification documents note the new requirement to “Construct a 144-bed dormitory to house the increase in enlisted personnel as the result of the potential Surety Mission” [emphasis added]. To justify the new construction, the documents note, “With the influx of airmen due to the arrival of the potential Surety mission and the bed down of the two F-35 squadrons there is a significant deficiency in the amount of unaccompanied housing available for E4s and below at Royal Air Force Lakenheath” [emphasis added].
Construction of the facility is scheduled to begin in June 2024 and end in February 2026.
We previously documented the UK’s addition to the Department of Defense’s FY2023 budgetary documentary for the NATO Security Investment Program, in which it was written that “NATO is wrapping up a thirteen-year, $384 million infrastructure investment program at storage sites in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, and Turkey to upgrade security measures, communication systems, and facilities” [emphasis added]. An explicit mention of the UK had not been included in the previous year’s budgetary documents, and it was removed in this year’s documents after we reported on its inclusion the previous year.
The removal of country names from the Pentagon’s Military Construction Program budget request follows the denial of a recent FAS declassification request of previously available nuclear warhead numbers. These decisions contradict and undermine the Biden administration’s appeal for nuclear transparency in other nuclear-armed states.
The past two years of budgetary evidence strongly suggests that the United States is taking steps to re-establish its nuclear mission on UK soil. The United States has not stored nuclear weapons in the United Kingdom for the past 15 years, since we reported in 2008 that nuclear weapons had been withdrawn from RAF Lakenheath.
The Weapons Storage and Security Systems (known as WS3) at RAF Lakenheath are contained within Protective Aircraft Shelters; the WS3s include an elevator-drive vault that can be lowered into the concrete floor, as well as the associated command, control, and communications software needed to unlock the weapons. A total of 33 WS3 vaults were installed at RAF Lakenheath in the 1990s, each of which can hold up to four B61 bombs, for a maximum capacity of 132 warheads. Whenever nuclear weapons have been withdrawn from European air bases in the past, their vaults have been put into “caretaker” status, but as Harold Smith, the former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs stated at the time, these vaults were “mothballed in such a way that if we chose to go back into those bases we can do it.”
The nuclear-related upgrades to RAF Lakenheath are taking place as the new 495th Fighter Squadron (hosted at RAF Lakenheath) prepares to become the first U.S. Air Force squadron in Europe to be equipped with the nuclear-capable F-35A Lightning II. The upgrades coincide with the long-planned delivery of the new B61-12 gravity bombs to Europe, which will replace the approximately 100 legacy B61-3s and -4s currently estimated to be deployed in Europe.
In December 2021, in response to a media question about potentially stationing nuclear weapons in Poland, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced that “we have no plans of stationing any nuclear weapons in any other countries than we already have…” However, it is difficult to square his statement with the planned “arrival of the potential Surety mission” at RAF Lakenheath, as well as the addition of the base to the list of sites receiving nuclear upgrades.
One possible explanation is that the United States is currently preparing the infrastructure at RAF Lakenheath to allow the base to potentially receive nuclear weapons in the future or in the midst of a crisis, without necessarily having already decided to permanently station them there or increase the number of weapons currently stored in Europe. The budget language of a “potential Surety mission” indicates that a formal deployment decision has not yet been made.
This would be consistent with construction at other known nuclear storage bases across Europe, where new upgrades are taking place that are designed to facilitate the rapid movement of weapons on- and off-base to increase operational flexibility. In the midst of a genuine nuclear crisis with Russia, for example, a portion of U.S. nuclear weapons could be redistributed from more vulnerable eastern bases to RAF Lakenheath.
Background information:
Lakenheath Air Base Added To Nuclear Weapons Storage Site Upgrades
NATO Steadfast Noon Exercise and Nuclear Modernization in Europe
The C-17A Has Been Cleared To Transport B61-12 Nuclear Bomb To Europe
FAS Nuclear Notebook: US nuclear weapons, 2023
This research was carried out with generous contributions from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the New-Land Foundation, the Ploughshares Fund, the Prospect Hill Foundation, Longview Philanthropy, the Stewart R. Mott Foundation, the Future of Life Institute, Open Philanthropy, and individual donors.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 30
|
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/occupation-and-reconstruction-germany-1945-48
|
en
|
The Army and the occupation of Germany
|
[
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/nam_stacked_web-bw.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/101792_slice.jpg.webp?itok=0ilIlCua",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/101792_slice.jpg.webp?itok=WpQ3bB-c",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-06/250459_full_v3.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/262451_half_1.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107729_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/253238_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/103028_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-10/262505_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107568_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/240586_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/103758_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/269441_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107730_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/108222_slice.jpg.webp?itok=4XWfen_Q",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/108222_slice.jpg.webp?itok=PY9k-sbG",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/81367_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm6_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm3_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/259331_slice.jpg.webp?itok=4QdRvBgg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/259331_slice.jpg.webp?itok=ktj6TUPf",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/101907_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/108282_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/261279_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/261277_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm5_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107679_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/108217_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/108216_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/107678_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/112284_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2017-07/101808_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/262777_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm1_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-03/iwm2_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/100844_slice.jpg.webp?itok=MhI6bfsS",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/100844_slice.jpg.webp?itok=9rNZJMDk",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2017-07/103850_slice.jpg.webp?itok=0TJP2GAM",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-03/107552_half.jpg.webp?itok=cHneMshd",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2019-10/97818_half.jpg.webp?itok=J4AvPN2x",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2019-10/260621_full.jpg.webp?itok=cYqCWL4s",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2021-02/foe-friend-notitle_teaser_v2.jpg.webp?itok=GVhqnz2X",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-04/103761_slice.jpg.webp?itok=LWzds_5P",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/facebook.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/x.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/instagram.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/youtube.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Following their victory over Nazi Germany in 1945, the Allies were faced with administering a country in ruins. British soldiers had a leading role in this, helping to hunt war criminals, rebuild industry and help displaced persons.
|
en
|
/themes/custom/nam_theme/favicon.ico
|
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/occupation-and-reconstruction-germany-1945-48
|
Occupation
On 7 May 1945, after months of fierce fighting, the Germans agreed to Allied demands for unconditional surrender, finally ending six years of warfare that had left millions dead and much of Europe in ruins. The following day, Tuesday 8 May 1945, was declared 'Victory in Europe' (VE) Day, and marked the formal end of the European war. The Allies were now faced with occupying a conquered and destroyed nation.
It had already been agreed that Germany and Austria would be divided into four occupation zones: Soviet, American, French and British. Each of the major powers was the sole political and legal authority in its zone.
The German capital of Berlin, despite being deep inside the Soviet occupation area, was also to be split into four separate zones. The four powers would also work together via the Berlin-based Allied Control Council, formed in August 1945, which would oversee matters relating to the whole of Germany.
BAOR
On 25 August 1945, Field Marshal Montgomery's 21st Army Group was renamed the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR). It was made responsible for the occupation and administration of the British Zone in north-west Germany. In this task, it was assisted by the Control Commission Germany (CCG). This consisted of British civil servants and military personnel. It took over aspects of local government, policing, housing and transport.
The BAOR’s headquarters were established in Bad Oeynhausen in North Rhine-Westphalia. Both here and elsewhere, it requisitioned German buildings for military administration and accommodation, exacerbating the housing shortage. Indeed, with around 800,000 Commonwealth soldiers in Germany by the end of 1945, finding barracks and camps for them all in a ruined country was major headache.
Last-ditch resistance
Following their victory, the Allies feared that Nazi fanatics might wage a partisan war against the occupation, and gather in the mountains of Bavaria and Austria, in the so-called 'Alpine Redoubt'. These concerns proved unfounded and were largely the result of German propaganda fooling Allied intelligence services.
Another last-ditch Nazi resistance effort, the Werewolf plan, was also something of a damp squib. This was aimed at encouraging acts of sabotage and reprisals against collaborators in areas occupied by the Allies. Despite its limitations, it was a useful propaganda device that helped convince the most ardent Nazi supporters to carry on fighting in the final weeks of the war.
In any case, the Allies took the threat seriously and had interned around 100,000 civilian suspects by the end of 1945. They also kept many German officers in prisoner-of-war camps for longer to prevent them supporting the Werewolf campaign on release.
The last Werewolf activities petered out in early 1947, with its operatives having failed to mobilise a war-weary population to support their doomed struggle.
War criminals
Thousands of men and women suspected of involvement in the concentration camp system and other crimes across Europe were rounded up by Allied forces. The key Nazi leaders were to be dealt with jointly by the main Allied powers, while the rest would be punished in those countries where they had committed their atrocities. Apprehending these lesser-known Nazis became the responsibility of the Allies depending on which zone of Germany or Austria they controlled.
Between November 1945 and October 1946, the Nuremberg military tribunal tried 24 leading Nazis and charged them with crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Eleven were executed and the others sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment.
Investigation teams
The BAOR was responsible for pursuing suspected war criminals in its zone of north-west Germany. It established the British Army War Crimes Investigation Teams (WCIT), which was assisted by other units, including the Special Air Service (SAS).
Among those brought to trial were the SS personnel of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, which had been liberated by the British in April 1945. Those found guilty included Commandant Josef Kramer who was sentenced to death by a military court and hanged on 13 December 1945.
The most famous Nazi caught by the British was Heinrich Himmler, chief of the SS and one of the main architects of the Holocaust. He was arrested, while in disguise, at a checkpoint and taken to an interrogation camp near Lüneburg on 23 May 1945. Under interrogation, Himmler admitted who he was, but avoided trial by committing suicide with a concealed cyanide pill.
Political support for war crimes prosecutions soon declined. As relations with the Soviet Union deteriorated, it was considered more expedient to make friends with Germany rather than keep prosecuting its people and alienate them from the West. As early as April 1946, the British government was calling for cuts to the WCIT. Many investigating officers were demobbed without being replaced. By early 1948, only a handful of cases were being pursued.
By then, the WCIT had brought around 350 cases to trial involving over 1,000 accused Nazis. Of these, 667 were convicted of crimes and 230 sentenced to death. War crimes trials were also brought by many other countries, including the Soviet Union and Poland, but only a small fraction of guilty Nazis were ever punished.
De-nazification
The hunt for war criminals was accompanied by a campaign to rid German and Austrian politics, industry, media, arts, and the judiciary of Nazis. Former party and SS members were removed from positions of power and influence, and Nazi organisations were abolished.
At the same time, hundreds of thousands of Germans were detained in internment camps while their backgrounds were investigated. There were nine such camps in the British zone, all guarded by British troops.
By late 1946, growing tensions with the Soviet Union, the economic importance of western Germany and a lack of Allied manpower to run the de-nazification effort, saw the campaign wind down. In their zone, the British handed over de-nazification panels to German authorities.
A ruined nation
The BAOR and Control Commission Germany also had to restart German economic life. Years of bombing and the recent fighting had left agriculture, industry and transport in ruins. Industrial output was down by a third from 1939 levels. There were shortages of food, clothes and fuel. Millions of people had been made homeless by the war.
In 1945-46, the British mobilised released German prisoners of war to assist in gathering the harvest (Operation Barleycorn) and to work in the Ruhr coal mines (Operation Coalscuttle). But this only provided limited assistance. For most Germans, life in the immediate post-war years was one of rationing, shortages and poverty.
Economic recovery
Initially, there was a reluctance among the wartime Allies about fully rebuilding the German economy. Some planners argued that Germany should be reconstructed purely as an agrarian state, one that lacked the heavy industry needed to wage a future war.
The victorious powers also seized German military, technological, industrial and scientific assets, as well as all patents in Germany. Many factories and laboratories were dismantled and shipped off as a form of reparations.
Eventually, however, the realisation that the economic recovery of Europe was largely dependent on the rebirth of German industry changed the minds of the Americans and British. They also feared the possibility of civil unrest developing, with an accompanying upsurge in Communist influence, if Germans' living standards did not improve.
This change in policy was exemplified by the introduction of the Deutsche Mark (DM) in 1948, which replaced the weak wartime currency, the Reichsmark (RM). This brought an end to the black market, helped stop inflation and stabilised the economic recovery.
In 1949, Marshall Aid was extended to the newly formed West Germany. This American package of economic and technical assistance boosted industry and raised living standards.
Army's rebuilding role
Germany's economic rebirth was assisted by the British Army. Major Ivan Hirst and his comrades of the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers took over the Volkswagen plant in Wolfsburg in 1945, initially to make and repair cars for the British. The CCG provided raw materials and labour.
Eventually, Hirst helped turn Volkswagen into today's well-known brand. Most of the factory's workforce initially consisted of displaced persons from across Europe, but more Germans were employed as time went on. By the end of 1947, 20,0000 cars had been made.
Other German businesses were assisted by the Army, including the KWS Grain Factory and the Huth-Apparatebau radio factory in Hanover. The latter concern employed locals to make radio sets manufactured primarily from components salvaged from German military equipment.
The British Army also helped found 'Der Spiegel' magazine. The latter was co-founded in Hanover by Major John Chaloner who was assigned to the Public Relations and Information Services Control, a unit rebuilding the German media industry under the supervision of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He worked with recently released German prisoner of war Rudolf Augstein.
The BAOR also mobilised former enemy soldiers into the German Civil Labour Organisation (GCLO). This provided paid work and accommodation for thousands of men. By late 1947, over 50,0000 Germans were employed as labourers, drivers, mechanics and in many other roles. In 1948-49, the GCLO played a major part in supporting the Allied effort during the Berlin Airlift.
Black market
The shortage of food and other supplies immediately after the German surrender meant that illegal commerce, the so-called ‘black market’, filled the void. The wartime Reichsmark (RM) was almost worthless, so goods like cigarettes and coffee served as makeshift currency. Many goods were supplied to illegal traders by Allied servicemen.
British soldiers often bought goods cheaply in staff canteens and NAAFI shops, which were reserved for their use only, and sold them on the black market for RMs. Initially, RMs were accepted in Army canteens and stores and could be used to buy more goods, or converted into sterling and sent home as money orders. For example, a packet of NAAFI-issued cigarettes, which cost 1-2 shillings (5-10p), could be sold for 160RM on the black market, worth £4 at the official rate of exchange of 40RM to £1.
The CCG tried to stamp out the black market by investigating suspects, raiding markets and checking traffic at road blocks. In February 1948 alone, over 4,200 people were arrested for black market activities in the British zone.
From 1946, military involvement in the trade was partly curtailed by issuing troops with British Armed Forces Special Vouchers. This meant they had a different currency from the locals, and the only one accepted in NAAFI canteens and various messes.
But the wider black market was only fully ended by West Germany’s economic recovery and by issuing a stable and trusted new currency, the Deutsche Mark (DM).
Non-fraternisation
From the Army's first crossing into enemy territory, personnel were expressly forbidden to have any social contact with Germans. In March 1945, Field Marshal Montgomery sent a letter outlining the policy to all soldiers in 21st Army Group. Its main focus was on enforcing a sense of defeat on the Germans:
‘Twenty-seven years ago the Allies occupied Germany: but Germany has been at war ever since. Our Army took no revenge in 1918; it was more than considerate… So accommodating were the occupying forces that the Germans came to believe that we would never fight them again in any cause. From that moment to this their continued aggression has brought misery to millions.’
Policy change
But this policy proved unenforceable. Soldiers of all ranks resisted the ban on fraternisation. Many had to work with Germans to re-establish industrial concerns and local government, making it impossible to adhere to the policy's strict conditions.
Others actively sought out the company of German women, or worked closely with civilians in the black market, while some just felt pity for a poor and desperate people.
Eventually, the High Command accepted the policy was unworkable. In June 1945, soldiers were no longer forbidden from fraternising with children. The following month, they were authorised to hold conversations with adult Germans in public.
Finally, in September 1945, Montgomery cancelled his previous orders on the issue and simply reminded his soldiers that they were 'to conduct themselves with dignity, and to use common sense when dealing with Germans'.
Even so, he still banned his troops from billeting with German families, or from marrying Germans. But as time went on, these rules too were quietly forgotten.
Displaced persons
At the end of the war, the Allies also had to deal with millions of displaced persons (DPs). These included former concentration camp inmates, forced labourers taken from their homelands by the Nazis to work in Germany, and Allied prisoners of war (POWs) who had to be sent home.
The military in the various zones of Germany did what they could for DPs, many of whom were sick or malnourished. They were housed in makeshift camps where they were fed, medically checked and processed. But eventually, in October 1945, the Allies and Soviets handed responsibility for DPs to the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) .
In the British zone, the Army assisted UNRRA by providing transportation, supplies and security. Dealing with so many people took time. But by the end of 1945, over six million refugees had been repatriated by the military of the four occupied zones and UNRRA. The last German DP camps closed in the early 1950s.
Exiles
Many displaced persons who were former residents of the Soviet Union, or from nations in Eastern Europe and the Balkans recently taken over by Communists, had no wish to return. Some had collaborated with the Germans and could expect little mercy. But even those forcibly taken by the Germans would still be suspects in the eyes of the Communist authorities.
Political opponents of the Communists also feared going home. Indeed, many of those who did return were jailed or executed in countries like Poland and Yugoslavia.
The British, in their zone of occupation, formed some of these people into the Civil Mixed Watchman Service. They were tasked with guard duties in the camps set up to deal with the tide of humanity moving through Germany. The British also established the Civilian Mixed Labour Organisation to undertake reconstruction work.
In 1959, both organisations were merged into the Mixed Service Organisation (MSO), which would continue to work for the BAOR for many years. MSO units had a British Army commanding officer and senior non-commissioned officers overseeing a multi-national rank and file.
Iron curtain
These developments occurred against a backdrop of rising tensions between the Western Allies and Soviets elsewhere in Europe. Potential flashpoints included the threat of a Communist takeover in Greece, and growing Soviet demands for territorial concessions from Turkey.
In a speech in March 1946, less than a year after the war’s end, Winston Churchill denounced the Soviet imposition of Communism on the nations of Eastern Europe. His words came to define much of the post-war era: 'From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.'
US President Harry Truman’s intention to support any nations threatened by Communism (the so-called Truman Doctrine of 1947) raised the stakes even higher.
In March 1948, the Soviet Union withdrew from the Allied Control Council after learning of Allied proposals to create a new West German state. There was now a growing concern in the West that the Soviets would attempt to impose by force their solution to the German question.
Berlin
The total breakdown of Soviet-Allied cooperation and joint administration in Germany became apparent with the Berlin Blockade in 1948-49. The Soviets, taking advantage of their zone's position surrounding the German capital, severed road and rail links between western Germany and Berlin.
The Western Allies responded by airlifting supplies to the people of West Berlin. The Allies were so alarmed by the Soviet actions that they decided the only answer was collective defence. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) was therefore formed in April 1949 with General Dwight Eisenhower as the first Supreme Allied Commander Europe.
Two German states
In May 1949, the three western occupation zones were merged to form the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The Soviets followed suit in October 1949 with the establishment of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany).
In the west, the three post-war occupation zones were formally abolished by treaty in May 1955. That same month, West Germany joined Nato. It was also encouraged to build a new military, the Bundeswehr, which took its place alongside the BAOR as an ally in the burgeoning Cold War.
In response to West Germany joining Nato, the Communist states of Eastern Europe formed the Warsaw Pact under Soviet tutelage.
As a result of its commitments to Nato, Britain had to convert the BAOR from a static occupation force consisting of two divisions into a field force of at least four divisions. This force's main focus now changed to preparing to face an invasion of West Germany by the Warsaw Pact.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 29
|
https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/collins-aerospace-and-rnlaf-establish-f-35-pilot-readiness-centre/
|
en
|
Collins Aerospace and RNLAF establish F-35 pilot readiness centre
|
[
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1175064750058523&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2017/09/AFT.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/07/collins-16thJuly.jpg",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/company-profile-unit.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/newsletter-new.svg",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://pr-fr-json-b2b-gdm-figaro1.pantheonsite.io/pharmaceutical-technology/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/report.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2023/08/NGI-1024x528.jpg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2024/08/CVN-72-1024x587.jpg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/icons/catfish-icon.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2017/09/AirforceTechnology_footer.png",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/linkedin_icon_w.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/twitter_icon_w.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/img/icons/facebook_icon_w.svg",
"https://www.airforce-technology.com/code/wp-content/themes/goodlife-wp-B2B/assets/images/verdict-logo-w.png",
"https://analytics.twitter.com/i/adsct?txn_id=ocdmi&p_id=Twitter&tw_sale_amount=0&tw_order_quantity=0",
"https://t.co/i/adsct?txn_id=ocdmi&p_id=Twitter&tw_sale_amount=0&tw_order_quantity=0"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Aninda Chakraborty"
] |
2021-07-16T09:35:45+00:00
|
Collins Aerospace and the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) have established a F-35 pilot readiness centre in the Netherlands.
|
en
|
Airforce Technology
|
https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/collins-aerospace-and-rnlaf-establish-f-35-pilot-readiness-centre/
|
Collins Aerospace and the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) have established an F-35 pilot readiness centre in the Netherlands.
RNLAF’s Center for Man in Aviation in Soesterberg is the first of its kind outside the US.
The dedicated in-region facility will be used to provide helmet fitting, calibration, centrifuge, flight simulators and altitude chamber training. This will help RNLAF and its international customers maintain and improve fleet and pilot readiness.
Collins Aerospace Avionics service and support vice-president and general manager Lisa Steffen said: “As F-35 fleets continue to grow across the globe, in-region support to assure mission readiness is an absolute necessity.
“Helmet fitting coupled with extensive training provides a unique opportunity to gain insight into physiological dynamics that will drive innovation and ultimately will bring benefits for the entire F-35 community.”
The centre will now support the RNLAF’s ten F-35s that are in active service. It is expected to reach initial operating capability later this year.
RNLAF commander lieutenant general JD Luyt said: “The Royal Netherlands Air Force has a long history of providing pilot training excellence for airforces around the world.
“The F-35 pilot readiness centre is a natural evolution of our state-of-the-art facilities in the Netherlands, ready to support the fifth-generation warfighter for its recurring training, helmet fitting and calibration needs.”
A unit of Raytheon Technologies, Collins Aerospace Systems focuses on providing technologically advanced and intelligent solutions for the global aerospace and defence industry.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
0
| 0
|
https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/organisations/royal-netherland-air-force-rnaf
|
en
|
Royal Netherland Air Force [RNLAF] :: Rochester Avionic Archives
|
[
"https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/raa-logo.png",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/Royal_Netherlands_Air_Force.png?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0718_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0719_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0720_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0721_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0722_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/catalog/C0723_%28front%29.jpg?w=1500&fit=max",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-the-collection.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-media-archive.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-document-archive.jpg",
"https://cdn.rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/img/home-thumbnail-picture-archive.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/img/favicon.png
| null | |||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 65
|
https://www.f-16.net/units_article269.html
|
en
|
The ultimate F
|
[
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/F-16.net-logo.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album98/aac.jpg?m=1371939303",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album98/315.jpg?m=1371924290",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/artwork/Berry/RNlAF/J-201.jpg?m=1371938798",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/f-16-photos/album37/album13/nnl.jpg?m=1371911598",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/f-16-photos/album37/album13/J-511.jpg?m=1371908889",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/407/504/315sqn%20period1.jpg?m=1371900544",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/407/504/315sqn%20period2.jpg?m=1371901267",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/407/504/315sqn%20period2.jpg?m=1371901267",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/Former-Yugoslavia/dep-deny-flight.jpg?m=1407530995",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/Former-Yugoslavia/aab.jpg?m=1407530752",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/Former-Yugoslavia/aad.jpg?m=1407530752",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/Former-Yugoslavia/aae.jpg?m=1407530752",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/Former-Yugoslavia/aac.jpg?m=1407530752",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/Former-Yugoslavia/dep-allied-force2.jpg?m=1407530761",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/F-16-net-Site-graphics9/album63/album122/International-Security-and-Assistance-Force/dep-EPAF.jpg?m=1407531146",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/J-136_001_001.jpg?m=1371924663",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/J-218_004.jpg?m=1371906672",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/J-210_003.jpg?m=1371911274",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/biv.jpg?m=1371905395",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/J-063_006.jpg?m=1371937628",
"https://www.f-16.net/g3/var/thumbs/f-16-photos/album37/album13/J-257_001.jpg?m=1371938937",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/rss-feed.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/facebook.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/twitter.png",
"https://www.f-16.net/themes/Evo2/images/linkedin.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/graphics/F-16.net.ico
| null |
The squadron became operational on the F-16 on November 1st, 1987, only in the FBA role at that moment. Followed one year later with the CWI task. The squadron was also assigned to the NATO AMF (Ace Mobile Forces) force. It took over this task from 314 sqn on October 3rd, 1988 because that squadron was to convert to the F-16. Although only a temporary task at first (till the conversion of 314 sqn was finished), it ultimately proved that this task would be assigned to 315 sqn permanently.
In April of 1999 the squadron also started, together with 311 sqn, to train on dropping laser-guided bombs. The illumination of the targets was done by the British Buccaneers of 237 squadron. Together with this task, the squadron also performed a QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) duty together with its sister squadron - the 313th - to relieve the two Leeuwarden based squadrons - 322 sqn & 323 sqn - of this duty.
During the first Gulf War the squadron was assigned to the AMF and consequently the Dutch government offered the F-16s of 315 sqn to Turkey to protect the country against a possible attack by Iraq. Turkey rejected on the offer and instead Belgian Mirage V, Italian F-104S and German Alpha Jets went to Diyarbakir to protect the Turkish airspace.
A remarkable fact in the history of the 315th sqn was that it received the last F-16 of the Fokker production line on February 27th, 1992. This was airframe #J-021.
A year later the squadron was the first to leave for Villafranca AB in Italy for operation 'Deny Flight'. On April 12th, 1993 two F-16s - #J-508 & #J-516 - lifted their noses into the sky to commence this operation. The operations over former Yugoslavia only ended 8 years later, with 315 sqn contributing to these operations on a regular bases.
With the latest defense cuts within the Dutch military, it was decided that the RNlAF had to loose one squadron. After celebrating its 50th anniversary in 2002, the squadron started with minimizing its activities. It finally disbanded in 2004.
|
||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 91
|
https://sof.news/exercises/tac-blaze-23/
|
en
|
Dutch Exercise TAC Blaze 23 Conducted in UK
|
[
"https://i0.wp.com/sof.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/2-TAC-Blaze-23-600.jpg?resize=600%2C381&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/sof.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/3-TAC-Blaze-23-500.jpg?resize=600%2C333&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/sof.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/LtCol-Bob-Oostrom-500.jpg?resize=600%2C342&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/sof.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/sfa-convention-2023.jpeg?resize=80%2C60&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/sof.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Ramzan-Kadyrov-Kremlin-600.jpg?resize=80%2C60&ssl=1",
"https://c.statcounter.com/11059826/0/46b7c322/1/"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Pat Carty"
] |
2023-06-08T05:00:00+00:00
|
Aircrews from the Dutch Defence Helicopter Command (DHC) recently conducted Exercise TAC Blaze 23 in the United Kingdom.
|
en
|
SOF News
|
https://sof.news/exercises/tac-blaze-23/
|
By Pat Carty.
Since 2006 I have attended a particular exercise in the UK, which has been very special for me. The reason being it has involved only helicopters from a foreign Air Force.
Exercise TAC Blaze, run by the Dutch Defence Helicopter Command (DHC), is based at Carlisle Airport. However, as TAC Blaze aims to train and qualify aircrew in low-level flying techniques, it utilises the vast areas of Cumbria and Northumberland. In addition, as its other aim is to train crews in Electronic Warfare, it centres itself on the Electronic Counter Measures Range at the nearby Royal Air Force Spadeadam.
The latest TAC Blaze, which incidentally has not been run in the UK since 2019, due to a reorganisation within the Dutch military, and then the outbreak of Covid, flew missions’ day and night and over the hilly terrain, and at very low altitudes. It also involved a variety of scenarios which simulated missions against potential adversary threats, whilst performing evasive manoeuvres and other tactics to defeat the enemy.
The first indication that TAC Blaze 23 was going ahead, was reports that 2 AS532U2 Cougar helicopters, call sign Wildcat (300 Squadron), 5 AH-64D Apache helicopters, call sign Knife (301 Squadron) and 4 CH-47F Chinook helicopters, call sign Sabre (298 Squadron) had departed from their Gilze-Rijen Air Base in Holland. After quick refuels at Northolt and Mildenhall, the formations arrived at Carlisle, delighting the locals and aviation enthusiasts who had gathered to welcome their arrival.
Photo: “Sabre” and “Wildcat” enroute to the IP during Exercise TAC Blaze 23. (photo by Duane Hewitt)
Ground support for the exercise had arrived previously by road, having crossed the North Sea. It consisted of up to 250 troops and 80 vehicles. Air support also arrived at Newcastle International Airport, using T-057, a Dutch Air Force A-330 (MMF39).
Once established at Carlisle, the Dutch aircrews flew a complex variety of day and night missions, co-ordinated with RAF Spadeadam. Incidentally, Spade covers some 9,600 acres (38.8km2) and was available from 14.00 to 23.00 hours.
Once the “Familiarisation Brief” had been completed each Monday, morning and afternoon missions were flown. Mondays were also used as “range familiarisation” by the weapons instructors, who then trained any new crews.
Between Tuesday and Thursday, afternoon and evening sorties were flown. However, Fridays were scheduled for daytime flying only.
The second week tended to be a copy of the first, with the addition of new crews joining the exercise. These also needed to get familiar with the terrain, the systems, the hazards and the numerous antennas at Spadeadam.
Whilst at Spadeadam, crews flew evasive manoeuvres against the range radar systems. This consisted of the helicopter flying at higher altitudes, thus giving radar systems a chance to lock-on to the helicopters. Once the radar had locked- on, crews would fly much lower to attempt to lose the radar lock. Crews also practised how and when to deploy “chaff”. These aluminium-coated glass fibres stripes can either swamp a radar screen with multiple returns, or confuse guidance systems.
The Wednesday and Thursday sorties saw all three aircraft types flying together, starting with relatively small formations. For example, a single Apache would initially enter the landing zone, whilst attempting to evade radar detection. During these sorties, the Spade jamming facilities could also be used to disrupt the aircraft’s FM, VHF or UHF radios (and GPS if required). With the landing zone secure, Cougars or Chinooks could then touch down, simulating the insertion of Special Forces troops.
Photo: Lt Col Bob Oostrom, Exercise TAC Blaze 23. (photo by Duane Hewitt)
During TAC Blaze, I had what I thought would be the pleasure of interviewing Lieutenant Colonel Bob “Sleeer” Oostrom; Head of the Helicopter Warfare Centre at Gilze-Rijen Airbase and the TAC Blaze Exercise Commander. However, when I asked him what types of aircraft he had flown during his military career, the RAF Spadeadam Media Communications Officer raised her eyebrows and said: “You don’t want to go into personal things like that”! Due to her interruption, no way did I wish to continue the interview, especially discuss his units SF future. So, I thanked Lt Col Oostrom for the interview, and for providing one of each aircraft type for myself, a TV News cameraman and a local BBC radio reporter, to photograph. Then, after thanking Wing Commander Andrew Tidmarsh, the Station Commander, RAF Spadeadam, also Officer Commanding the Spadeadam Aggressor Squadron for attending, I left!
Incidentally, Lt Col Bob Oostrom’s flight name – Sleeer, is Dutch for a sleigh. Hence Bobsleigh.
All was not lost, the reason being that after talking unofficially to several crews, I now know TAC Blaze taught them a lot. That they enjoyed the exercise, and also enjoyed both meeting both the local people and seeing the local area.
Were SF troops involved in this Tac Blaze? The previous exercise saw SF troops embedded within the exercise and based at Spade. However, as I did not venture into Spade this year, I cannot comment. I will also not mention those troops inserted by helicopter into Spade during this TAC Blaze, whilst gunfire could be heard. Then extracted!
As for the 300 Squadron. They were scheduled to disband in 2011. However, that decision was gradually rolled-back due to the delayed entry of the NH Industries NH90 helicopter, and the planned mid-life update of the Dutch Boeing CH-47 Chinook. Both of which created a shortage in the Dutch transport helicopter capacity. In 2017, it was decided the squadron would remain operational until at least 2030 and, depending on future decision-making, receive a new dedicated mission; Special Operations Forces Air (SOF-Air). Since then, they have worked very closely with Dutch SOF.
On the 6 June 2023, the Dutch State Secretary Christophe Van Der Maat announced that 14 new H225M Caracal helicopters have been ordered, replacing the Cougars from the beginning of 2028. So, there are now a lot of happy faces within SOF.
**********
Author: Pat Carty is a NATO accredited journalist who covers military news, events, operations, and exercises; including special operations forces. He is a contributor to SOF News as well as several other military defense publications.
Top photo: “Wildcat 1” and “3” into Spadeadam during TAC Blaze 23. Photo by Duane Hewitt.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 71
|
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/active-edge-army-germany-during-cold-war
|
en
|
Active Edge: The Army, Germany and the Cold War
|
[
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/nam_stacked_web-bw.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-09/1005959_slice.jpg.webp?itok=bFD7ckYK",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-09/1005959_slice.jpg.webp?itok=-MxhyZce",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-06/250459_full_v3.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2017-07/101808_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/262759_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-10/167146_slice.jpg.webp?itok=yKoK9vwn",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-10/167146_slice.jpg.webp?itok=nM0EkC0w",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-03/100844_slice.jpg.webp?itok=MhI6bfsS",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-03/100844_slice.jpg.webp?itok=9rNZJMDk",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/271102_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-10/97818_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-08/117778_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/269423_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-10/260621_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-10/250454_slice.jpg.webp?itok=-SbaVFnF",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-10/250454_slice.jpg.webp?itok=ayzrTZrh",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/272121_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/248686_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-10/1123335_slice.jpg.webp?itok=KoeAEC3d",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-10/1123335_slice.jpg.webp?itok=EJRYMw1P",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/272244_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/1031241_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/115835_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/208862_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/259362_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/271120_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-10/2711.27_slice.jpg.webp?itok=fxmld4A4",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-10/2711.27_slice.jpg.webp?itok=2ZfrAzAz",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/fuel_full.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/1128714_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/248690_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-10/268615_half.jpg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_sm/public/2020-10/1130233_slice.jpg.webp?itok=SkMbGgqu",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/slice_lg/public/2020-10/1130233_slice.jpg.webp?itok=VBlhlvgh",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2021-02/foe-friend-notitle_teaser_v2.jpg.webp?itok=GVhqnz2X",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-03/101792_slice.jpg.webp?itok=CiCjKX6e",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-03/107552_half.jpg.webp?itok=cHneMshd",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2020-04/103761_slice.jpg.webp?itok=LWzds_5P",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2019-10/97818_half.jpg.webp?itok=J4AvPN2x",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/related_mobile/public/2017-07/103850_slice.jpg.webp?itok=0TJP2GAM",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/facebook.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/x.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/instagram.svg",
"https://www.nam.ac.uk/themes/custom/nam_theme/assets/img/youtube.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
In 1945, British troops occupied Germany alongside their wartime Soviet allies. But growing East-West tensions soon evolved into the Cold War. For the next four decades, soldiers in Germany prepared to face an attack by the Warsaw Pact.
|
en
|
/themes/custom/nam_theme/favicon.ico
|
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/active-edge-army-germany-during-cold-war
|
Occupation
In the aftermath of the Second World War (1939-45), there was a clear plan for how to deal with a defeated Germany. Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery had talked about winning the peace in May 1945; now was the time to do it.
At Yalta in February 1945 the Allies had decided that Germany would be divided into four occupation zones, with each of the victorious powers taking responsibility in their zone. This structure was established by the Berlin Declaration on 5 June 1945, which pronounced the end of the Third Reich and the replacement of all German civic and political authority by that of the Allies.
The Allies would be the sole political and legal authority in the defeated Germany. The Potsdam Conference in July-August 1945 later formalised their goals. These insisted that Germany be demilitarised and that de-Nazification take place. The conference also confirmed the zones of occupation and the joint administration of Berlin. The Allies would work together in the Berlin-based Allied Control Council, constituted on 30 August 1945, which would oversee matters relating to the country as a whole.
In a matter of weeks, the British had moved from conquerors to occupiers and governors. To facilitate this, the conquering forces quickly evolved; 21st Army Group was dissolved in August 1945 and became the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR), with an administrative rather than a military role. It was headquartered in the spa town of Bad Oeynhausen in North Rhine-Westphalia. But it was not long before war loomed once again on the horizon.
Allies become enemies
The British had ended the Second World War on strained terms with some of their allies. It did not take long for the ideological differences between them, that had been put aside during wartime, to re-emerge. The main area of tension was about Germany's future.
In March 1948, the Soviets withdrew from the Allied Control Council after learning of Allied proposals to create a new West German state. With the main body for cooperation and partnership paralysed, and relations non-existent, a confrontation between the former Allies seemed inevitable.
On 24 June 1948, following increased tension and agitation, the Soviets exploited Berlin’s location deep inside the Soviet Zone and blockaded the city.
Airlift
The Western Allies responded. On 26 June 1948, the Berlin Airlift, a mission to supply the city by air, commenced. On 12 May 1949, the Soviets lifted the blockade of West Berlin and the phenomenal operation was drawn to a close the following month.
During the 13 months from 26 June 1948 until 1 August 1949, more than 266,600 flights, carrying over 2,223,000 tons of food, fuel and supplies, were made to Berlin by British and US aircraft. At its peak, one plane landed every minute at either Tempelhof, Gatow or Tegel.
Even flying boats were used, which landed in the Havel See, and were then unloaded by barges. The Allies had estimated that 4,500 tons of supplies were required per day to keep the garrisons and civilians fed, clothed and heated. In the end, they had managed an average daily rate of 5,579 tons.
Despite the success of the airlift, the Allies were so alarmed by the Soviet actions that they decided the only answer was collective defence. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) was therefore formed in April 1949.
Two blocs emerge
In May 1949, the three western occupation zones were merged to form the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The Soviets followed suit in October 1949 with the establishment of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany).
In May 1955, West Germany joined Nato. In response, the Communist states of Eastern Europe formed the Warsaw Pact under Soviet tutelage.
With ideological battle lines drawn between East and West, Europe was now locked into the Cold War. The BAOR and its Nato allies became responsible for Western Europe’s defence, with the forces in West Germany now on the front line.
As well as the threat of an all-out Warsaw Pact assault on the West, the troops in Germany also faced the prospect of nuclear attack, as atomic weapons added to the tension and risk.
Manpower
In 1949, as a result of the Berlin Airlift, the BAOR's manpower was set between 53,000 and 55,000 soldiers. It was also returned to a war fighting role. It was this force that would actively confront the rising Soviet threat, staring them down across the increasingly fortified Inner German Border, or across the walls and wire of divided Berlin.
The looming threat of the Soviet forces massed across the Inner German Border were the principal enemy for which the Army prepared. Outnumbered three to one, any battle would be short and bloody. Everything about life in the BAOR was geared towards fighting and winning. It was about preparing not just for a war, but the war.
Active Edge
Despite being outnumbered and outgunned, the British were able to maintain effective deterrence in Germany by focusing on perfecting their skills and drills through relentless, rigorous training at all levels. From small-unit training, to large scale exercises, the British trained constantly.
The call of the codeword 'Active Edge' would begin the exercise that tested a unit’s ability to mobilise and deploy within hours to their positions in readiness for a Soviet attack. Soldiers were expected to be capable and ready at a moment’s notice. When 'Active Edge' was called, it wasn’t always clear whether it was a training exercise or the real thing.
Intelligence on the enemy was also key. Threat recognition guides were produced and regularly updated to tell British soldiers what to expect from the Soviets, and what weaknesses their equipment had. At the same time, handbooks were produced to help British soldiers recognise friendly and allied equipment when on training exercises, so that when the time came in the heat of battle they could distinguish between friend and foe.
Lionheart
During the 1980s, under the leadership of Lieutenant General Nigel Bagnall, the BAOR developed its tactics to include a counter-attack phase - raising confidence not only about being able to stand and fight should the Warsaw Pact attack, but ultimately win any potential conflict through hard-hitting, mobile operations.
Large-scale Autumn exercises had already become an annual occurrence for the British. The biggest of these, in fact the largest exercise ever put on by the Army, was 'Exercise Lionheart', which took place between 3 September and 5 October 1984. It took four years of planning, and cost around £31 million (over £100 million in today’s money). The event was also attended by hundreds of foreign and Commonwealth military observers.
Around 130,000 UK troops descended on the British Zone to rehearse and test their wartime plans. It was an exercise that defined an entire era, but it was absolutely necessary if the British were going to fight and win in West Germany.
Training area legend
British troops spent millions of hours during the Cold War honing their skills on the specialist training areas available to them in West Germany. These places all had their own reputations, and created their own stories, myths and legends: the stairs at Vogelsang, or the haunted buildings at Sennelager. But greatest of all was that of Wolfgang Meier on the Soltau-Lüneburg Training Area.
Wolfgang was an enterprising local German who sought to capitalise on the hungry British troops on the training area. For 25 years, his catering vans served bratwurst, fish and chips, chips with mayonnaise, and liquid refreshment to eager and grateful soldiers, who flocked to the van wherever and whenever it appeared.
With an uncanny ability to sniff out British troops despite their attempts at camouflage - so much so that it was jokingly suggested he might be a KGB spy - and navigate challenging terrain, Wolfgang was and remains a fixture of the British Army’s cultural memory in Germany.
PIRA
Despite the Cold War and the looming Soviet threat across the border, another enemy intruded into the lives of British soldiers, their families and their German neighbours. Although soldiers from Germany were deployed to Northern Ireland during 'the Troubles', the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) also began targeting the British in Germany from the 1970s. Bombings and shootings put soldiers and their families in real danger.
The British community developed a lifestyle of constant vigilance. They were encouraged in this by posters and leaflets. They were also issued with handheld mirrors to sweep under their cars to check for bombs. To better protect them, the distinctive British number plates on their cars were removed and replaced with German ones. This vigilance was well-founded; the IRA threat remained constant, and for many was more serious than that posed by the Soviets.
A British island
It was in West Berlin, deep inside Soviet-dominated East Germany, that British forces were at their most precarious during the Cold War. The establishment of the Berlin Wall in 1961, and the fortifying of the Inner German Border with wire and watchtowers by the Communists - Churchill’s ‘Iron Curtain’ made real - created a new world of walls and wire for the British; a world complete with new rituals, duties, threats and opportunities.
The British military presence in Berlin comprised 3,100 men in three infantry battalions, an independent armoured squadron, and a number of support units. The three infantry battalions were rotated every two years, and the armoured squadron was detached from a BAOR armoured regiment based in West Germany. British West Berlin was truly an island in a Communist sea.
Out of uniform
While Army life in Germany was dominated by training for the expected confrontation, with strict minimum-manning requirements that governed issues like leave, there were opportunities to enjoy life when off-duty. For those stationed in Berlin, there were the undoubted attractions of city life.
Amusement could be found in West Berlin and around the British sector in neighbourhoods like Charlottenburg - 'Mon Cheri' in ‘Grotty Charlotty’ has its own reputation - but also on trips to the East, where the exchange rate favoured the British.
In other towns, there were plenty of attractions, including local beers like Herforder Pils. But life could be hard for those in rural areas, where the strength of the garrison community was key to making sure soldiers and their families were happy. The opportunity to travel around Germany was something many soldiers and their families took, making good use of the tax-free petrol they received.
Sport
Another popular pastime for British forces in Germany was sport. The sports on offer included those available elsewhere in the Army and the UK, such as football, rugby and polo - increasingly also played against local German teams. But there were also pastimes that were more dependent on service in Germany. Adventure training was common across the Army, but in Germany there were fantastic facilities, such as those at the Kiel Yacht Club, or the Möhnesee Sailing Club.
Opportunities unavailable to soldiers elsewhere included skiing in the Harz Mountains or Bavaria. Indeed, thousands of soldiers would descend on Bavaria each year for Exercise Snow Queen, with many staying in ski huts owned by their regiments.
After the fall
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 heralded a rapid change in the established world order. In quick succession, the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact collapsed, led by Poland and Hungary breaking away and establishing democracy. The British forces in Germany, which had stood on the front line of the Cold War in Europe, had accomplished their task.
But as the Cold War ended, questions were asked about the BAOR's future. What was the role of the Army in Germany now that the major threat had been defeated? The following decades would see the size, structure and role of the Army transform, with huge impacts on soldiers and their families, and on the relationship between the Army and Germany.
The BAOR was formally disbanded in 1994. The remaining troops became part of the multi-national Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC), which was under British leadership.
Germany became a launchpad for the Army, from where it could deploy around the world, to places like the Gulf in 1990-91 and Iraq in 2003. Soldiers from the German garrison also completed the last combat tour in Afghanistan in 2014.
In 2010, the Strategic Defence and Security Review made further cuts in the German garrison. It was also announced that the majority of soldiers would leave the country by 2020.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 24
|
https://www.dvidshub.net/news/420914/farewell-tour-dutch-finish-overwater-f-16-training-above-florida-coast
|
en
|
Farewell tour: Dutch finish overwater F-16 training above Florida coast
|
[
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/dvids_logo_main.png",
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/dvids_mobile_menu_logo_main.png",
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/dvids_mobile_menu_logo.png",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201542/1000w_q95.jpg",
"https://cdn.dvidshub.net/images/subscribe-button-icon.png",
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/public_domain_logo.png",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201537/75x75_q95.jpg",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201538/75x75_q95.jpg",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201539/75x75_q95.jpg",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201540/75x75_q95.jpg",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201541/75x75_q95.jpg",
"https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2205/7201542/75x75_q95.jpg",
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/podcasts_logo_white.png",
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/mil_247_logo_white.png",
"https://www.dvidshub.net/images/defensegov-logo-footer-new.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Airmen and Royal Netherlands Air Force personnel from Morris Air National Guard Base, Arizona, traveled to Naval Air Station Key West, April 27, 2022, for a two week-training event with the final Dutch B-Course student pilots.
|
/favicon.ico
|
DVIDS
|
https://www.dvidshub.net/news/420914/farewell-tour-dutch-finish-overwater-f-16-training-above-florida-coast
|
Airmen and Royal Netherlands Air Force personnel from Morris Air National Guard Base, Arizona, traveled to Naval Air Station Key West, April 27, 2022, for a two week-training event with the final Dutch B-Course student pilots.
This temporary duty satisfied the over-water training and dissimilar aircraft training required by the student pilot course syllabus of the Royal Netherlands Air Force.
“Since we are only flying over land in Tucson, our altitude awareness is really good,” said Lt. Col. Joost Luijsterburg, RNLAF detachment commander. “Every class goes to a location to fly over water and give them a different perspective.”
While flying over open waters, there are no ground references such as cars, buildings, and terrain to determine altitude. This training is crucial in preparing the students for their return home to the Netherlands where most flying occurs over the Atlantic Ocean.
Two of our students found themselves a lot lower in altitude than they thought they were, said Luijsterburg.
The other goal for the student pilots is to see the hard work of deploying various personnel assets as a cohesive unit, said Luijsterburg. As an example, Luijsterburg said that the student pilots were surprised to learn that their maintenance crew brought a spare aircraft engine, as a contingency.
The 162nd Logistics Readiness Squadron coordinated the TDY with the 161st Air Refueling Wing and with the 107th Airlift Wing to provide a KC-135 Stratotanker and a C-17 Globemaster III, respectively, for a seamless movement of personnel and equipment round trip to NAS Key West.
The 148th Fighter Squadron brought along six of their own F-16 Fighting Falcons from Morris ANGB to fly against F-18 Super Hornets.
“In Tucson, the students have not had an opportunity to fight against dissimilar aircraft,” said Lt. Col. Andrew Wittke, the 148th Fighter Squadron commander. “When we are fighting a different platform with different capabilities, it changes things up quite a bit. It is some of the best training you can do as a young lieutenant.”
This trip is also significant because this is the last Dutch F-16 B-course to graduate before closing out their contract and moving back to their home country.
“This is a big deal and a bittersweet thing,” said Wittke.
After a 32-year partnership, this is the last TDY that the RNLAF will participate in as part of the 148th Fighter Squadron before returning home to the Netherlands.
“I, myself, was a student in the 148th Fighter Squadron in 1991,” said Luijsterburg. “That was 31 years ago and now I am going to close this unit in a couple of months. It is the end of an era, I think you could say.”
The Dutch were the first in a long line of foreign partners to train at Morris ANG Base. On average they flew 2,000 hours a year and graduated four student pilots every nine months.
“I will be sad to see them leave,” said Wittke. “They have been one of our best partners. They are always in combat with us and that loyalty I find incredibly inspiring.”
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 73
|
https://www.airbus.com/en/about-us/our-history
|
en
|
Our History
|
[
"https://www.airbus.com/themes/custom/airbus_web_experience_ui/logo.svg",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/w160h200/public/2021-08/EM-airbus-careers-working-environment-1.png?itok=hd8IetVo 1x, /sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/w320h400/public/2021-08/EM-airbus-careers-working-environment-1.png?itok=A-QheFAS 2x, /sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/w480h600/public/2021-08/EM-airbus-careers-working-environment-1.png?itok=k7sI3ee- 3x, /sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/w640h800/public/2021-08/EM-airbus-careers-working-environment-1.png?itok=6CUTLzlh 4x",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_608x608/public/2021-11/Airbus-history-decades-60s_0.jpg?itok=GsOVEI0O",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/UM42324-1_0_0.jpg?itok=qAvkpE3w",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/SA341-Gazelle.jpg?itok=D3DJEhlR",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/concorde_007.jpg?itok=StZ6HLsE",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/1969_A300_go_ahead_signature.jpg?itok=GOasFqc6",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/Airbus-retirement-Beteille.jpg?itok=5EURUrUI",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/Rene-Mouille-helicopters-2019_0.jpg?itok=C9MWAO61",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/B%C3%B6lkowLudwighell_0.jpg?itok=uk5pu416",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_608x608/public/2021-11/Airbus-history-decades-70s.jpg?itok=IG1sCcHQ",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A300B-in-flight_0.jpg?itok=vSmYkD2m",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/C-212-3.jpg?itok=L5qCVvv5",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/SA360-digit-04800.jpg?itok=cFOWlBdT",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A300_Airbus_first_flight.jpg?itok=1TYgAubC",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/a300bAirbus-LatAm-history-A300B-tour1.jpg?itok=sr7w5dbW",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/helios-01.jpg?itok=KWpzO0az",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/a300bA300B2_first_deli_to_AFR_1974__crew.jpg?itok=oOO2a8Tb",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/199679_D9591_003.jpg?itok=QCYBKjzq",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/symphonie-02.jpg?itok=YG5S5ooQ",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/Meteosat-satellite-Copyright-ESA.jpg?itok=afKK480f",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A300B_in_final_assembly_line.jpg?itok=IgAnhJaT",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Super-Puma-AS332.jpg?itok=2C02GV-2",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/BK-117.jpg?itok=NdDTjLdK",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/ariane-1.jpg?itok=k2SSk2xk",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_608x608/public/2021-11/Airbus-history-decades-80s.jpg?itok=oh7D3z4M",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A300-cockpit-pilot.jpg?itok=aY9Z5ZY7",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A310-in-flight-95.jpg?itok=xUvfIrC_",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Spacelab-carousel-2.jpg?itok=_Vs49RZo",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/CN235-2.jpg?itok=6bLkAsKv",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Eurostar-Neo.jpg?itok=0na2Pd4Q",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A319-A320-A321-formation-97.jpg?itok=bSNMGWvl",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/DIGIT-02683.jpg?itok=eYxEaZ0H",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/An_Ariane_4_44L_on_the_launchpad_1989.jpg?itok=xtcuJfMv",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-09/Jean-Pierson--2.jpg?itok=lrLp5OGx",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_608x608/public/2021-11/Airbus-history-decades-90s.jpg?itok=72tV5--D",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/1991_A340_roll_out.jpg?itok=XVpsgEBj",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A330-300__Airbus_first_flight.jpg?itok=6tZH95QF",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/web.efa_.air_.supperiority.jpg?itok=UCfDTSVj",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/DP-00614D.jpg?itok=Ln_jOEN-",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/1994_rollout_beluga.jpg?itok=4N47SZuy",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/3-300358-4-1_1.jpg?itok=xEpS5WQ4",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A3XX-historical-in-flight.jpg?itok=zyDD4ntT",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/D977.jpg?itok=KRqwIc9R",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/AE52768-2.jpg?itok=oqbc1pbu",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/C295-2.jpg?itok=lep_5nMg",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/DIGIT-00429.jpg?itok=2ukyOfyg",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/EC145.jpg?itok=6BoDxCHm",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/DP-04182.jpg?itok=W4ArL4Zu",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_608x608/public/2021-11/Airbus-history-decades-00s.jpg?itok=pzMVg9FX",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/EXPH-972-20_A4.jpg?itok=yeg-g6AV",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A318__Airbus_first_flight_R.jpg?itok=IEP5gY0k",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/web.space_.exploration.marssexpress.1.jpg?itok=wJKrqyPE",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Malaysia-A400M-%282%29.jpg?itok=8Wyq70mK",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/EM-helicopter-production-plant-columbus-mississippi-usa.jpg?itok=f2M1vBwS",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Amman_relief_flight_1.jpg?itok=sHqrQgjK",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A380-reveal-04.jpg?itok=sUJOePjX",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-09/CDPH-0472-097.jpg?itok=B0TET36N",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A319_CHINA_EASTERN_AIRLINES.jpg?itok=aZJkgTtF",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/Artist-view-MetOp-Copyright-Airbus-2011.jpg?itok=4DcT1S7L",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/UH-72A-Lakotas.jpg?itok=Up9sEDbP",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/4.%20A330%20MRTT%20RAAF.jpg?itok=M9m6HVwI",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-10/flying_over_columbus.jpg?itok=HtVloj4h",
"https://mediarenditions.airbus.com/coPatLScJZL3MJ6uEY9RC51pWKQoSnIsLxUkn35nnR8/resize?src=kpkp://airbus/38/542/542941-x0842soj9o.jpg&w=480&h=480&t=fit",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/ATV_to_ISS-medium_0.jpg?itok=gwRNVbMZ",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/Fabrice_BREGIER_President_and_CEO_Airbus__2.jpg?itok=kLSIb77d",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_608x608/public/2021-11/Airbus-history-decades-10s.jpg?itok=19HpAwru",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/DIGIT-04170-1.jpg?itok=e6JY60NZ",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/exph-0726-10-1.jpg?itok=-0q2oS1I",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A320neo_PW_Airbus_neo_livery_V10.jpg?itok=XJiD_yv5",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/EXPH-1544-176_Copyright-AirbusHelicopters-JeromeDeulin.jpg?itok=G4hsWEZs",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A350_XWB_MSN1_First_Flight.jpg?itok=Q6R_GxnK",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Gaia-cropped.jpg?itok=-poCQHmb",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Airbus-flag.jpg?itok=z9jLuLwx",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A320neo.jpg?itok=TerSsWsp",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/rosetta_landung_final.jpg?itok=dpi4zKJx",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/Airbus_US_manufacturing_facility_opening_ceremony_1.jpg?itok=aAE_N_kY",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/H160_Copyright_Thierry_Rostang_2015.jpg?itok=OvU65xZe",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/bizlab-teaser-2.jpg?itok=6ZJCMK5s",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/web.space_.spaceesploration.lisapathfinder.jpg?itok=weTPkDw1",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/10_000th_Airbus_aircraft_delivery_A350-900_to_SIA-Morning_ambiance-019.jpg?itok=AciE7ZhQ",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/web.space_.satnav.galileo.7.jpg?itok=eUUYPOpJ",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A330-800-MSN1888-first-flight-air-to-air-053.jpg?itok=akH3UxDU",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/FCAS-Infographic-2019.jpg?itok=WnbHzYES",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/VSR700-2018-first-flight-PAD-01.jpg?itok=Ql2OAQsB",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A220-300-in-flight-024.jpg?itok=9Z5bC4S1",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/BelugaXL-First-Flight-Air-To-Air-074.jpg?itok=fS7pOCAU",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-08/web.space_.spaceesploration.bepicolombo.jpg?itok=3zMD4DVr",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-11/A220-100-Delta-First-takeoff.jpg?itok=bep9yAIc",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A220-100-DeltaAirLines-Airbus12k.jpg?itok=ua1dz2uP",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-07/A321XLR-02.jpg?itok=q8p8penY",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-09/Tom-Enders-2.jpg?itok=Ekg-iiLr",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/history-commercial-teaser.jpg?itok=eseMhndp",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-10/history-helicopters-teaser.jpg?itok=C2YAa7xd",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/history-defence-teaser.jpg?itok=68b1UwTq",
"https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/styles/airbus_480x480/public/2021-06/history-space-teaser.jpg?itok=pKs9A9j9"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"www.facebook.com"
] |
2021-06-14T00:00:00
|
With a 50-year track record of innovation, technological firsts and industry milestones, Airbus has lived up to its official motto, “We Make It Fly,” from the company’s creation.
|
en
|
/themes/custom/airbus_web_experience_ui/appicons/appicon-48x48.png
|
Airbus
|
https://www.airbus.com/en/about-us/our-history
|
With a 50-year track record of innovation, technological firsts and industry milestones, Airbus is a leader in designing, manufacturing and delivering aerospace products, services and solutions to a customer base that spans the globe – with operations for commercial aircraft, helicopters, defence, space and security.
Take a journey through some of the highlights of our company from the past 50 years, and learn more about Airbus’ continuing success story with the extensive 'History In Depth' pages below.
1960s | Laying the foundations
1965
The SA330 Puma performed its first flight
This medium-weight twin-engine was the first of a long series that has been built in various versions down to the present day.
1968
First flight of the Gazelle SA341
The second prototype of the Gazelle (SA 341) made its first flight on 12 April 1968, and featured a Fenestron tail rotor fairing.
1969
Concorde takes off on its 1st flight in Toulouse
Commercial aviation took a supersonic leap into the future with Concorde’s maiden flight, which was captained by André Turcat.
29 May 1969
Official launch of the Airbus A300 Programme
The A300 programme was launched with a milestone agreement signed by French Transport Minister Jean Chamant and German Economics Minister Karl Schiller at the 1969 Paris Airshow, to build a commercial aircraft that was smaller, lighter and more economical than its three-engine American rivals.
Trailblazing pioneers
Roger Béteille
Roger Béteille was a key figure at Airbus from 1967 to 1985 – and a driving force behind the A300 programme, serving initially as a Technical and Coordinating Manager, and becoming Managing Director in 1975.
A large part of the company’s initial success can be traced back to Béteille: a believer in European cooperation, he joined Airbus still in its “preliminary” stage. Béteille’s first proposal of work-sharing (to have aircraft parts such as elements of the fuselage, the wing root and the wings produced by different entities) is still in place today. Béteille’s involvement in the A300 programme ensured the aircraft would match the needs of airline customers, and not just manufacturers’ ideas. Béteille retired from the company in 1985; the final assembly building for the Airbus A350 XWB in Toulouse is named after him.
René Mouille
René Mouille was pivotal in pushing the helicopter industry forward and garnered a collection of groundbreaking inventions to his name.
He is at the origin of the design for the SE3120 (Alouette I) and the SE 3130 Alouette II (the first turbine helicopter), and the Alouette III in 1958; the Super Frelon in 1962; the Puma in 1964; the Gazelle in 1967; and the Dauphin and Ecureuil in the 1970s. In 1963, he was nominated Engineer-in-Chief of the helicopter division of Sud Aviation. With over 40 patents to his name, Mouille was instrumental in pushing the barriers of helicopter technology, such as with the hub NAT (Non-Articulated Drag) with visco-elastic dampers, as well as the famous Fenestron© shrouded tail rotor and the Starflex main rotor. He also invented the SARIB suspension system. The inventions by Mouille and his collaborators are still widely used in the helicopter industry today.
Ludwig Bölkow
An innovator of the aeronautical industry in Germany, Ludwig Bölkow created the Bölkow GmbH in Ottobrunn, which developed into the biggest aeronautics and spaceflight company in the country, MBB (Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm).
MBB was an aerospace manufacturer that was later bought by Deutsche Aerospace AG, which is now part of Airbus. Bölkow was the key figure in the design of the world's first jet fighter, the Me 262, and was leading the rebuilding of the German aviation industry following the Second World War. Bölkow was awarded the Ludwig-Prandtl-Ring from the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Luft- und Raumfahrt (German Society for Aeronautics and Astronautics) for "outstanding contribution in the field of aerospace engineering" in 1972. He was awarded a Gold Medal by the British Royal Aeronautical Society in 1978.
1970s | European Collaboration
1970
Airbus Industrie was officially created as a GIE
France’s Aerospatiale (a merger of SEREB, Sud Aviation and Nord Aviation), and Germany’s Deutsche Airbus – a grouping of four firms.
1971
First flight of C-212 Aviocar
Developed by Airbus predecessor CASA, the C212 has been used in charter and short-haul cargo roles, for search and rescue missions, and various military applications.
1972
First flight of the SA360 Dauphin
The Dauphin was originally designed as the successor to the Alouette III and was to be called the "Business Alouette".
1972
The world's first twin engine wide-body aircraft
The first flight of the A300 took place in Toulouse on 28 October 1972, a month ahead of schedule despite several delays due to bad weather.
1973
An odyssey across South and North America
A300 embarks on a six-week sales expedition across North and South America to show off Airbus’ new creation to customers, pilots and executives.
1974
Helios-A and Helios-B, launched in 1974 and 1976
Helios-A and Helios-B were the first space probes produced outside of the U.S. and the Soviet Union to leave Earth orbit, with their launches in 1974 and 1976.
1974
A300B2 enters regular service for Air France
Initial commercial flights for Air France were from Paris to London.
1974
First flight of the Tornado
The MRCA prototype, later known as the Tornado, took its maiden flight at Manching.
1978
Eastern Airlines, Airbus' first US customer, orders 23 A300B4 aircraft
After the breakthrough agreement with Eastern Airlines, there followed a series of orders that confirmed Airbus as a serious contender in the global aircraft manufacturing industry.
1979
First flight of BK 117
The precursor to the EC145, the BK117 was a 50:50 joint venture by MBB and Kawasaki.
1980s | New stars are born
1982
Cockpit advances
Delivery of the first A300 FFCC jetliner version, received by Indonesian airline Garuda, incorporating the Forward-Facing Crew Cockpit configuration, which enabled a two-pilot crew to fly the aircraft without the need for a flight engineer.
1983
Spacelab starts its journey into space
Spacelab, built in Bremen by MBB-Erno as prime contractor, starts its first journey into space on board the Columbia space shuttle. The command and data managament subsystem CDMS was developed by MATRA.
1985
Development of Eurostar
A series of high-performance communications satellites suited to a full range of communications missions – including links with fixed ground stations, mobile services, broadcast and broadband.
1987
Launch of A320
With the groundbreaking Fly-by-wire technology, the A320 Family would go on to record spectacular sales success, becoming the best-selling jetliner aircraft family ever.
1988
Maiden flight of the Bo108
The Bo108 took off with the most up-to-date technology, including a composite structure, new vibration absorbers, and ultra-modern avionics with screens.
1988
Launch of the first Ariane 4
The first Ariane 4 flew in June 1988 from the Guiana Space Centre in French Guiana, performing 113 successful launches and capturing 50% of the commercial satellite launch services marketplace.
Jean Pierson
CEO and managing director of Airbus 1985 – 1998
Jean Pierson was a French engineer and industrialist , having participated in the Concorde programme and the development of Airbus as one of its historical leaders. Pierson championed the spirit of Airbus which summed up the organisation’s essence from its beginnings to the present day: “The determination of the partners to keep the damaging demons of intra-European rivalry at bay was a key factor in the success of Airbus Industrie. It is in the interests of Europe that this determination should prevail. If there could be one lesson…it would be that co-operation is the key to prosperity and that there simply is room no more for narrow nationalistic endeavours.”
1990s | Expanding frontiers
1991
Arrival of the A340
The ultra long-range four engined A340-300, able to seat 295 in a three-class configuration and fly 7,150 nautical miles/13,200 kilometres, was rolled out in October, 1991.
1992
Maiden flight of the medium to long-range A330
Carrying 335 passengers in two classes, the A330 marked another milestone with the first Rolls-Royce engine – the Trent 700 - on an Airbus aircraft.
1994
First flight of the Eurofighter
The extremely capable, flexible and versatile swing-role front-line fighter aircraft flew for the first time.
1994
Maiden flight of the EC135
The first helicopter in the Eurocopter range and successor to the BO108. The most important addition to the EC135 is its Fenestron® tail rotor.
1994
Rollout of the A300-600ST Beluga
The Beluga was the successor to the Super Guppy transporter for Airbus components.
1995
First flight of the EC120 Colibri
With this helicopter, Eurocopter extends its range to include 1.5 metric tonne machines.
1996
Super jumbo A3XX
Airbus Industrie sets up Large Aircraft Division, to develop the super jumbo A3XX, later designated the A380.
1996
First official flight of the NH90
The maiden flight took place at the Eurocopter plant in Marignane, France in the presence of military and governmental representatives from France, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands (the nations participating in the NH90 Programme).
1997
Successful lift off of the Ariane 5
As of early 2019, the heavy-lift vehicle had been launched more than 100 times from the Guiana Space Centre in French Guiana. Its payload lift capability has evolved from the initial 6,900 kg. in geostationary transfer orbit to an enhanced performance of 10,000 kg., along with a capacity of 20 tonnes into low Earth orbit.
1998
First flight of C295
Originally designed for the deployment of forces, the C295 can transport over nine tonnes of troops or cargo. Further developed from the CN235, it has a longer fuselage and more powerful engines.
1999
Production investment contract signed for the Tiger
The contract marked a decisive step towards production of Tiger, with an initial batch of 160 helicopters (80 for Germany and 80 for France) to be procured.
1999
Maiden flight of the EC145
The EC145 offers an increased maximum takeoff weight and payload capacity as well as a modern cockpit identical to that of the EC135.
1999
Maiden flight of the EC130 B4
This new member of the Ecureuil/AStar family offers more cabin space, extensive visibility and a reduced sound level.
2000s | A new era begins
2000
"Day One" as the official start of operations for EADS
The merger of the Franco-British company Matra Marconi Space with the space activites of Daimler-Chrysler Aerospace leads to the foundation of Astrium
2001
The new EC725 helicopter is presented to the French Air Force Chief of Staff
This version will be able to carry a higher military payload, and will also have an increased civil range of action compared to the MK2 version of the Cougar / Super Puma.
2002
First flight tests of the A318, the smallest member of the A320 family
Captain Bernd Schaefer confirmed that the aircraft handled as anticipated on its maiden flight, which kicked off the A318 flight test campaign.
2003
Mars Express heads for the Red Planet
Mars Express lifted off in June 2003. After arriving at Mars, data from this planetary orbiter helped answer questions about the geology, atmosphere, surface environment, history of water and potential for life on the planet.
2003
Launch of A400M programme
With the first flight performed in December 2009, the A400M developed for tactical and strategic missions – along with force-projection through aerial refuelling – Airbus set the bar high in terms of technical and programme complexity.
2004
Opening of American Eurocopter plant in Columbus
The Columbus site will mainly focus on the assembly and customisation of the helicopters sold by American Eurocopter to local and federal government organisations for military operations, homeland security and other parapublic missions.
2005
EADS provides relief assistance and 2 million euro donation in response to tsunami disaster in Southeast Asia
Through the years Airbus has supported international aid organisations in regions affected by natural disasters. We bring our products and resources, from relief flights to satellite imagery and helicopter hours, to emergency responders to help alleviate some of the world's most pressing challenges.
2005
Unveiling of the A380
The world's largest and most modern passenger jet is unveiled to the public. Later that year it would complete its maiden flight.
2005
Eurocopter Ecureuil AS350 piloted by Didier Delsalle lands on Mount Everest on May 14, 2005
This tremendous achievement breaks the world record for the highest altitude landing and takeoff ever, which sets an ultimate milestone in the history of aviation.
2005
EADS and China agree on strategic partnership
Airbus strengthened its foothold in China, with an order of 150 A320 family aircraft, the largest order in Airbus history so far, and a new engineering centre to be set up
2006
Launch of Metop-A
Observation data provided by Metop enable precise weather forecasting, better prediction of natural disasters, and measurements for issues such as climate change, progressive melting of polar ice and rise in sea levels.
2006
U.S. Army selects the UH-72A Lakota
U.S. Army selects the UH-72A Lakota version of the EC145 rotorcraft as the military service’s Light Utility Helicopter. More than 400 have been supplied to the U.S. Army and Navy, with production performed at a facility in Mississippi.
2007
First flight of the A330 MRTT
Based on the successful A330-200 airliner, the A330 MRTT is the benchmark for new-generation multi-role tanker/transport.
2008
Columbus sets sail for ISS on the Space Shuttle Atlantis
The Columbus science laboratory was launched aboard Space Shuttle Atlantis on February 7, 2008 and docked at the International Space Station (ISS).
2006
Inauguration of A320 final assembly line in Tianjin, China
Airbus expanded its industrial network by creating a new A320 final assembly line in Tianjin, China – the company’s first outside of Europe.
2008
ATV in service of the International Space Station
The Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), a servicing spacecraft for the ISS with the delivery of propellant, water, air, payload and experiment equipment.
Fabrice Brégier
Airbus COO 2006 – 2018, President of Airbus Commercial Aircraft 2012 – 2018
In 1998, Mr. Brégier became CEO of Matra BAe Dynamics. He was appointed CEO of MBDA, the leading European missile systems company that was created in 2001 by Aerospatiale Matra, British Aerospace and Finmeccanica. In 2003, Fabrice Brégier became President and CEO of the Eurocopter Group and was appointed Head of EADS’ Eurocopter Division in June 20. Mr. Brégier was appointed Airbus Chief Operating Officer (COO) in October 2006. As a Member of the EADS Executive Committee, he was commissioned by Louis Gallois to improve the overall operational performance of the Group. From 2012 – 2018, Fabrice Brégier served as President of Airbus Commercial Aircraft.
2010s | We make it fly
2010
The new generation EC145 T2 performs its first flight
The EC145 T2 was developed with major innovations such as the dual AFCS, reducing pilot’s workload, particularly in difficult weather or mission conditions.
2010
First flight of the X3 demonstrator
The X3 is a high-speed hybrid helicopter developed to perform vertical takeoffs and landings and obtain cruising speeds of approximately 220 kts.
2011
A record breaking year
Beginning with a milestone order: Virgin America’s acquisition of 60 A320s, Airbus hits above its 10,000th order mark. Also in January 2011, Airbus signed a Memorandum of Understanding with IndiGo for 180 A320s.
2012
Clean Sky 2 initiative
Eurocopter signs up for leadership in a European compound rotorcraft demonstration project through the Clean Sky 2 initiative.
2013
The A350 XWB takes flight
Airbus’ newest and most efficient jetliner – the A350 XWB – conducted its highly successful maiden flight from Toulouse-Blagnac Airport.
2013
Launch of Gaia
Gaia – an Airbus-designed and-built space surveyor for ESA – is to compile a 3D space catalogue of more than 1,000 million stars, or approximately roughly 1% of the stars in the Milky Way.
2014
EADS renamed Airbus Group
EADS was renamed Airbus Group (which later in 2017 renamed to Airbus). Eurocopter becomes Airbus Helicopters. The rebranding marks a new era in the history of the company as it joins Airbus and Airbus Defence & Space within the new Airbus Group.
2014
First flight of the A320neo
The highly-efficient aircraft with new engine option along with standard Sharklets, will deliver a 15% fuel burn reduction to carriers.
2014
Cometary encounter
Launched in 2004, the Rosetta spacecraft spent 10 years on a voyage of more than six billion kilometres to reach and study the comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.
2015
Inauguration of operations of the A320 FAL in Mobile, Alabama
The facility joins existing final assembly lines in Hamburg; Toulouse; and Tianjin, China, boosting the production of the best-selling single-aisle aircraft family.
2015
Unveiling the H160
The H160 is unveiled on Airbus Helicopters’ Heli-Expo booth in Orlando, Florida. Its first flight took place in Marignane (France) on June 13, 2015.
2015
Airbus launches business accelerator BizLab
Airbus formally launched its first global aerospace business accelerator Airbus BizLab – located in Toulouse, France, with a second site at Hamburg, Germany.
2015
Launch of the LISA Pathfinder
This ESA technology demonstrator mission is one of the most ambitious scientific undertakings to date: proving key elements of Einstein’s theory of general relativity.
2016
Delivery of the 10,000th aircraft to Singapore Airlines
A year of milestones, including service introductions of the A320neo; first deliveries of the latest A330 Family member tailored for regional routes; start of final assembly for the A330neo; and its 10,000th overall delivery.
2016
Galileo goes live
Galileo, the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) went live in 2016. From the beginning of Galileo through 2018, Airbus was prime contractor for the satellite navigation system’s ground control segment.
2017
Maiden flight of the A330neo
Powered by latest-generation Rolls-Royce Trent 7000 engines, the A330neo will expand operators’ market opportunities with a range capability increase of approximately 400 nautical miles while carrying more payload.
2018
Europe’s Future Combat Air System (FCAS)
The landmark industrial agreement between Airbus and Dassault Aviation envisions a “system of systems” – composed of next-generation fighter aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, future cruise missiles and drones, and military services.
2018
The autonomous demonstrator VSR700
Airbus Helicopters started autonomous flight trials of a VSR700 Optionally Piloted Vehicle (OPV) demonstrator, without safety pilot on December 20, 2018.
2018
The newest members of Airbus’ single-aisle aircraft family
A milestone partnership between Airbus and Canada’s Bombardier took effect in July with Airbus acquiring a majority stake in the C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership.
2018
The first BelugaXL
Airbus’ next-generation super airlifter – performed its maiden flight on 19 July in Toulouse.
2018
Launch of the BepiColombo
Launched on an Ariane 5 in October, the BepiColombo to research the solar system’s smallest and least-explored terrestrial planet – Mercury.
2019
Growth of the A220
As of early 2019, more than 530 orders were placed for A220 aircraft. Airbus is to open a new assembly line for the aircraft at its U.S. manufacturing facility in Mobile, Alabama, which will build jetliners for U.S. customers.
2019
Delivery of the 12,000th Airbus jetliner
Airbus delivered the 12,000th commercial aircraft in the company’s 50-year history – an A220-100 assembled in Mirabel, Canada for U.S.-based Delta Air Lines.
2019
A321XLR: Efficiency and extra-long range
After its official launch at the 2019 Paris Air Show, Airbus’ extra-long-range single-aisle A321XLR steadily built up a strong base of orders and commitments from customers around the world.
Tom Enders
CEO of Airbus 2007 – 2019
Dr. Thomas (“Tom”) Enders served as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Airbus SE, from June 2012 to April 2019, after having been CEO of the Airbus Commercial Aircraft Division since 2007. Before that he served as Co-CEO of EADS between 2005 and 2007. He was Head of the Group’s Defence Division from 2000 to 2005. He has been a member of the Executive Committee of Airbus S.E. since its creation in 2000. Prior to joining the aerospace industry in 1991, Enders worked, inter alia, as a Member of the “Planungsstab” of the German Ministry of Defence and in various foreign policy think tanks. He studied economics, political science and history at the University of Bonn and at the University of California in Los Angeles.
Discover more Airbus history
Commercial Aircraft
1967 to today
Airbus Helicopters
1920 to today
Airbus Defence
1970 to today
Airbus Space
1960's to today
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 53
|
http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/files/articles/336-c130.html
|
en
|
Operating a workhorse of the RNLAF, 336 squadron
|
[
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_header.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_01.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/tn_336-c130_02.png",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_03.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_04.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/tn_336-c130_05.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_06.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_07.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/tn_336-c130_08.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_09.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_10.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_11.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_12.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_13.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_14.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/tn_336-c130_15.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/336-c130/336-c130_16.jpg",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/facebook.png",
"http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/images/twitter.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Niels Hoogenboom",
"Mike Schoenmaker"
] | null |
Worldwide military aviation journalism with reviews of units, air shows and exercises from all over the world.
| null |
Implementation
The history of the current RNLAF 336 Squadron is relatively short in comparison to other active RNLAF squadrons. The squadron celebrated its 10-year anniversary in October 2017. But, the unit was actually founded and implemented within the RNLAF in September 1961.
Ever since The Netherlands gave up their colonial rule over Indonesia and Indonesia became an independent state in 1949, both countries had a conflict about the colony Dutch New Guinea. The reason for this conflict was that in the sovereignty transfer from The Netherlands to Indonesia, the mentioned colony wasn't stipulated that it would remain under Dutch colonial rule and Indonesia therefore claimed it. The conflict led to a build-up of Dutch troops in the region which had to protect the Dutch inhabitants as well as to prevent tensions rising too high. The new implemented 336 Squadron was assigned to transport personnel and goods for and to the Royal Netherlands Navy (RNN) units in Dutch New Guinea with DC-3 Dakota transport aircraft. Shortly after The Netherlands eventually acknowledged that New Guinea belonged to Indonesia by signing the Treaty of New York on August the 15th of 1962, the 336 Squadron was de-activated.
Re-implementations
On the 1st of August 1981, the 336 Squadron was re-implemented again. Stationed at Hato International Airport (IAP) at Curaçao, the unit was assigned with Search-And-Rescue (SAR) missions, surveillance against smugglers and detection of oil pollution in the Caribbean Sea. The squadron performed these tasks operating two Fokker F-27 Marine Patrol Aircraft. The two planes carried soldiers from one ABC-isle (ABC-Islands: Aruba, Bonaire und Curacao) to another and participated in different oversea exercises. When their task was taken over by P-3C Orion aircraft of the Royal Netherlands Navy, the 336 Squadron was de-activated again on the 6th of July 2000.
The 3rd implementation of the squadron took place on the 23rd of October 2007. After The Netherlands Minister of Defense (MoD) decided to buy two additional Hercules transport aircraft (two already were operated by the 334 Squadron since 1994), The Netherlands MoD re-assigned and divided the RNLAF transport aircraft from one into two squadrons. The two C-130 transport aircraft were assigned to the 336 Squadron. The other aircraft (KDC-10, Fokker 50, Fokker 60 and G-1159 Gulfstream) remained with the existing 334 Squadron.
The fleet
Partly due to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 The Netherlands MoD concluded that the RNLAFs Fokker F-27 fleet needed replacement. It was foreseen that future politically and military developments would occur in places that didn't match the range and transport capabilities of the F-27 which was in service since 1960. The RNLAF needed midsized tactical transport aircraft to be able to address the RNLAFs commitment when it was required. Therefore, the MoD purchased two C-130Hs in 1992. To be able to carry more bulk cargo, the aircraft's length was stretched to 34,4 meters. The RNLAF 334 Squadron received the first stretched Hercules, designated as C-130H-30 on the 14th of February 1994. The second C-130H-30 entered RNLAF service on the 2nd of October 1994. From the several military deployments and commitments during the years that followed, The Netherlands MoDs concluded that the RNLAF needed two additional C-130s. These C-130Hs, with a standard length of 29,8 meters, were bought in 2004 from the United States Navy and entered RNLAF service in 2010.
Today, the 336 Squadron prepares and conducts tactical air transport all over the world. The four C-130s offer a wide range capacity of more than 8,000 km and can carry up to 20 tons of freight. Its STOL-capabilities (Short Take Off and Landing) allow the Hercules to land almost everywhere, facing difficult conditions such as remote areas with few infrastructures. The cockpit of the C-130s is fully digital since 2012, increasing situational awareness and decreasing work pressure. The C-130s don't carry offensive weapon systems. But, equipped with the Missile Warning System the Hercules crew can protect the aircraft by using flares against heat-detecting rockets.
Military deployments
In 2019 the C-130 celebrates its 25th year of service within the RNLAF. During this period the RNLAF participated in many military crisis operations. A few examples. In 1995 and 1996 the C-130 supplied RNLAF and other NATO troops in Bosnia (SFOR), flying from Italy. During the Kosovo crisis in 1999, the C-130 aircraft proved their worth by supplying Dutch units in the area. They also brought First Aid supplies for Kosovar refugees to Albania. Between 2001 and 2011, the Hercules aircraft and their crews participated in several phases of the war against terrorism in Afghanistan. One or more of the transport aircraft flew from several airports, like Trabzon Airport (Turkey), Manas Airport (Kyrgyzstan), Khwaja Rawash Airport (Kabul, Afghanistan) and Camp Mirage (near Dubai, United Arab Emirates). In 2008 one of the 336 Squadron's workhorses operated as part of a French led EUFOR-mission, which was aimed at creating stability and safety in the region between Chad and Cameroon. The current commander of the 336 Squadron, lieutenant-colonel pilot Jorrit 'Winnie' de Gruijter says: "Today the RNLAF is active in Jordan, to participate in the war against terrorism from ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham) with several F-16s (Air Task Force Middle East). Even though the 336 Squadron isn't part of the deployment, our C-130 is used regularly to supply our troops."
In between military deployments and other operations, crews have to be trained. Besides courses in the latest techniques, the 336 crews participate in several international exercises, such as the European Tactical Airlift Program-Training. During this exercise the procedures that the participating airlift crews use to operate their tactical transport aircraft are harmonized and standardized to improve interoperability within NATO-context.
Humanitarian efforts
The RNLAF C-130 is obviously primarily meant to be used for military operations. But, during the last 25 years the 334 and 336 Squadron proved the versatility of its transport aircraft and its crews by using the Hercules also in humanitarian operations. The list of deployments in which the RNLAF participated is too long to mention every single one. Some of the most striking operations are elaborated on hereafter.
Silver Back and Provide Care
Already within two months after entering RNLAF service, the Hercules was deployed to Africa to be a part of the United Nations' Operation Silver Back (supporting refugees of the civil war between the Hutu and Tutsi tribes in Rwanda and Burundi) and the following Operation Provide Care in 1994. John 'Lost' van Noorloos, a 1st lieutenant C-130 Instructor Flight Engineer, participated in both. Back then John was a 1st Sergeant C-130 loadmaster. He says: "I remember well our missions to the city of Goma. It was the first time for me to be under enemy fire. It was also the first time I witnessed human despair on a large scale at close range. The human suffering I saw was horrible. Many refugees were sick and exhausted from cholera and dehydration and I can still remember the air of the many deceased people. As you can imagine, the combination of all these experiences to say the least were very impressive to me and my colleagues." The operation was aimed at providing emergency care to Hutu refugees who fled from Tutsi rebels and settled in camps around the city of Goma in Zaire. Operation Providing Care is without a doubt one of the most unnerving and horrifying sights of human suffering RNLAF personnel ever witnessed.
The RNLAF C-130 crew managed to evacuate many refugees and supplied the camps with tents, blankets, medication, water and food. Sometimes with great risk for their own safety. Major-pilot (retired) Lex 'Sexy' Schoenmaker remembers another specific story: "We were asked to assist New Zealand with their transport runs to Bukavu. From the intel we received, it appeared that the local runway was long enough. However, we should try to avoid some gravel at the end of the runway. Before we landed, we performed a low-level reconnaissance pass to check out the runway which from the air seemed to be fine. The opposite turned out to be true. We did avoid the gravel, but the runway itself was recently renewed and large pebbles of granite were scattered all over it. This resulted in severe damages to several antennas, navigation lights and drains. We decided that Bukavu was too dangerous to stay overnight waiting for a technical team and we flew back to Mombasa. After performing some emergency repairs, we flew to Brussels (Belgium) without stopovers." This 14,5 hours flight was the longest flight without refueling flown with the RNLAF C-130 since.
Natural disasters
Since the nineties, the RNLAF operates transport aircraft with a greater range than the aircraft she had in service before. The Netherlands therefore was able to offer their help after natural disasters occurred, anywhere in the world. With the Hercules the RNLAF supported the United Nations, the Red Cross and other organizations after the earthquakes in Iran (1997) and Afghanistan (1998) occurred.
The C-130 was also deployed to the Caribbean area several times after destructive hurricanes like LuÃs (1995), Mitch (1998) and Irma (2017). The 336 Squadron commander remembers: "On the 6th of September Irma struck the islands Saint-Maarten, Saba and Saint-Eustasius. As soon as we received the formal requests from the three islands, we immediately responded positively. Already the next day, one C-130 and one KDC-10 departed to the area to bring in relief supplies and personnel." He continues: "I will never forget the story that one of our pilots invited evacuees into the C-130 cockpit to explain in general how the aircraft is flown. His personal attention to the evacuees was visibly well appreciated, despite the circumstances they were in." Major Martin Tennekes, Public Affairs Officer at Eindhoven AB and also was deployed to Saint-Maarten as such, adds: "Everyone within the RNLAF is dedicated to take part in humanitarian operations. As a soldier, but mostly and simply as a human being. Also, our ground crew of the 940 Squadron, or RNLAF Cargo, deserves a huge compliment. You have to imagine that the loading and unloading of the aircraft is very heavy work. Especially during the tropical weather conditions, they were in over there."
MH17
The 17th of July 2014 marks a black page in Dutch history. Flight MH17 of Malaysian Airlines was shot down and crashed near the Ukrainian city of Kharkov, killing all 298 passengers of which 196 were Dutch. A ten-month complex repatriation mission and a criminal investigation followed.
Together with the Royal Australian Air Force, the 336 Squadron brought the mortal remains back home. The first C-130H and Australian C-17A arrived at Eindhoven AB on the 23rd of July. With respect and military ceremonial honor, each coffin was carried from the aircraft into hearse vehicles, in the meantime watched by relatives, friends and dignitaries. At the time, the commander of Eindhoven AB colonel-pilot Johan van Soest said to Dutch television that it was a hard, sometimes very emotional, but highly rewarding job to be involved in the repatriation mission. The way the Dutch government and everyone at Eindhoven AB have dealt with the repatriation has received much praise and respect from the Dutch society. As a reminder of the disaster, on the 17th of July 2017 a national monument was unveiled at Vijfhuizen Park, near Schiphol IAP. Another monument, a statue called 'The imagination', was unveiled near the entrance of Eindhoven AB on the 24th of March 2018.
The unit's future
Germany, Luxembourg, Norway and the Netherlands have jointly ordered seven Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) aircraft. Two of these will replace the capacity of the current two RNLAF KDC-10 aircraft from 2020 onwards, as these will be taken out of service. The four partners are part of the so-called Multinational MRTT Unit (MMU). "This development affects the organization of Eindhoven AB, as well as The Netherlands MoDs intent to restructure the RNLAF into a command structure will do. Our air force will be organized into a command structure. Next to the already existing Defense Helicopter Command, an Air Mobility Command, a Fighter Command and a Special Operations Command will be formed", says De Gruijter. He continues: "Given the fact that several years ago our four Fokker F-50s and four Fokker F-60s were phased out and sold, as well as the fact that the new A330s will resort with the MMU and are owned by NATO, it's not efficient any more to have two transport squadrons at Eindhoven AB. Most likely the 334 Squadron will therefore be de-activated, leaving the 336 Squadron the only fixed wing transport unit within the RNLAF. We will see what choices will be made in the coming years, but the final version of the plans should be implemented from 2021 onwards." Being asked about possible consequences for the Hercules fleet, Winnie says: "Yes, these changes can also affect our fleet. Our aircraft are technically and digitally up to date and the Center Wing Box will be replaced on short term. But given the airframe's age, the focus on the MMU and restructured RNLAF later on could justify replacement of our current fleet for a yet to be determined type, depending on the tasks the RNLAF focusses on in the future."
Sudore ac pulvere
The 336 Squadron's motto is 'Sudor ac pulvere'. This Latin phrase translates into 'In sweat and dust'. "No other motto is better applicable for the squadron than this one", says the squadron commander. "We are in service of and in service for the Netherlands and its population. Our drive is to offer necessary assistance and we do this proudly, efficiently and anywhere in the world, in almost every circumstance. Military as well as humanitarian. I'm confident we will continue to do so and I'm proud of our job and my colleagues." Cleary, the last 25 years, of which the 336 Squadron operated the C-130 for 10 years, were an intensive, busy, sometimes emotional and above all rewarding period for the unit.
This article was also published in the Dutch magazine 'Piloot & Vliegtuig, 10-2018' and the Polish magazine 'Lotnictwo Aviation International, 01-2019'.
|
|||||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 86
|
https://www.key.aero/article/no-312-squadron-inside-last-dutch-f-16-unit
|
en
|
No 312 Squadron: Inside the last Dutch F-16 unit
|
https://supersocial.fullfatthings.com/i/1/https://www.key.aero/article/no-312-squadron-inside-last-dutch-f-16-unit
|
https://supersocial.fullfatthings.com/i/1/https://www.key.aero/article/no-312-squadron-inside-last-dutch-f-16-unit
|
[
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/themes/keyaero/logo.svg",
"https://www.key.aero/sites/keyaero/themes/keyaero/images/avion-revue-logo-white.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7080444/interactive-153342628011.png",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/woodwing/2023-05/198622.jpeg?h=65d36320&itok=RpiScf0l",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/woodwing/2023-06/198439.jpeg?h=b0117eef&itok=wyrgG_HS",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/woodwing/2023-11/239991.jpeg?h=c39b9bfd&itok=JgcyeOGN",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2021-09/lead_rnlaf_flight_test_fc-2245.jpg?h=1391f184&itok=_4rHxqsn",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/airforces-monthly.png?itok=fYAKPk3l",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2024-05/small_image.jpg?h=ac6cbfe2&itok=l9tjzPgo",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2024-04/transall_flight_adventure_2.jpg?h=804717d6&itok=JPjuJVzU",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/listing_card/public/2024-07/001_ai-aug-24_copy.jpg?h=ca3d6bfa&itok=ex4v8dWX",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/2021-10/KA%20bb%20reviews%20Oct_21.jpg",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/airliner-world.png?itok=yr0EUvfv",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/combat.png?itok=JI0mnk6m",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/aeroplane.png?itok=pgfznVlj",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/flypast_0.png?itok=oqoXRuzG",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/airforces-monthly.png?itok=fYAKPk3l",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/aviation-news.png?itok=dgBjCWrZ",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/pc-pilot.png?itok=JgKm2Vpk",
"https://fullfatthings-keyaero.b-cdn.net/sites/keyaero/files/styles/medium_scale/public/publications/AI-LOGO-2020_0.png?itok=EF2B-Pf1",
"https://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-9Yp58hh8HXUzM.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2023-05-23T12:00:00+00:00
|
AirForces Monthly visits No 312 Squadron, the Royal Netherlands Air Force’s only fully operational fighter unit and sole remaining employer of the F-16AM/BM (MLU) Fighting Falcon, as it prepares to transition to the F-35A Lightning II
|
en
|
/sites/keyaero/themes/keyaero/favicon.ico
|
Key Aero
|
https://www.key.aero/article/no-312-squadron-inside-last-dutch-f-16-unit
|
Gert Kromhout visits No 312 Squadron, the Royal Netherlands Air Force’s only fully operational fighter unit and sole remaining employer of the F-16AM/BM (MLU) Fighting Falcon, as it prepares to transition to the F-35A Lightning II
The Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) purchased 213 General Dynamics (now Lockheed Martin) F-16 Fighting Falcons in total, with deliveries starting in 1979 and concluding in 1992. In its heyday, this highly capable multi-role fighter equipped nine RNLAF squadrons.
Today, No 312 Squadron at Volkel Air Base is the last of these nine units to fly the type nicknamed ‘Viper’ and it is also currently the only fully operational fighter squadron in the RNLAF. The unit’s transition to the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II fifth-generation multi-role stealth fighter is due to start in 2024, but in the meantime, the squadron has two very important missions to perform.
No 312 Squadron is responsible for covering two different mission sets. The first regards the protection of Dutch airspace by means of the Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) mission, while the second surrounds the execution of nuclear strike taskings on behalf of the NATO alliance.
While the defence and promotion of the international order remain a cor…
|
||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 69
|
https://ronaldderoij.photo/history-of-the-royal-netherlands-air-force/service-history-of-the-fokker-f-27-with-the-rnlaf/
|
en
|
Service history of the Fokker F 27 with the RNLAF
|
[
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/cropped-cropped-3371.jpg",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf16.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf22.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf15.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf14.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf4.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf19.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf1.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf21.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf18.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf9.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf24.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf27.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf8.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf17.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf29.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf28.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf26.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf27.jpg?w=150",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf25.jpg?w=470",
"https://ronaldderoij.photo/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ronald_de_roij_fokker-f27_rnlaf5.jpg?w=470",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2018-09-15T12:36:25+00:00
|
The Fokker F27-100/300M Friendships/Troopships were the workhorses of the Royal Netherlands Air Force (KLU, Koninklijke Luchtmacht) for decades until they were taken out of service in 1996. During this period they severed in a variety of task. In the Caribbean two Fokker F27-200 Maritime were active until 2000 Delivery to the Royal Netherlands Air Force…
|
en
|
https://s1.wp.com/i/favicon.ico
|
Ronald's photo site
|
https://ronaldderoij.photo/history-of-the-royal-netherlands-air-force/service-history-of-the-fokker-f-27-with-the-rnlaf/
|
The Fokker F27-100/300M Friendships/Troopships were the workhorses of the Royal Netherlands Air Force (KLU, Koninklijke Luchtmacht) for decades until they were taken out of service in 1996. During this period they severed in a variety of task. In the Caribbean two Fokker F27-200 Maritime were active until 2000
Delivery to the Royal Netherlands Air Force
Design of Fokker F27 was started as a response for a required replacement of the Douglas DC-3. Fokker adopted a high-wing, twin Rolls-Royce Dart powered design with pressurised cabin for 28 passengers. The first of two Fokker F27 prototypes made its first flight on 24 November 1955 and the second on 29 January 1957. Deliveries by Fokker began in November 1958 and were continuous through almost 30 years.
Twelve aircraft were purchased by the Koninklijke Luchtmacht, the first three being Fokker F27-100 friendships, the remainder were 37 seater Fokker F27-300M troopships. They were delivered between July 1960 and April 1961.
The Fokker F27-300M Troopship a military transport variant was developed for the Royal Netherlands Air Force with an extra-large cargo door and other modifications to make it suitable for transporting cargo.
Two maritime patrol Fokker F27-200MAR were ordered to replace the P-2 Neptune serving in the Caribbean as a cost-effective surveillance aircraft for coastal patrol, fishery protection, search and rescue and similar offshore duties with delivery starting in 1981.
Operational history
Three Fokker 27-100 were delivered as passenger aircraft (C-1 to C-3) off which C-1 was configured as a VIP aircraft. This VIP aircraft was used as a spare for the Royal family.
In the first years of service the Fokker 27 did not only perform the transport role but was used in a verity off roles Fokker F27’s C-5, C-6 and C-7 were converted to navigation trainers, replacing the BeechTC-45J aircraft used in this role.
Fokker F27 C-8 was used in the training of F-104 Starfighter pilot, fitted with a nose section of the F-104G it was soon called “Flipper”. The nose cone contained a NASSAR radar system and operated by a console in the passenger cabin and was used to introduce Starfighter pilots to radar navigation. All aircraft where converted back to their original state at one point.
Fokker F-27 C-9 and C-11 were at some point leased to NLM, registered PH-KFA and PH-KFB in May 1966. They were returned in May 1972.
During their service life some of the aircraft where modified to serve during peace keeping operations in Cambodia, the Balkan but also deployments during the Gulf war.
These modification where mostly related to self defence against missiles. And a white paint scheme for UN recognisability.
The first Fokker F27-200MPA aircraft, M-1, arrived at Hato on 13November 1981. The Fokker F27-200MPA operated for most of their operational life from here. In 1984 one aircraft the M-2 is deployed to the Persian Gulf to assist in mine control. One of the greatest problems faced by the squadron is corrosion; it became so bad that a team from Fokker was send over to help with the repairs.
Deployments and shows.
During its service life the Fokker F27 where involved in deployments for the UN and humanitarian cases. These ranged from deployments to Senegal in 1973 to add the people of West Africa during a period prolonged drought, to assistance to Romania after the fall off the Ceausescu regime in 1989. For the UN deployments were done to Cambodia, the Balkan and Israel to name a few. The Fokker F27 was the workhorse off the air force going everywhere where needed until the arrival of the bigger transport planes in the air force.
The Fokker F27-300M Troopship is probably best known for its amazing displays by 334 squadron. The first display was in 1970 during the air show at Volkel AB.
In the following years the display become more of a show off what was possible when a fighter pilot was flying a cargo plane. Whit steep declines and low take offs the team amazed the crowds during its first attendance at the RIAT in Greenham Common 1979, and winning the “International Display Sword” in the process. During the following years the team preformed at multiple shows in Europe.
At first the team operated the Fokker F-27 in a standard camouflage scheme, later this was changed in a special designed paint scheme. The team continued to the last years of operating the Troopship.
Squadrons equipped with the Fokker 27
334 squadron
The squadron was formed in 1946 but as it continued the traditions of No. 1316 (Dutch) Communications Flight of the RAF also known as the Transportvliegtuig afdeling 1 (TransVA 1), a date off July 7th 1944 is also mentioned.
After returning from the United Kingdom it was first stationed at Valkenburg AB until this becomes a NAS in 1957 and the squadron moves to Ypenburg AB. In this period the squadron uses a mix off airplanes including; Dominie, Lockheed 12A, Beaver’s and Dakota’s. With the introduction of the Fokker F27 most of the other types were phased out with the last Beaver leaving the squadron in 1966.
On 23 August 1960 the first of twelve Fokker F27s was delivered to the squadron. The unit received three Fokker F27-100 Friendships and nine Fokker F27-300M Troopships
In 1968 the squadron moved to Soesterberg AB were it stayed until May1992 before the last move to Eindhoven AB where it still is stationed. Today it operates the (K) DC-10, Gulfstream and Fokker 50 aircraft.
336 Squadron
Squadron 336 was established on 1 September 1961 to take over the transport tasks of the Royal Netherlands Navy in Netherlands New Guinea (West Papua). From its home base Mokmer New Guinea the unit operated theC-47 Dakotas in the transport role. A year later the squadron was disbanded after a cease fire was agreed.
With the introduction of the Fokker F27 maritime the squadron was brought back to live in 1981 at Soesterberg AB. The squadron was equipped with two Fokker F27-200MPA aircraft for maritime patrol duties in the Netherlands Antilles region replacing the Navy P-2 Neptune of 320Squadron. The first aircraft, M-1, arrived at Hato on 13 November 1981.The aircraft flew their missions with a mixed crew from the Air force and the Navy until June 2000, when the squadron was disbanded again during a round off defence cuts.
The squadron has since been brought back to live as a transport squadron operating the C-130 Hercules from Eindhoven AB. During the last reactivation the squadron’s motto and insignia changed to represent the new task.
End of the line
In 1996 the Fokker 27-100 and 300M became obsolete with the introduction of newer Fokker 50 and Fokker 60 aircraft. After the withdrawal from active service in 1996 most of the airframes were placed in storage and kept in airworthy condition in an effort to sell them. At one point there was an effort to make one aircraft available for the RNLAF Historical flight. Some were sold as complete aircraft and others for spares.
The Fokker 27-200M returned to Eindhoven AB in 2000 after the squadron was disbanded for storage. They were sold and finely scraped at southend airport.
Some Fokker 27 remains in the Netherlands as instructional airframes and in the Air force Museum in Soesterberg.
|
||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 25
|
https://sldinfo.com/2018/12/the-dutch-open-the-door-to-buying-additional-f-35s-a-key-building-block-in-shaping-their-defense-strategy/
|
en
|
35s: A Key Building Block in Shaping Their Defense Strategy
|
[
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/sldlogo.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/envelope.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/tagline.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/envelope.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/323-TES-Special-tail.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/1000w_q95-8-min-1000x570.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/323-TES-Special.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/SLD-Bookshop-logo.svg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/amazon-logo-transparent.png?v=1.1",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/Barnes-Noble-Logo-1999.png?v=1.1",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/themes/asenka/img/RakutenKobo_horizontal_RedOnWhite_CMYK.png?v=1.1",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/51UyluqCcYL._SL1499_.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/51YPjel62nL._SL1491_.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/B0CFZJKB7W.01.S001.JUMBOXXX.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MI_LOGO_Marc.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/SLD-SirRichardWilliamsFoundation-Logo-300x300-1.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/auvsi.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/c4defence.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/DW.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/India-Strategic-Web.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/ops.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/RID-Logo.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/1-maritimeSecBook.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Sally-B.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Centre.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/frontline.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/IntenationFighter-Partner-Ad.jpg",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Group-Five.png",
"https://sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Skyracer-Consulting_180x180-A.jpg"
] |
[
"https://player.vimeo.com/video/270509593",
"https://www.youtube.com/embed/hdijyiAHnXQ",
"https://www.youtube.com/embed/UuLav42flRU",
"https://sldinfo.com/2018/03/europe-prepares-fifth-generation-transformation-european-air-group-works-challenge/embed/#?secret=fB8TBAlVZE",
"https://www.youtube.com/embed/d9HqVXGRJL0"
] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Robbin Laird"
] |
2018-12-16T13:47:13+00:00
|
With the Dutch government focused on enhanced defense capabilities, a core building block in the way ahead clearly has been the purchase and involvement of the Dutch in the F-35 program. The Netherlands was one of the original nine partner nations for the F-35 as well as the second international partner to receive the F-35. […]
|
en
|
Second Line of Defense
|
https://sldinfo.com/2018/12/the-dutch-open-the-door-to-buying-additional-f-35s-a-key-building-block-in-shaping-their-defense-strategy/
|
With the Dutch government focused on enhanced defense capabilities, a core building block in the way ahead clearly has been the purchase and involvement of the Dutch in the F-35 program.
The Netherlands was one of the original nine partner nations for the F-35 as well as the second international partner to receive the F-35.
The Netherlands are working with the Italians to assemble most of their F-35s at the Cameri facility.
An article by Defense News’s Tom Kington published on June 15, 2018, highlighted this aspect of the program.
Assembly is underway in Italy on a F-35 Joint Strike Fighter destined for the Netherlands Air Force, Dutch and Italian officials have said.
The Netherlands is planning to assemble most of its F-35s at the line at Cameri in northern Italy, where Italian Air Force and Navy F-35s are already being assembled.
Dutch secretary of state for defense, Barbara Visser, attended a ceremony at Cameri on Thursday to mark the start of the work on Dutch aircraft.
“She was there as the aircraft, ‘AN9,’ went to the mating station as assembly got under way,” said Dutch Air Force spokesman, Sidney Plankman.
The aircraft is the ninth of the Netherlands’ order of 37 F-35As. The first eight are being assembled at Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth facility in the U.S.
The first Dutch F-35 assembled in the U.S. will roll off the Fort Worth line in January 2019 and will head to Luke Air Base for pilot training, said Plankman. “Six or seven of those assembled in the U.S. will go to Luke,” he added.
A follow on story on Defense News by Sebastian Sprenger highlighted the evolving approach of the Dutch government with regard to purchasing additional F-35s as well.
Dutch defense minister Ank Bijleveld has eliminated the country’s budget cap for F-35 purchases, opening the possibility of buying more planes in the future, a spokesman confirmed to Defense News.
The defense ministry spokesman described the move as “just a formality” that would not require parliamentary approval, as the Dutch objective of buying 37 copies of the Lockheed Martin-made jet for €4.7 billion remains in place. But it means “we leave the option open to buy new planes” beyond those already envisioned in the budget, the spokesman said.
And this month, the Dutch government has indicated that it is increasing defense spending which will include purchasing additional F-35s.
Ministers have pledged to set aside more money for the defence ministry in line with Nato agreements and that means buying more JSF fighter jets and tanks, the AD said on Friday afternoon.
The detailed plan to boost spending on the armed forces will be unveiled when government publishes its spring statement next year, the defence ministry said in a statement. Nato has said all its member states should come up with a ‘believable plan’ outlining how they will meet the agreed threshhold of spending 2% of GDP on defence by 2024.
Most European countries are far below the threshold – the Netherlands, for example, spends just 1.35% of GDP on defence, the AD said.
Defence minister Ank Bijleveld said in an official statement that the plan shows that the cabinet takes the current threats seriously. ‘The cabinet is committed to invest in defence,’ she said.
‘The Netherlands must take steps to remain a trustworthy ally.’ The minister told the AD that it is still unclear how much extra money will be allocated to defence.
Nor would she comment on how many extra JSFs – or F-35s as they are officially called – would be bought.
‘We will soon have two squadrons and Nato is asking for a third. That is 15 planes,’ she said.
The Netherlands is currently committed to buying 37 of the fighter jets.. Broadcaster NOS said the government has five priorities to boost the armed forces.
As well as buying more JSFs and tanks, ministers want to strengthen the elite special forces units, and boost cyber and information technology capacity.
FighterSweep.com provided this comment on the Dutch and the F-35 as well as including a Dutch video.
The Dutch Parliament approved an order for a lot of eight Lockheed Martin F-35As in March of last year, confirming the aircraft as the official replacement for the F-16AMs currently in use by the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF).
These aircraft are currently scheduled for delivery in 2019.
The Dutch are scheduled to procure a total of 37 F-35As, the first two of which are currently flying at Edwards Air Force Base in California with 323 Squadron.
That unit’s mission is Operational Test and Evaluation, being done alongside their American counterparts at the 31st TES.
Four RNLAF pilots, to include “Smiley” and “Pascal,” have completed their F-35 transition. Even though none of us at FighterSweep speak Dutch, we can surmise the focus of the presentation has to do with both the capacity and requirement of fighter pilots to sometimes make split-second decisions–and it doesn’t matter if you’re flying a Viper or TTL, or what language you speak.
So if you can filter out not understanding what they’re saying, you ought to enjoy this presentation.
And using the same approach of FighterSweep, we include a more recent Dutch F-35 video, which was published by the Dutch Ministry of Defence on November 26, 2018.
The video provides a look behind the scenes at the test squadron at Edwards AFB I which the Dutch participate. The focus is on the ground team that ensures the F-35 flies and does so safely.
The Aviationist provided photos and comments on the Dutch F-35s with special tail markings at 323 Test and Evaluation Squadron.
The 323 TES (Test and Evaluation Squadron) “Diana” celebrates its 70th anniversary with F-35 F-002 in special tail markings at Edwards Air Force Base, California.
“Three two three”, Royal Netherlands Air Force’s first F-35 squadron, operates two Lightning II aircraft, examples AN-1 (F-001) and AN-2 (F-002), at Edwards AFB, California. The Squadron, is responsible for the Operational Test and Evaluation Phase (OT&E) as part of the Joint Operational Test Team, which lays the foundation for the RNLAF’s commissioning of the F-35.
On Nov. 15, 2018, the squadron, that was established in 1948 and has changed designation (including Fighter Weapons School, Tactical Training, Evaluation and Standardization Squadron, etc.) several times through the years, celebrated its 70th anniversary, an achievement commemorated by applying special markings to the tail of one of the two Dutch F-35s: aircraft F-002 was given a Diana “Godness of the Hunt” (symbol of the squadron) artwork along with the silhouettes of all the aircraft that the unit has flown in the last seven decades and the text “70 years”.
The artwork was created by artist Christy Tortland. It looks like the markings are applied on panels attached to the rudder and fin; however, according to the artist, this was just for the photo shoot as the aircraft should be painted later.
The Dutch are contributing in other ways as well.
For example, the Deputy Director of the EAG, Air Commodore Robert Adang of the Royal Netherlands Air Force, is helping shape the way ahead with airpower teaming in which the F-35s are the tip of the spear for a coordinated air combat force.
For our interview earlier this year with Air Commodore Adang, see the following:
Europe Prepares for Fifth Generation Transformation: The European Air Group Works the Challenge
And we close with this video by Dafydd Phillips published on December 14, 2017, he caputres Dutch F-35s at Edwards AFB.
|
|||||
3572
|
dbpedia
|
1
| 84
|
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/lajeunes-eng.asp
|
en
|
The Distant Early Warning Line and the Canadian Battle for Public Perception
|
[
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/header/right.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/header/left-dnd-eng.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/header/leaf.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/js/support/archived/images/warning.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj1.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo6/no1/images/print_pdf-eng.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj2.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj3.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj4.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj5.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj6.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Laj7.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/cmj_bullet-eng.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/site/cre-equ-eng.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/cmp_left_crest.gif",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/cda_logo-110.jpg",
"http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/images/arrows/tphp.gif",
"http://stats3.forces.gc.ca/dcsh8iudx00000spe21691vkg_3x8e/njs.gif?dcsuri=/nojavascript&WT.js=No&WT.tv=9.4.0&dcssip=www.journal.forces.gc.ca"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"distant",
"early",
"warning",
"line",
"canadian",
"battle",
"public",
"perception",
"history"
] | null |
[
"Government of Canada",
"National Defence",
"Canadian Defence Academy",
"Canadian Military Journal",
"Adam Lajeunesse",
"Department of National Defence"
] | null |
The Distant Early Warning Line and the Canadian Battle for Public Perception
|
en
| null |
History
DND photo
The Distant Early Warning Line and the Canadian Battle for Public Perception
by Adam Lajeunesse
For more information on accessing this file, please visit our help page.
Introduction
In December 1954, construction began on the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line, an integrated chain of 63 radar and communication centres stretching 3000 miles from Western Alaska across the Canadian Arctic to Greenland.1 This predominantly-American defence project, designed to detect Russian bomber incursions into North American airspace, was the largest technological undertaking the Canadian Arctic had yet witnessed. The DEW Line was only one in a series of defence projects that Canada and the United States had jointly embarked upon in the Far North since the Second World War. However, the sheer magnitude and unprecedented expense of the project, coupled with Canada’s inability and disinclination to contribute to it, was widely seen as presenting a greater challenge to Canadian Arctic sovereignty than anything that had happened earlier in the region. The source of Canadian anxiety over Arctic sovereignty was the lack of any substantial physical Canadian presence there. While there were few serious fears of an official American usurpation of Canadian territory, there were serious concerns for loss of de facto control over that territory. It was reasoned that a large, unilateral American construction project in the North would inevitably result in the United States military exercising effective control over the region. The Americans would administer the territory, would guard it, would observe from it, and, given the local demographics, would effectively populate the region. While Canada might retain legal title to the land, this assertion of de facto control by a foreign state would have fundamentally undercut the image of Canadian sovereignty in the North, both domestically and internationally. To avoid the impression that any abdication of sovereignty had taken place, and to avoid actually investing heavily in the DEW Line itself, the Canadian government’s principal aim in dealing with the construction and operation of the Line became one of maximizing the perception of Canadian control and influence. Canadian policy focused upon the pursuit of appearance over substance, with the promotion of an idea rather than the pursuit of its physical embodiment becoming its primary objective. It was this battle for perception that became the driving force and the ultimate end-state of Canadian policy with respect to the DEW Line, from its inception to its manning during the 1950s.
What is Sovereignty?
The idea of sovereignty is an amorphous and multifaceted concept that has evolved throughout history to suit the various circumstances of the day. At its core lies a single principle: The possession of supreme authority expressed through the legitimate monopoly over physial force within a given territory.2 However, a holder of sovereignty must possess more than mere cohersive power. There must also exist legitimacy, what philosopher R.P. Wolff called “the right to command.”3
Fundamental to legitimizing sovereignty is the fact that a state’s right to control its territory is recognized and accepted by the international community. To this end, therefore, sovereignty must be derived from some mutually acknowledged source of legitimacy, which, historically, has ranged anywhere from a divine mandate to modern international law.4 When a state’s right to control territory is recognized by the larger global community, it essentially has been given a guarantee against external intervention within that teritory, and, ipso facto, is left with absolute authority, if not necessarily in practice, then at least in theory. Sovereignty is thus a two-headed creature. On one hand, force and control lie at its heart; it is from them that sovereignty flows, from them that it is enforced, and largely because of them that it is recognized. But the actual exercise of this force cannot be considered sovereignty per se, only its manifestation. It is only with the recognition of others of one’s right to use force, or, at the very least, with the absence of any challenges to that right, that sovereignty can be deemed to exist. Sovereignty is thus, at its very essence, an imagined concept, existing only in the minds of those that recognize it. It is this concept, the recognition that the Canadian Arctic is Canadian by virtue of tradition and international law, that the Canadian government fought for more than anything else to defend against American encroachment.
DND photo
Background
In 1949 and 1953 respectively, the Soviet Union detonated its first plutonium and hydrogen bombs. When mated with the then-new (1952) Soviet Tu-95 Bear bomber, and, to a lesser extent, the even earlier (1946) Tu-34 Bull bomber, many centres of industry and high-density population in North America had fallen within range of Soviet nuclear weapons.5 This series of genuinely revolutionary changes in military technology and strategic concepts had catapulted the Canadian Arctic from the strategic backwaters to the forefront of Cold War defence.6 In this new strategic paradigm, the Canadian Arctic had assumed the role predicted for it by Hugh Keenleyside in 1949, when he said: “What the Aegean Sea was to classical antiquity, what the Mediterranean was to the Roman world, what the Atlantic Ocean was to the expanding of Europe of Renaissance days, the Arctic Ocean is becoming to the world of aircraft and atomic power.”7 The Cold War had placed the Canadian Arctic under the spotlight and given it a new and unwelcome importance.
The DEW Line was a direct reaction to this emerging Soviet threat. Militarily, a northern radar line made sense from the Canadian perspective. While previously there had never existed any serious concern with respect to a major Soviet attack on the North, it was assumed that because of the close geographical proximity of Canadian and American industrial and population centres, as well as their close military and political connections, these two nations would share the same fate if a full-scale nuclear war were to erupt. Yet, the idea of any American activity on Canadian soil, however beneficial, made Canadian politicians nervous.
When the American plan for the DEW Line was forwarded to the Canadian government, Ottawa found it had little diplomatic choice in the matter. The Minister of National Defence, the Honourable Brooke Claxton, put it succinctly in a telegram to Secretary of the Cabinet Arnold Heeney when he wrote: “It may be very difficult indeed for the Canadian government to reject any major defence proposals which the United States government presents with conviction as essential for the security of North America.”8 The Canadian government, still under the obligations which it had accepted at Ogdensburg in 1940 when Prime Minister Mackenzie King had assured the Americans, “...[that] the enemy should not be able to pursue their way, either by land, sea, or air to the United States across Canadian territory,” could not conceivably refuse the American request to construct the Line.9 Under the military and political circumstances of the day, the construction of the DEW Line, as a rational continuation of continental defence, was almost inevitable. Canada was thus forced into the highly uncomfortable position of choosing between playing a large role in the construction of the Line and accepting a massive influx of American influence into its Arctic region, which could bring into question its ability to exercise effective control over its own neglected territory.
DND photo
Challenges to Sovereignty
Nearly a century of general indifference on the part of successive Canadian governments had left the region lacking an adequate military or civilian infrastructure, significant economic development, or adequate supervision. Coupled with an extremely sparse population, the physical manifestations of Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic were scarce. However, the United States was not interested in acquiring Canadian territory. This fact was amply demonstrated by the American Arctic projects of the Second World War, which had “scrupulously avoided” violating Canadian sovereignty.10 Canadian concern arose instead from the threat to Canada’s de facto sovereignty, which would be called into question if American forces were seen to be exercising authority over Canadian territory. In 1931, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) had ruled that it was the exercise of authority within a territory that was the principal consideration when dealing with matters of sovereignty. This control even superseded prior claims to discovery or contiguity.11 Without more physical control over the Arctic, there were serious concerns that Canadian claims, which were based upon discovery and contiguity, might be invalidated in the minds of both its own public and the international community if the United States was seen to be exercising effective control over the region.
Given the sparse population of the area, a large influx of American servicemen and civilian contractors would shift Arctic demographics, and the North would become more American in terms of a human presence. Americans would become responsible for the execution of the duties and responsibilities that were properly Canadian.12 With physical manifestations of sovereignty under foreign control, Canadian sovereignty would be eroded in the minds of anyone who looked north and saw that the real authority in the region was, in fact, if not in law, American.
DND photo
What to do?
With little physical presence to represent Canadian control, American domination in the North would be all too obvious, and the fear in Ottawa was that once the international community began to believe that the Arctic was under American control and administration, Canadian sovereignty would weaken accordingly. Damage control was therefore always at the core of Canadian policy surrounding the DEW Line. First and foremost, Ottawa endeavoured to control how people perceived the project and American involvement in the North. It was vital to the government that the image of Canadian control be maintained, even when that control was, in practical terms, being delegated to the United States. For this reason, the Canadian government spent a great amount of effort dealing with perception and publicity. Minor incidents, the wording of agreements and press releases, anything that might affect public opinion, was carefully managed and ‘spun’ to maximize the image of Canadian participation in, and even control over, the DEW Line, while minimizing the appearance of American control over Canadian soil.13
This effort was extensive and comprehensive, and it dated back to shortly after the Second World War. To minimize the US military profile in Canada, the Department of External Affairs went as far as to insist that United States Air Force (USAF) stations in Canada, when and where required, not be established near any major population centres. It was also requested that USAF offices be set up as annexes to American consulates, or even located inside Department of National Defence offices, rather than establishing separate facilities.14 The offices, if they had to be established, were to be kept “inconspicuous,” and the personnel, who were asked to wear civilian clothes, were to tell inquirers that they were “working on joint classified projects of the USAF and the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF).”15 In the opinion of one American bureaucrat, “[t]he attempt to cover up the fact that US forces are in Canada has at times involved ludicrous limitations.”16 These conditions were a sign of Canadian insecurity over the idea of being perceived as an unequal partner to the US, or worse, as a recipient of American aid. This insecurity was even more pronounced in the North, where local conditions gave American forces significance and a visibility disproportionate to their numbers.17
Ottawa had been careful to avoid giving the impression that American assistance constituted ‘aid’ of any kind, and activities in the North were no exception.18 Trivial incidents, ranging from an American refusal to allow an RCAF aircraft to land on one of their Canadian airfields, to the damaging of an Inuit archaeological site by US servicemen, were often enough to raise great concern in Ottawa.19 Every American action that gave the appearance of American disregard for Canadian sovereignty in the North, no matter how trivial, made an insecure Canadian government even more insecure. Most of these incidents were petty; but they epitomized the Canadian fear of the Arctic under de facto US military control. The government’s policy was thus marked by a push to suppress these incidents in an attempt to hide its anxiety behind a mask of false confidence, worn for both Canadians and the world.20
To lessen the appearance of American hegemony in the North, an effort was made to use the terms ‘joint-project’ and ‘cooperation’ at every possible occasion. When the DEW Line became operational in 1957, Canadian policy was to place Canadian officers in as many command positions as possible. While the ultimate command of the system rested with the USAF, the appearance of Canadians in positions of authority helped to encourage the impression that the DEW line was not solely under American control. Yet, while the agreement governing the establishment of the DEW Line gave Canada the right to man the stations, there was never enough trained manpower in the RCAF to accomplish the task.21 What men Canada did post to the DEW Line served more as symbols of national control and occupation, and they were a vital part of the government’s drive to reinforce the image of a Canadian presence. In 1959, in a speech to Parliament, the Minister of National Defence, George Pearkes, used the presence of the few RCMP officers in the region to give the impression of Canadian occupation. He said: “Everywhere you go at all these stations on the DEW line you now see the scarlet coat of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.”22 Yet, at the time, there were fewer than 200 RCMP officers spread across the entire Canadian North.23
According to an External Affairs report of the period: “The main purpose of Canadian participation is to make it clear to the people of Canada that the United States is not being permitted to carry out large projects in Canada except under effective Canadian control.”24 This policy is accurately summarized by a 1954 government Guidance Paper, which states:
... [that it is] important that the rest of the world should be aware that the Canadian Arctic is not an ‘Ultima Thule’ but is being effectively occupied, administered and developed by the Canadian Government and people. This emphasis should underline all public information on the north whether it relates to long-range policy plans or spot news.25
The Canadian response to the influx of Americans into its Arctic was thus primarily psychological, with Canadian participation principally designed to convey the image, rather than the substance, of Canadian control.
Canadians have generally been amenable to multilateral forms of cooperation. Part of the anxiety generated by the DEW Line was that American forces in the North gave the impression of Canadian sovereignty being usurped by a clearly defined foreign power. As such, from an early date, the Canadian government strove to link the DEW Line with multinational institutions. In March 1955, while on a visit to Washington, Lester B. Pearson, Canada’s then-Secretary of State, suggested to his American colleagues that the Arctic become a NATO region. He even went so far as to propose that European states be asked to provide troops to man the Line, personally suggesting the deployment of 200 to 300 Dutch service personnel.26 While, for political and military reasons, the DEW Line was never integrated formally into NATO, and there was no “multilateral command,” as the influential Winnipeg Free Press had suggested, there was a push to minimize the impression of American hegemony in the North by attempts to place the DEW Line into a multilateral paradigm within which Canadians had traditionally been more comfortable.27 Very early on, Canadian government publications began linking the DEW Line to NATO, to collective security, to the United Nations, and even to world peace. This was not a new tactic, nor would it be the last time it was employed to make a bilateral agreement with the United States sound more appealing. The joint statement made by the Canadian and American governments concerning the completion of the Pinetree Line, and the start of construction on the DEW Line in 1954, illustrate this attempt to place a fundamentally bilateral defence arrangement within a more comfortable multilateral context:
The defence of North America is part of the defence of the North Atlantic Region to which both Canada and the United States are pledged as signatories of the North Atlantic Treaty. Thus the cooperative arrangements for the defence of this continent and for participation of Canadian and United States forces in the defence of Europe are simply two sides of the same coin, two parts of a world wide objective, to preserve peace and defend freedom.28
In 1959, the Report on National Defence by the Minister of National Defence linked the radar warning lines not only to NATO and the preservation of world peace, but also attempted to link the DEW Line to the United Nations.29 In public statements, a concerted effort was made to ensure that the DEW Line was not looked upon as an isolated project. The notion that it was a NATO project, or was at least connected to NATO or UN policy, served to balance the American presence in the Canadian Arctic, since, at that time, a Canadian brigade and an air division were similarly deployed on the territory of France, another NATO ally.
And yet, the DEW Line sites differed from the NATO military bases spread across Europe. The NATO establishments in Europe were paid for by all members, not just single states, as was the case with the Arctic sites.30 In this manner, the appearance of control by a foreign nation was diluted in the European context. Most importantly to the Canadian Cabinet, however, was the fact that NATO’s European bases were located in heavily populated areas,
“...[and] represent a small fraction of the sum total of human activity in those areas and thus did not in any sense constitute a threat to the sovereignty of the states within which they were located, whereas it was just within the realm of possibility that in years to come US developments might be just about the only form of human activity in the vast wastelands of the Canadian Arctic.”31
There had been calls, both in the House of Commons and within the Department of External Affairs, to invest the time and resources in the Arctic that would have allowed Canada to exercise more than a token amount of physical control, and would avoid surrendering the area to the Americans.32 However, these were largely “voices in the wilderness,” as the overwhelming majority of politicians and bureaucrats balked at the costs of equal (or even meaningful) participation in the DEW Line. Yet, this reaction to the expense of the DEW Line was certainly not unreasonable. The total Canadian defence budget for 1953-1954 was only $1.8 billion, and to undertake even a 50 percent share in the project would have required roughly a 6 percent increase in defence expenditure. Given that in 1953, Canadian defence expenditure already accounted for fully 50 percent of all government spending and 10 percent of the GNP, at a time when the nation was in a mild economic downturn, such an increase would have been politically, if not economically, unworkable.33 That estimate also assumed the correctness of the $200 million figure quoted for construction of the Line to the American government by Western Electric, a private firm anxious to win a lucrative contract. Many in Ottawa felt that the Americans were not “fully aware of the magnitude of the problems involved” in Arctic construction, and there was a strong suspicion that the final costs would end up being far more than the US government had predicted.34 The correspondence between the Department of External Affairs and the US government clearly demonstrate Ottawa’s aversion to becoming committed to this risk. Canada’s decision to allow the United States to pay for the project in its entirety should not necessarily be considered as a shirking of its national responsibilities. Indeed, given that by the time of the Line’s completion in 1957, unconfirmed rumours put the overall cost for construction (excluding equipment and transportation) at more than $750 million, the Canadian decision to abstain appears to have been prudent and farsighted.35 Instead, Canada focused its limited resources upon a project it deemed a more cost effective way to offset the image of the DEW Line as a Canadian abdication of its defence responsibilities.
• DEW Line Radar Stations
• MID Canada Line Radar Stations
• Pinetree Line Radar Stations
Map by Christopher Johnson
The Mid-Canada Line
The Canadian construction of the Mid-Canada line (or McGill Fence) was a cost-effective attempt to dilute the appearance of American control in the Arctic. In 1954, the same year that the Canada-US Military Study Group officially recommended the construction of the DEW Line, the Canadian government undertook sole responsibility for the construction of a radar line to run roughly along the 55th Parallel. The Mid-Canada Line, a project of questionable military value, was supposed to complement the DEW Line to the north, and the Pinetree Line to the south.36 Concerns with respect to American control in the Arctic had played a large role in the Canadian government’s deliberations over how, or even if, this line should be constructed.37 In 1953, Brooke Claxton had written to Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent, advising him in favour of constructing this radar line, and suggesting that it be done independent of American assistance. For Canada to build the Mid-Canada Line alone, he argued, would provide a counter to the American building of the DEW Line, and it would be cheaper than joint cooperation in the Far North. An entirely Canadian built and manned radar line would allow Ottawa to boast:
“ Well, we think we have done what we thought was necessary for continental defence. If you want to go on and do more we are not going to stand in the way and keep our self respect without having to put out too great an expenditure of materials, manpower and money... It would enable us to tell our own people and the Americans that we were quite prepared to do anything we thought necessary in continental defence.”38
The Canadian government thus used the Mid-Canada Line to promote the idea that all three radar lines should be considered “an over-all continental defence warning system,” with Canada responsible for the construction and manning of one, the United States the other, with the third (the Pinetree Line) being a joint responsibility.39
DND photo
Ottawa used the construction of the Mid-Canada Line to demonstrate that the DEW Line did not constitute an American takeover of the Arctic, but simply a section of a larger system that the United States had been assigned to build. That the US was responsible for this line in its entirety was, as Lester Pearson stated in the House of Commons, not an indication of any loss of control or of an abdication of sovereignty.
...[it was because] experience has shown that projects of this nature can be carried out most effectively by vesting responsibility for all phases of the work of construction and installation in a single authority. Accordingly it has been agreed that Canada would construct the mid-Canada warning line and the United States the distant early warning line.40
In building the Mid-Canada Line, rather than contributing to the DEW Line, Canada also avoided the embarrassment of being seen as a minor national partner. In the Far North, where the cost of construction was so much higher, every few million dollars Canada could contribute would be matched by tens of millions from the Americans.41 External Affairs felt that even a small contribution to the DEW Line would “merely serve to emphasize we were participating in the project but as a one-tenth partner.”42 The Canadian solution, to substitute participation in the DEW Line with the construction of the Mid-Canada Line, was meant to create the perception that Canada was an equal partner to the United States, as each had the responsibility for the construction of one segment of the system.
It was important for both the domestic Canadian and the international public to understand that the various radar lines constituted a single entity. External Affairs was adamant that “any announcements with regard to the distant early warning line should be drafted in such a way as to indicate that it was not an isolated project but part of an overall continental system.”43 Like the attempt to give the DEW Line a multilateral dimension, linking it to the Mid-Canada Line was an attempt to shape public perception. Regardless of what Canada did on the 55th Parallel, the American military still held de facto control over the Canadian Arctic. However, if the Canadian public and the international community perceived that American action in the context of a larger defence effort in which Canada was seen as pulling its own weight, the Canadian absence from the North seemed far less like an abdication and more like a delegation of responsibility.
After completion in 1957, the DEW Line remained in operation until 1985, when it was modernized and merged with a number of newly built stations to create the North Warning System. The fear of an American occupation of the North, and the loss of sovereignty that that would entail, never materialized. Following two seasons of construction, the majority of Americans involved left the area in 1957, and the provisions Canada had made to maintain its sovereignty proved effective. Indeed, contrary to the fears of the 1950s, the DEW Line turned out to be, in many ways, a valuable tool to Canadian sovereignty claims in the Arctic.
Those Sovereignty Provisions
Before allowing American construction to begin, the US government was required to agree to a long, detailed, and comprehensive set of conditions dictated by the Canadian government. These conditions were imposed to insure that American activity in the region would take place on Canadian terms. These terms covered every aspect of Northern activity, from the application of Canadian law and the use of radio frequencies and customs procedures to clauses concerning the provision of hunting licences and the protection of the local Inuit natives and the environment.44 Distinguished Canadian political scientist Doctor R.J. Sutherland believed that American acceptance of Canadian law and control in these areas constituted an implied recognition of Canadian sovereignty: “Canada received what the United States had up to that time assiduously endeavoured to avoid, namely, an explicit recognition of Canada’s claims to the exercise of sovereignty in the far North.”45 Regardless of whether the DEW Line brought this recognition, as Sutherland believes, or merely enforced it, as has been asserted by Doctor David Bercuson of the University of Calgary, the acceptance by the United States of the conditions demanded by the Canadian government represented a vital form of recognition on the part of the US government.46
As early as 1959, Canada was able to take over operational command of the Line, although manning and administration remained a predominantly USAF concern, and by 1968, most of the stations had become the responsibility of the RCAF. Once under Canadian control, the DEW Line provided much of what Canada needed most in the Arctic, namely, a physical presence. The enormous airstrips, constructed to handle USAF heavy lift aircraft, were a boon to both military and civilian agencies. These runways provided Canada access to many areas of the Arctic that had previously been limited by geography.47 The local stations provided communication and operations facilities where none had previously existed. They became bases for Arctic research missions, for search and rescue operations, for commercial exploration, and, of course, the sites continued in their primary role as surveillance centres. During the 28 years it remained in operation, the DEW Line wielded a major, positive, impact upon Canadian Arctic sovereignty. By making the region more accessible, and thus easier to control effectively, it allowed Canada to exercise a degree of physical control over its sovereignty that previously had not been possible.48
Map by Monica Muller
Conclusion
The DEW Line was the most ambitious project ever undertaken in the Canadian Arctic to that point in time. Over 460,000 tonnes of equipment and supplies were shipped north from Canada and the United States, including enough gravel to build two copies of the Great Pyramid of Giza, and it was all constructed in “...darkness, blizzards and sub-zero cold.”49 A long history of indifference towards its Arctic territory had left the Canadian government with little infrastructure, military presence, industry, or physical control in the North. The sudden infusion of men and material brought on by the construction and manning of 63 radar installations thus had the potential to fundamentally upset the image of Canadian control over what was essentially terra nullius, a vast expanse of unpopulated and unguarded ‘No-Man’s Land.’ Canada, lacking the ability to pay for the DEW Line itself, and, given the circumstances of the day, being unable to reject the American proposal, focused its energy towards maintaining the image of Canadian control over the project, and over the Arctic in general. All this was done to avoid giving the domestic and international community the impression that Canada had lost control over its Arctic, thus highlighting the tenuity of its claims to sovereignty. The battle Ottawa waged was not to gain control over the DEW Line, nor was it to ensure that the United States respected Canadian sovereignty while its citizens were in the region. Both of these conditions were assumed from the start and agreed upon in the exchange of notes that established the Line.50 Instead, Canada fought to maintain the perception of Canadian control in the Arctic. Ultimately, the notion of Canadian sovereignty over the region was maintained, and even enhanced. The DEW Line served to augment the Canadian position in the Arctic by providing what had always been lacking, a degree of physical presence and control.
|