US warns China after lasers injure American pilots in Africa
The United States has issued a formal warning to China after personnel at the Asian country's military base in Djibouti used lasers to interfere with U.S. military aircraft, minorly injuring two pilots, according to the Pentagon.
Top Defense Department spokeswoman Dana White told reporters Thursday that the U.S. is confident the Chinese are behind the "very serious incidents," which have increased in the past few weeks.
"There have been two minor injuries. This activity poses a true threat to our airmen. We have formally demarched the Chinese government. And we've requested that that Chinese investigate these incidents," White said during a Pentagon briefing.
The U.S. government, meanwhile, has warned airmen to be cautious when flying in certain areas in Djibouti, in Africa, due to the recent incidents.
Also at CNN.
Related: A Small Secret Airstrip in Africa is the Future of America's Way of War
China Sends Troops to Djibouti Ahead of Establishment of its First Overseas Military Base
Related Stories
Reuters reports that the Pentagon is quietly building up a small airstrip in a remote region of east Africa that is a complex microcosm of how Washington runs military operations overseas — and how America's way of war will probably look for the foreseeable future. Chabelley Airfield is less than 10 miles from the capital of the small African nation of Djibouti but the small airport is the hub for America's drone operations in the nearby hotspots of Somalia and Yemen as part of its war against Islamic militants. "The U.S. military is being pressured into considering the adoption of more of a lily pad basing model in the wake of so much turbulence and warfare across the region," says Dr. Geoffrey Gresh. "Djibouti is a small, relatively safe ... ally that enables the U.S. special operators to carry out missions effectively across the continent."
In September 2013, the Pentagon announced it was moving the pilotless aircraft from its main base at Camp Lemonnier to Chabelley with almost no fanfare. Africom and the Pentagon jealously guard information about their outposts in Africa, making it impossible to ascertain even basic facts — like a simple count — let alone just how many are integral to JSOC operations, drone strikes, and other secret activities. However a map in a Pentagon report indicates that there were 10 MQ-1 Predator drones and four larger, more far-ranging MQ-9 Reapers based at Camp Lemonnier in June 2012 before the move to Chabelley.
The Pentagon does not list Chabelley in its annual Base Structure Report, the only official compendium of American military facilities around the world. "The Chebelley base ... [is] a reflection of the growing presence of the U.S. military in Africa," says Dr. David Vine, author of 'Base Nation: How U.S. Military Bases Abroad Harm America and the World". "The [U.S.] military has gone to great lengths to disguise and downplay its growing presence in Africa generally in the hopes of avoiding negative attention and protests both in the U.S. and in African countries wary of the colonial-esque presence of foreign troops."
American drones fly regular missions from Chabelley, an airstrip the French run with the approval of the Djiboutian government. Washington pays Djibouti for access to Paris' outpost. Part of the reason for this circuitous chain of responsibility could be the fact that the Pentagon's drone missions are often controversial.
Critics contend targeted strikes against militants are illegal under American and international law and tantamount to assassination. "The military is easily capable of adapting to change, but they don't like to stop anything they feel is making their lives easier, or is to their benefit. And this certainly is, in their eyes, a very quick, clean way of doing things. It's a very slick, efficient way to conduct the war, without having to have the massive ground invasion mistakes of Iraq and Afghanistan."
China has sent two warships to the Republic of Djibouti in Africa, where it will open its first overseas naval base:
China has dispatched troops to Djibouti in advance of formally establishing the country's first overseas military base. Two Chinese Navy warships left the port of Zhanjiang on Tuesday, taking an undisclosed number of military personnel on the journey across the Indian Ocean.
An editorial Wednesday in the state-run Global Times stressed the importance of the new Djibouti facility -- in the strategically located Horn of Africa -- to the Chinese military. "Certainly this is the People's Liberation Army's first overseas base and we will base troops there. It's not a commercial resupply point... This base can support Chinese Navy to go farther, so it means a lot," said the paper.
The Global Times said the main role of the base would be to support Chinese warships operating in the region in anti-piracy and humanitarian operations. "It's not about seeking to control the world," said the editorial.
Also at The Atlantic and Xinhua (newer article).
Related: A Small Secret Airstrip in Africa is the Future of America's Way of War
Chinese Companies to Build Commercial Spaceport on the Horn of Africa
The Hong Kong Aerospace Technology Group (HKATG) and a Shanghai-based Touchroad International Holdings Group have entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the government of Djibouti to build a $1 billion commercial spaceport with seven launch pads and three rocket engine test facilities.
Djibouti President Ismail Omar Guelleh met with company officials on Monday to discuss the planned Djiboutian Spaceport, which will be constructed in the northern Obock region near the entrance to the Red Sea. It would be the first orbital spaceport in Africa.
[...] HKATG and the Djiboutian government will manage the spaceport for a period of 30 years. The government will then take control over the facility.
Construction of the spaceport is expected to begin after the parties sign a formal agreement in March. The project is expected to take five years.
The Djiboutian government said the project will require the development of a port facility, a network of highways, and a power grid.
See also: Rocket Report: SpaceX reaches 'ludicrous' cadence; ABL explains RS1 failure
Previously:
A Small Secret Airstrip in Africa is the Future of America's Way of War
China Sends Troops to Djibouti Ahead of Establishment of its First Overseas Military Base
U.S. Complains That Chinese Military Personnel Are Injuring American Pilots With Lasers in Africa
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @05:12PM (12 children)
This is from the same people that think 2 mW laser pointers cause "very serious incidents" over a range of 5 km or more. I'd take it with a large grain of salt.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Friday May 04 2018, @05:23PM
it would be stupid for the Chinese to provoke the US there, now, abd the US has a long history of questionable "casi belli" under their belt. OTOH if the chinks are playing the long game they may want to purposefully have the yanks protest over this and play the victim...
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday May 04 2018, @05:56PM (10 children)
If your pilot, even briefly or momentarily...
Then that can result in everyone onboard dying and the loss of all cargo, an expensive aircraft, and whatever it hits on the ground.
To call that merely a "serious incident" is about right.
I criticised [soylentnews.org] the British pilot's association when they called it "serious, widespread laser attacks on aircraft", which I thought went a bit far. But "incident" means something out of the ordinary happened, without accompanying "accident." That's a good description.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday May 04 2018, @06:11PM (4 children)
When you are surprised, maybe.
Otherwise let's not be too dramatic about pilots falling over Hollywood-style:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAfagq8PjpM [youtube.com]
https://youtu.be/W8HwGdx-jRQ?t=679 [youtu.be]
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday May 04 2018, @06:29PM (3 children)
Only when the laser flash comes at an unexpected moment would a pilot be surprised.
Unfortunately, that pretty much is the only moment in which the event tends to happen.
Leaving the pilots as likely to be surprised as not. Right?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Friday May 04 2018, @06:47PM (2 children)
True.
On the other hand the FAA has 28000 laser incident reports from 2011 to 2015 [arstechnica.com], and zero crashes.
It's something bad which needs to be addressed, but it's not exactly the worst criminals-who-deserve-decades-in-jail problem we have...
(Score: 5, Funny) by Immerman on Friday May 04 2018, @06:59PM
True, but nobody's throwing politicians in jail, so we have to come up with some way to meet the quotas...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @06:24AM
28000?!?
What about a defend against this kind of attack?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @08:07PM (2 children)
It also *could* result in the spontaneous materialization of pink unicorns. Admittedly, the odds of unicorns appearing are very, very, very low. About the same odds as an accident occurring, which so far is none. No unicorns and no accidents.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday May 04 2018, @10:47PM (1 child)
If you believe that there are no air accidents in history resulting from a disoriented or distracted pilot, then your universe--apparently it also features unicorns--probably isn't as similar to the one in which these events take place as you had first assumed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @02:16AM
If you believe that there have been air accidents in history resulting from a disoriented or distracted pilot caused by laser pointers then it is your view of the universe that has deviated from reality.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Saturday May 05 2018, @03:27AM (1 child)
Won't matter in short order. Human pilots won't be needed soon. The next tanker will be drone. the next fighters will be drones. I imagine cargo will be as well. Problem solved.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @07:53AM
Drone...no onboard human pilot, ergo rules about use of lasers capable of blinding no longer apply, so expect the norm to become 'painting' them with increasingly higher powered beams as they become available in an attempt to 'degrade' the ability of the onboard cameras to do their jobs.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @05:30PM (28 children)
Why not modify them a little, to ride that laser beam right back to it's source? We could even use mini-missiles, or "unarmed" missiles, so as to kill the guy holding the laser, but not level the apartment complex he's standing in.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @05:35PM (21 children)
Ah yes, murder, the obvious solution for prank level hijinks.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @05:48PM (8 children)
It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @06:02PM (3 children)
So make sure and hurt them first? I get the angry sentiment, but that doesn't make it any less stupid of a statement.
Like seeing kids dropping pennies onto a freeway. Chance of anyone actually getting hurt is near zero, but you still think someone should go run them over.
Maybe the last few days of stories have riled people up a bit much. Calm down bruh.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @06:12PM (2 children)
Is your comment directed at me? If so, you have 100% misunderstood my comment. Perhaps you aren't familiar with that phrase?
Or did you click the wrong "Reply to This" button?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @09:49PM (1 child)
You should keep in mind the OP the thread was based on. Context.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @04:44PM
Wow, crazy mods. How is that a troll? The point was the OP advocated murder, quite a lot of hurt to put on someone. That was the premise.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday May 04 2018, @06:08PM (2 children)
It's all fun and games until someone loses a missile launcher.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @11:46PM (1 child)
In this case, it would be "looses" a missile launcher. As in: "... until someone sets loose a missile launcher."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @06:27AM
No, he's right. When someone finds that thing all heck is going to break loose.
How do you lose a missile launcher?
I don't know. Ask a US soldier in Iraq.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday May 05 2018, @08:58AM
How seriously hurt has to be someone to justify a killing?
Or it all depends on the nationality of the hurt and the hurter?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @05:53PM (6 children)
You call it murder. I call it pranking the prankster. Or, we could call it wanking the wanker. Whatever we call it, I'm with Darwin. Only the fittest should survive, and obviously, these wankers aren't fit.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday May 04 2018, @06:53PM (5 children)
Do you even understand (of course you fucking don't, I'm being rhetorical...) what Darwin meant by "fittest?" No? Then shut your stinking gob.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @11:16PM (4 children)
Don't start talking shit, Zumi. Of course I understand Darwin. Which part do you need explained? The part where stupid bastards fucking with heavily armed planes/tanks/troops/ships don't stand a chance of accomplishing anything, other than causing death to rain from the skies?
Go watch that video again - the one called "collateral murder". People die, for real, and their children with them. Survival of the fittest. It isn't a game, there is no reset, no power-up, nothing but death.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday May 05 2018, @04:32AM (3 children)
So you *don't* actually know what Darwin meant by "fitness." Thanks for confirming it.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Redundant) by Runaway1956 on Saturday May 05 2018, @01:48PM (2 children)
In nature, traits that contribute to survival to sexual maturity, and reproduction, are selected for. Traits that don't aid in survival to sexual maturity tend to be weeded out.
Now - I'm a big, bad, terrist mofo, and I'm pissed at the USA. So, I go out whenever possible, just to fuck with them. I've heard that lasers blind pilots, so I start waving a laser around when 'Murican aircraft are near. I get by with that little thrill for awhile - but one night, the jet flew over, and disappeared, only for six Apache helicopters to pop up over the trees. I quickly jump into a ditch to take cover, but that doesn't save my three wives and eighteen children sleeping in the hovel behind me. All of them dead, and I can't even find enough of their bodies for proper funerals. Darwin award, 21 times - three wives, and eighteen children, blown into eternity without passing my DNA on to the next generation.
Now, try one more time to convince me that you understand Darwin better than I do. The terrist mofo just ain't fit!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday May 05 2018, @05:07PM (1 child)
*rolls eyes*
If he already had kids then, newsflash, he was sexually mature and already reproduced. Evolution is not some teleological force. From a purely reproductive standpoint, the "terr'ists" are *more* fit than most Americans, and I have to wonder sometimes if there's some kind of subconscious understanding of that in our armed forces. Or in your mind, since you seem obsessed with levelling the playing field (and everything else for miles around).
War is not a case of genetic unfitness. It is not something wrong with the genome, it does not, for example, produce lazy sperm or mutations incompatible with life. No, war is something *we* do. You really want to conflate character traits or behavior (or culture...) with genes so you can point to Darwin and say "See? They DESERVED to die!" to ease what remains of your own conscience. It doesn't work like that.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 06 2018, @02:06AM
92nd percentile short circuit?
Mankind takes years to mature. Mankind requires constant nurturing in the first years of life. Our terrist hero has managed to nullify all the nurturing given to his offspring - which sorta kinda translates to an erasure of his sexual achievements, as well as the achievements of his three wives.
You, our sheltered American female member, seem to think that only adult males die in war. Women and children around the world would be happy to correct that belief.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday May 04 2018, @06:31PM
Well, yes, it sounds murderous, but it's also pretty clever imo.
Maybe a warning label would help:
警告：美國軍隊使用綠色激光瞄準導彈。 請避免使用綠色激光器，因為這樣會避免導致錯誤。
(Score: 2) by edIII on Friday May 04 2018, @07:33PM (1 child)
Except it's not prank level. You have a craft that weighs anywhere from 200,000 to 900,000 lbs. moving at great speed. Take moving vehicles and take the danger up an order of magnitude at least.
The reality is that these pranksters are putting a lot of people in great danger when they disrupt pilots trying to keep the plane in the air.
There is a time and place for pranks, and pilots actively piloting large craft are simply not one of them.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @08:21AM
Ok, now if you're talking about take-off and landing, maybe..rest of the time? Altitude and Autopilot.
It's more a worry when they target light aircraft, especially those flight school Cessnas flown by inexperienced pilots at lower altitudes over residential areas (where there's a statistically greater chance of coming to the attentions of a nutter with a green laser pointer) there's more chance of a fatal loss of control happening there, still, AFAIK, this hasn't happened out there yet.
Mines is the right retina with scarring caused by walking into the beam of an IR laser diverted down an open lab sans any visible guide beam by a fucking idiot who I really must catch up with some day...in a dark alley...to thank properly..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @11:30PM
Doesn't have to be an explosive warhead. A few time getting sprayed with a Thioacetone warhead ought to solve the problem...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @06:45AM
If it is military action then it is an act of war
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @05:52PM (2 children)
Yes, a good old retroreflector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroreflector [wikipedia.org] would be great, but you'd lose too much power.
I suggest an automated laser system that returns fire at comparable levels.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Snotnose on Friday May 04 2018, @05:55PM (1 child)
I suggest 7x the power coming in. Clearly you've never read The Satanic Bible.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 3, Funny) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @06:15PM
I hear you but escalation... where would it end? Somewhere beyond Thunderdome I fear...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @06:08PM (1 child)
I'd hit the afterburner and go mach about 5 feet over their tiny heads.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @06:10PM
Having just been blinded by a laser - you might go mach five feet under their feet. In which case, you would achieve your intended result - with a few unintended consequences added in to the deal.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Immerman on Friday May 04 2018, @07:06PM
Escalation factors aside - because it's trivially easy for the target to remove the laser beam? My understanding is that laser-guided missiles typically use a laser to "paint" the target, creating a brightly blowing omni-directional bullseye. A laser pointer in comparison is about as tightly-focussed a beam as we can (cheaply) produce - the moment that beam points even one degree beyond the missile it becomes invisible - and you now have a guided missile flying into a (probably) residential district without any guidance.
Plus, it gets expensive really fast.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by esperto123 on Friday May 04 2018, @05:45PM (15 children)
So the chinese were probably using lasers to blind cameras on spy planes, some US pilots got too close to the base, maybe unintentionally, probably to spy, got hit by the laser and got partially blind. I don't know if this kind of act is covered by some convention on engagement, but I would call this just china defending their post, they are not obligated to allow foreign powers to see their base.
Next time, use protection glasses.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @05:58PM (8 children)
I understand your statement, but I disagree.
On one hand you have passive observation.
On the other hand, you have an action which certainly _can_ cause harm, called "reckless endangerment" in legal terms.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @06:54PM (6 children)
> On one hand you have passive observation.
"Spy planes" don't sound very passive.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by LVDOVICVS on Friday May 04 2018, @08:06PM (5 children)
It's the difference between looking at someone and poking a stick in their eye.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @10:15PM
Thank you, well said. I almost responded, but so many AC comments here are irrational and I've never found a way to correct irrational thinking. Besides, I have more important things to do. Thanks again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @08:39AM (3 children)
Eh?, if you think the act of looking is passive then clearly you've never had the pleasure of drinking at some of the more 'salubrious' pubs and bars out there where a mere wrong glance at someone (or their wife/girlfriend/sister) can start a full scale fight (fun times...)
Got what you meant though..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @11:56AM (2 children)
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/salubrious [dictionary.com]
I don't think it means what you meant, even with single quotes.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Saturday May 05 2018, @12:21PM
First: You are entirely correct in addition to being helpful and you are entirely in the right.
Second: Directed to this site's sizeable contingent insistent upon on misusing language and calling it "progress": Shall we now modify "salubrious" to mean any random thing as well?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @05:24PM
No, the use of the word 'salubrious' here to describe a pub/bar where you're likely to have at least one fight a night heralded by the words 'are you looking at my wife|girlfriend|sister?' was perfectly correct.
I do know what the word means, but in context here it's an obvious example of the deliberate misuse of the word to describe a pub/bar which is the exact opposite of the pleasant/agreeable/high-class one that the use of that word normally conjures up, written sarcasm, if you like.
Obviously an idiomatic use that didn't cross the pond.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @01:40AM
What would be the response from a US military base if a foreign country was flying planes that close?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday May 04 2018, @06:11PM (3 children)
Instead of counter measures, I wonder if it is technically possible for the US to engage in the same kind of laser blinding against Chinese aircraft?
It would require a budget, and laser pointers from a contractor at $50,000 per unit. But it could be done, I think.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JNCF on Friday May 04 2018, @07:24PM
"Now remember children, the age of human flight began in 1903 and ended in 2018, which was the start of Cold War II, also known as The Laser War."
(Score: 3, Funny) by RS3 on Friday May 04 2018, @10:24PM
I think the US should use Chinese-made laser pointers.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday May 04 2018, @10:52PM
As it happens, I have a good supply of high-quality military grade laser pointers [dollartree.com] that I will sell the armed forces for *half* your quoted price.
They are highly portable and feature replaceable power supply units.
At this price, I will also train up to twenty instructors in their use, that the instructors might train the troops.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @06:33AM (1 child)
Lasers can't take out cameras like that anymore. Doesn't do Jack with current filters.
Even if it does do something, it's a camera. Just replace the damaged parts day when a huge frigging laser mounted on a shark is used to burn through it from 50km away. .. Just like in the movies
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 05 2018, @09:00AM
It isn't about 'taking out' the cameras, but 'degrading' their ability to take clear images, hitting the cameras with a number of beams pulsing at various frequencies in an attempt to both 'dazzle' them and (assuming electromechanical aperture control) to try mess with any ALC, I do know from messing around with my shitty little bridge camera that a standard red laser being shone at it can cause it to lose focus and start the AF 'hunting', though I'd be surprised if military grade surveillance ones would suffer the same (focus would be more or less infinity anyway, I suppose, so AF mostly irrelevant)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04 2018, @08:04PM
Our complaint could be what they seek. It tell them that the lasers were not filtered out. This means we are vulnerable to that color of laser.
It could be automated. There may be an anti-aircraft gun using that laser to measure for targeting.