Amb. Henry F. Cooper, Chairman . . . Lt. Gen. Daniel Graham, Founder
High Frontier . . Building Truly Effective Defenses . . Reagan’s Vision Lives!
Flash Message 130719
Southern Exposure . . .
By Ambassador Henry F. Cooper
July 19, 2013
Windows with a “southern exposure” provide a potential economic benefit especially to “northern” city dwellers, because rays from the winter sun reduce heating costs, and less direct rays of the summer sun have less impact on cooling costs. (This benefit results from the changing orientation of the earth’s axis of rotation with the seasons—click here for a brief discussion, and see the figures below.) Anyway, there are benefits to such southern exposure.
There also can be a negative connotation to the term ”exposure”—as in the case of our growing “exposure” to the consequences of carrying too much national debt. Growing numbers of U.S. citizens worry about that problem as—year after year— we collectively pile up deficit upon deficit, weighting down our grandkids with a major economic burden.
Furthermore, we have a “southern exposure” threat to our national security that also should be a growing concern to U.S. citizens—beyond their greatly advertised and justified immigration concerns. And this other concern is perhaps a much greater threat, increasingly in the news, involving our Latin American neighbors and their connections with other hostile nations, including the so-called rogue states, North Korea and Iran.
Perhaps the most recent indication of these ties was provided earlier this week when Panamanian authorities boarded a North Korean ship, headed from Cuba through the Panama Canal, presumably on its way to North Korea, and discovered “hidden missile equipment” and other weapons and related equipment. The ship, the Chong Chon Gang, was reported to have come through the canal on June 1st and after stopping in Cuba was on its way home with Cuban cargo for as yet unknown—or at least unreported—purposes. Lloyds of London reported that the ship was in China on January 25th and Russia on April 12th . . . an associated set of trading partners in the “cacophony of proliferation?” The figure below summarizes most of the key features known at this time, from a July 17th Washington Times article by Shaun Waterman.
There’s a lot of speculation about what was going on—and for how long and for what purpose. Some folks want to dismiss the findings, claiming that whatever the purpose, it was all old technology, as if old technology is not dangerous—or cannot be “modernized.” Perhaps this is simply some kind of ongoing deal between Cuba and North Korea, who will do just about anything for money. Wonder how long the weapons and associated components have been in Cuba—and what else there might be? And what future plans might be—or perhaps might have been before this discovery?
By the way, who says Cuba must use this technology and associated missiles for the same purposes for which they were originally designed? The Soviets used the SA-2 in 1960 to shoot down Gary Powers in his U-2 surveillance aircraft. So, for example, is the SA-2 useful only for shooting down aircraft at high altitude?
If it could carry a lightweight nuclear weapon, as some believe North Korea may have been successfully testing, it is technically possible that the SA-2 could be used to launch an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack that would create chaotic if not catastrophic conditions across the southern United States. A wild thought? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
States have surprised us with their innovations. An example: During the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam Hussein’s SCUD attacks on Tel Aviv and Haifa used a Rube Goldberg SCUD design based on cutting up three SCUDs to produce two longer range ones. Portions of the three normal SCUDs were welded into the booster portions of two longer range SCUDs. Although it may have been unplanned, these modified SCUDs not only achieved the desired longer range—they posed a daunting offensive countermeasure. When they reentered the atmosphere, hind parts first, they broke-up into “decoys” and an aerodynamically unstable, maneuvering, warhead that was nearly impossible for Patriot to intercept—an innovative countermeasure, whether or not it was planned.
Whatever we eventually conclude about the specific purposes of this diverted shipment, another very important fact was illustrated by this event. It is very important not to miss the growing threat posed by such trading with Latin America, beyond Cuba. Nor should the above mentioned states be assumed to be the complete list of threatening partners of nation states (and terrorists) wishing to do us harm.
For example, Iran was not mentioned, at least in reports I have seen. But Iran’s interests, including in ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, has well known links to the nations mentioned—and unlike North Korea, Iran does not need to transit the Panama Canal to reach possible trading partners in Cuba and a number of their Latin America partners, as discussed in Ilan Berman’s recent testimony to the House Homeland Security Committee.
These issues should be carefully considered in assuring that our future missile defenses are designed to counter this threat from the south before it matures. (Our current plans are focused on defending the U.S. Homeland from missiles arriving from the north–we have left the “back door” open while focusing on only locking the “front door.”) Otherwise, we will find ourselves with a “southern exposure” to a potentially serious existential threat—e.g., nuclear armed ballistic missiles launched from vessels in the Gulf of Mexico or from Latin America.
For example, Venezuela is known to partner with Iran, which is led by folks who have threatened to kill Americans if they can. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently referred to the Iran’s previous President as a “wolf in wolf’s clothing” whereas the recently elected, allegedly more moderate, President is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”
Nothing has changed in the views of Iran’s real rulers, the mullahs, who view Israel as the “Little Satan” and the U.S. as the “Great Satan” . . . and are scheming to destroy us both.
So, stay tuned . . . and keep an eye on our “southern exposure.”
What to do?
We look forward to Defense Secretary Hagel’s Report to Congress, which among other issues important to our homeland defense, should address our “southern exposure.” Meanwhile, High Frontier will continue to inform the powers that be of the existential threat associated with electromagnetic pulse (EMP), including from ballistic missile or satellite attack with nuclear weapons; and how it can be countered. With all the bad news from the Middle East and North Korea—coupled to the above discussed reminder that they are both aligned with powers to our south, we may need the most effective defenses we can build relatively soon.
We will couple these concerns in our efforts to urge the powers that be in Washington as well as grass roots Americans and local/state authorities to get involved in learning about the issues and responding accordingly.
And what can you do?
Join us at High Frontier in seeking to alert the public and your local and state authorities to the existential threats posed by both man-made and natural EMP events—and what can be done about these threats.
We can use your help in spreading this information to the grass roots and to encourage all “powers that be” to provide for the common defense as they are sworn to do. Will you do your part?
Begin by passing this message to your friends and suggest they visit our webpage, www.highfrontier.org for more information. Also, please encourage your sphere of influence to sign up for our weekly e-newsletter!