Germany Approves Funding for Supersonic Naval Missile Development and Extensive Missile Purchases

 

Germany's parliament has approved funding for the acquisition of thousands of missiles and the development of a supersonic naval cruise missile, as announced by the Defence Ministry.

In collaboration with Norway, Germany will work on developing the supersonic Tyrfing missile. A key parliamentary committee released funds for Berlin's first venture into creating modern naval missiles, which currently are mostly French or American-made.

While Norway and its state-owned arms manufacturer Kongsberg will lead the project, Germany plans to invest approximately €650 million ($695 million) into the development through 2033.

The new missile, named 3SM Tyrfing, is slated to be operational by 2035. The contract, expected to finalize by August, will involve Diehl Defence and MBDA working on the German side.

Initially, Germany’s portion will be funded from Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s special military fund, established following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. In subsequent years, funding will come from the regular defense budget.

Kongsberg describes the Tyrfing as a “new super missile” to succeed the Naval Strike Missile developed in the early 2000s. The 3SM (Super Sonic Strike Missile) is anticipated to be ready by 2035. Besides Norway and Germany, Kongsberg aims to market the missile to other European armed forces.

Additionally, the German budget committee has approved purchasing up to 3,266 Brimstone 3 rockets, scheduled for delivery by 2033 under a contract expected to pass next month. Initially, 274 missiles and necessary equipment will be purchased from MBDA Germany for about €376 million. An additional 29 Brimstones will be used for operational testing and 75 for training and telemetry.

These rockets are intended for the Eurofighter fleet, the core of Germany’s Air Force. Berlin first announced plans to acquire the air-to-ground missile in 2017. The British Royal Air Force has utilized the Brimstone family of missiles for nearly two decades, including in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. A contingent of German Eurofighters is also deployed in the Baltics to bolster NATO’s stance against Russia.

The parliamentary budget committee also approved acquiring 506 Stinger man-portable air defense systems, valued at approximately €395 million, to replace 500 ground-to-air missiles sent to Ukraine.

Germany has been a leading supporter of Ukraine, providing more military aid than any country except the United States. According to the Germany-based Kiel Institute for the World Economy, the German government has sent €10.2 billion in military aid to Ukraine as of the end of April 2024.

Japan Deploys First Surface-to-Ship Missile Unit to Counter Chinese Naval Threats

 Amid escalating tensions with China, Japan has taken a significant step in enhancing its maritime defense capabilities. The country recently deployed its inaugural surface-to-ship missile unit on Okinawa Island.

Okinawa’s central location in a chain of Japanese islands extending toward Taiwan makes it strategically vital for safeguarding Japan’s interests. Additionally, Okinawa plays a crucial role in the US defense framework in the region, hosting approximately 30,000 troops across all branches of the military.

The newly established surface-to-ship missile regiment is equipped with advanced Type 12 surface-to-ship guided missiles. Developed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, these missiles feature inertial guidance, GPS, and radar systems. Their current operational range spans between 200 and 400 kilometers. However, Japan has ambitious plans to extend this range to at least 1,000 kilometers by 2026.

The primary mission of this missile unit is to monitor Chinese military vessels navigating the waters between Okinawa and Miyako Island. Given China’s growing assertiveness in the region, Japan aims to maintain a vigilant watch over maritime activities.By closely tracking Chinese naval movements, Japan can respond swiftly to any potential threats and safeguard its territorial waters.

Japan’s commitment to bolstering its defense capabilities aligns with its ambitious $320 billion rearmament program, announced in 2022. The Type 12 system, introduced as a successor to the Type 88 missiles, began deployment in 2014.

Japan’s deployment of the surface-to-ship missile unit represents a proactive stance in countering potential threats and ensuring regional security. The Type 12 missiles, with their advanced technology and planned range extensions, play a crucial role in this defensive strategy.

New Floating Bases For U.S. Navy------Defense News

Decades after the idea was broached for a floating, mobile base to support operating forces in the Persian Gulf, the concept has suddenly shifted into high gear, and a sense of urgency is driving both new U.S. ship construction and conversion of an existing vessel.

A new Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB) is mentioned almost in passing within the Pentagon budget briefing document made public Jan. 26. Development funding will be provided, the document said, for a new AFSB “that can be dedicated to support missions in areas where ground-based access is not available, such as countermine operations.”

Elsewhere, under “industrial base skills,” the documents noted that, “for example, adding the afloat forward staging base addresses urgent operational shortfalls and will help sustain the shipbuilding industry in the near-term and mitigate the impact of reducing ship procurement in the” budget.

What is all this verbiage code for?

“This fulfills a long-standing requirement from U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), going back to the Tanker Wars of the late 1980s,” said Capt. Chris Sims, a spokesman for U.S. Fleet Forces Command in Norfolk, Va.

Sims was referring specifically to a recent decision to modify the amphibious transport dock ship Ponce — which had been scheduled to be decommissioned March 30 — into an interim AFSB able to support minesweeping MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopters.

The ship will be operated jointly by active-duty Navy officers and sailors, and by government civilian mariners employed by Military Sealift Command (MSC) — a hybrid crew similar to those used on the Navy’s two submarine tenders and the command ship Mount Whitney.

Beyond the conversion, though, the Navy now plans to build at least one, and possibly two, AFSBs.

U.S. Navy officials would not publicly confirm the new construction, but sources confirmed the service plans to modify the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) design to take on the AFSB role.

Three MLPs have been funded for construction at the General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding (NASSCO) shipyard in San Diego. The ships are large, 765-foot-long vessels able to float off small landing craft, tugs or barges.

For the AFSB role, a fourth MLP hull would be modified with several decks, including a hangar, topped by a large flight deck able to operate the heavy H-53s in the airborne mine countermeasures role.

But the AFSB will also be able to carry Marines, support patrol and special operations craft, and fuel and arm other helicopters.

The ship is expected to be requested in 2014.

Sources also said the Navy might be considering modifying the third MLP to the AFSB mission. Construction of that ship, funded in the 2012 defense bill, is being negotiated between NASSCO and the Navy.

Conversion of the Ponce, meanwhile, is proceeding with alacrity. MSC issued requests for proposal (RFPs) on Jan. 24 to upgrade and refit the ship. Bids are to be submitted by Feb. 3, with work to begin in mid-month. The RFPs state that sea trials are to be carried out in mid-April.

The work includes upgrading the ship’s navigation systems, bringing habitability up to MSC standards and general refurbishment. No flight modifications are planned at this time, said MSC spokesman Tim Boulay.

Fleet Forces Command also has begun solicitations for 50 Navy personnel to help man the ship in its special mission role.

The Ponce had returned to Norfolk from its final cruise Dec. 2, and crewmembers had already begun the inactivation process when the order came down to keep the ship running.

Use of the ship, Sims said, was “seen as an opportunity to fulfill that longstanding CENTCOM request.”

U.K. to Develop Short Range Protection System for Warships---------Defense News

LONDON — Development of a short-range weapon to protect Royal Navy warships from fast jets and sea-skimming missiles has been given the green light by the British government.

Sources here said missile builder MBDA and the Ministry of Defence signed the deal just before the end of the year but have kept the move under wraps.

Neither the contractor nor the MoD was prepared to comment on the missile contract.

The Future Local Area Air Defence System (Maritime) program will provide a new-generation weapon to replace the long-serving Seawolf missile currently employed by the Royal Navy, when it goes out of service in 2016.

Details of the plan to develop the weapon based on MBDA’s Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM) are scarce but the source said the deal could be worth in the region of 500 million pounds ($784 million).

The missile is expected to be initially deployed on existing Type 23 frigates but will later be used on the upcoming Type 26/Global Combat Ship.

Future iterations of the weapon are destined to replace the Rapier ground-to-air missile deployed by the British Army, as well as provide technology insertions for the Royal Air Force’s Advanced Short-Range Air-to-Air Missile on which the CAMM is loosely based.

CAMM is one of six missile programs placed into an assessment phase in 2008 by the MoD/industry partnership known as Team Complex Weapons.

The Team CW scheme was launched by the then-Labour government in 2006, ending competition over a range of weapons and bringing together the skills of the leading weapon suppliers here such as MBDA, Thales UK and QinetiQ in an effort to maintain sovereign capabilities at a time of declining demand for new weapons.

Other programs being looked at include an update of the Storm Shadow cruise missile, development of the ground-launched Fire Shadow loitering munition, light and heavy future anti-surface guided weapons, and air-to-ground precision weapons.

Late last year also saw the government extend the assessment phase of Thales UK’s work on the Future Anti-Surface Guided Weapon (Light) using its Lightweight Multirole Missile.

The missile will be fitted to the AgustaWestland Wildcat naval helicopters due in service by the middle of the decade.

Would the US be defeated in the Persian Gulf in a War with Iran?

mi

Soldiers attend Iranian massive naval maneuvers dubbed Velayat 90 on the Sea of Oman, Iran, Dec. 28, 2011. The naval drills cover an area of 2,000 km stretching from the east of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden.

(Xinhua/Stringer/Ali Mohammadi)

After years of U.S. threats, Iran has started to take very public steps to demonstrate that it is willing and capable of closing the Strait of Hormuz. On December 24, 2011 Iran started its Velayat-90 naval drills in and around the Strait of Hormuz and extending from the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman (Oman Sea) to the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea in the Indian Ocean. Since these drills took place there has been a growing war of words between Washington and Tehran. Nothing the Obama Administration or the Pentagon had done or said deterred Tehran from continuing the naval drills.

The Geo-Political Nature of the Strait of Hormuz

Besides the fact that it is a vital transit point for global energy resources and a strategic chokepoint, two additional things should be noted in regards to the Strait of Hormuz’s relationship to Iran. The first point is about the geography of the Strait of Hormuz. The second point is about the role of Iran in co-managing the strategic strait on the basis of international law and its sovereign rights.

Source : http://www.marketoracle.co.uk

The maritime traffic that goes through the Strait of Hormuz has always been in contact with Iranian naval forces, which are predominately composed of the Iranian Regular Force Navy and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Navy. In fact, Iranian naval forces monitor and police the Strait of Hormuz along with the Sultanate of Oman via the Omani enclave of Musandam. More importantly, to go through the Strait of Hormuz all maritime traffic, including the U.S. Navy, sails through Iranian territory. No country can enter the Persian Gulf and transit the Strait of Hormuz without sailing through Iranian waters and territory. Almost all entrances into the Persian Gulf are made through Iranian waters and most exits are through Omani waters.

Iran allows foreign ships to use its territorial waters in good faith and on the basis of Part III of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea’s maritime transit passage provisions that stipulate that vessels are free to sail through the Strait of Hormuz and similar bodies of water on the basis of speedy and continuous navigation between an open port and the high seas. Although Tehran in custom follows the navigation practices of the Law of the Sea, Tehran is not legally bound by them. Like Washington, Tehran signed this international treaty, but never ratified it.

American-Iranian Tensions in the Persian Gulf

Now the Iranian Majlis (Parliament) is re-evaluating the use of Iranian waters at the Strait of Hormuz. Legislation is being proposed by Iranian parliamentarians to block any foreign warships from being able to use Iranian territorial waters to navigate through the Strait of Hormuz without Iranian permission; the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee is currently studying legislating this as an official Iranian posture on the basis of Iranian strategic interests and national security. [1]

On December 30, 2011, the U.S.S. John C. Stennispassed through the area where Iran was conducting its naval drills. The Commander of the Iranian Regular Forces, Major-General Ataollah Salehi, advised the U.S.S.John C. Stennis and other U.S. Navy vessels not to return to the Persian Gulf while Iran was doing its drills, saying that Iran is not in the habit of repeating a warning twice. [2] Shortly after the stern Iranian warning to Washington, the Pentagon’s press secretary responded by making a statement saying: “No one in this government seeks confrontation [with Iran] over the Strait of Hormuz. It’s important to lower the temperature.” [3]

In an actual scenario of military conflict with Iran it is very likely that U.S. aircraft carriers would actually operate from outside of the Persian Gulf and from the southern Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. Unless the missile systems that Washington is erecting in the petro-sheikhdoms of the southern Persian Gulf are fully capable and active, the deployment of large U.S. warships may be unlikely in the Persian Gulf. The reasons for this are tied to geographic realities and the defensive capabilities of Iran.

Geography is against the Pentagon: U.S. Naval Strength has limits in the Persian Gulf

U.S. naval strength, which predominately includes the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard, essentially has primacy over all the other navies and maritime forces in the world. Its deep sea or oceanic capabilities are unparalleled or unmatched by any other naval power. Nevertheless, primacy does not mean invincibility. U.S. naval forces in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf are very vulnerable to Iran.

Despite its might and shear strength, geography literally works against U.S. naval power in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. The relative narrowness of the Persian Gulf makes it like a channel, at least in a strategic and military context. Figuratively speaking, the aircraft carriers and warships of the U.S. are confined to narrow waters or are closed in within the coastal waters of the Persian Gulf.

This is where the Iranian military’s advanced missile capabilities come into play. The Iranian missile and torpedo arsenal would make short work of U.S. naval assets in the waters of the Persian Gulf where U.S. vessels are constricted. This is why the U.S. has been busily erecting a missile shield system in the Persian Gulf amongst the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries in the last few years.

Even the small Iranian patrol boats in the Persian Gulf, which appear pitiable and insignificant against a U.S. aircraft carrier or destroyer, threaten U.S. warships. Looks can be deceiving; these Iranian patrol boats can easily launch a barrage of missiles that could significantly damage and effectively sink large U.S. warships. Iranian small patrol boats are also hardly detectable and hard to target.

Iranian forces could also attack U.S. naval capabilities merely by launching missile attacks from the Iranian mainland on the northern shores of the Persian Gulf. Even in 2008 the Washington Institute for Near East Policy acknowledged the threat from Iran’s mobile coastal missile batteries, anti-ship missiles, and missile-armed small ships. [4] Other Iranian naval assets like aerial drones, hovercraft, mines, diver teams, and mini-submarines could also be used in asymmetrical naval warfare against the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Even the Pentagon’s own war simulations have shown that a war in the Persian Gulf with Iran would spell disaster for the United States and its military. One key example is the Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02) war game in the Persian Gulf, which was conducted from July 24, 2002 to August 15, 2002 and took almost two years to prepare. This mammoth drill was amongst the largest and most expensive war games ever held by the Pentagon. Millennium Challenge 2002 was held shortly after the Pentagon had decided that it would continue the momentum of the war in Afghanistan by targeting Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, and finishing off with the big prize of Iran in a broad military campaign to ensure U.S. primacy in the new millennium.

After Millennium Challenge 2002 was finished, the war game was presented as a simulation of a war against Iraq under the rule of President Saddam Hussein, but this cannot be true. [5] The U.S. had already made assessments for the upcoming Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. Moreover, Iraq had no naval capabilities that would merit such large-scale use of the U.S. Navy.

Millennium Challenge 2002 was conducted to simulate a war with Iran, which was codenamed “Red” and referred to as an unknown Middle Eastern rogue enemy state in the Persian Gulf. Other than Iran, no other country could meet the perimeters and characteristics of “Red” and its military forces, from the patrol boats to the motorcycle units. The war simulation took place because Washington was planning on attacking Iran soon after invading Iraq in 2003.

The scenario in the 2002 war game started with the U.S., codenamed “Blue,” giving Iran a one-day ultimatum to surrender in the year 2007. The war game’s date of 2007 would chronologically correspond to U.S. plans to attack Iran after the Israeli attack on Lebanon in 2006, which was suppose to expand into a broader war against Syria too. The war against Lebanon, however, did not go as planned and the U.S. and Israel realized that if Hezbollah could challenge them in Lebanon then an expanded war with Syria and Iran would be a disaster.

In Millennium Challenge 2002’s war scenario, Iran would react to U.S. aggression by launching a massive barrage of missiles that would overwhelm the U.S. and destroy sixteen U.S. naval vessels – an aircraft carrier, ten cruisers, and five amphibious ships. It is estimated that if this happened in reality, more than 20,000 U.S. servicemen would have been dead after the attack within a single day. [6] Next, Iran would send its small patrol boats – the ones that look insignificant in comparison to theU.S.S. John C. Stennis and other large U.S. warships – to overwhelm the remainder of the Pentagon’s naval forces in the Persian Gulf, which would result in the damaging and sinking of most of the U.S. Fifth Fleet and the defeat of the United States. After the U.S. defeat, the war games were started over again, but “Red” had to operate under handicapping restraints so that U.S. forces would be allowed to emerge victorious from the drill. [7] This would hide the reality of the fact that the U.S. would be overwhelmed as an outcome of a conventional war with Iran in the Persian Gulf.

Hence, the formidable naval power of Washington is handicapped by geography coupled with Iranian military capabilities when it comes to fighting Tehran in the Persian Gulf or even in much of the Gulf of Oman. Without open waters, like in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific Ocean, the U.S. will have to fight under significantly reduced response times and, more importantly, will not be able to fight from a stand-off (militarily safe) distance. Thus, entire tool boxes of U.S. naval defensive systems, which were designed for combat in open waters using stand-off ranges, are rendered unpractical in the Persian Gulf.

Making the Strait of Hormuz Redundant to Weaken Iran?

The entire world knows the importance of the Strait of Hormuz and Washington and its allies are very well aware that the Iranians can militarily close it for a significant period of time. This is why the U.S. has been working with the GCC countries – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, and the U.A.E. – to re-route their oil through pipelines bypassing the Strait of Hormuz and channelling GCC oil directly to the Indian Ocean, Red Sea, or Mediterranean Sea. Washington has also been pushing Iraq to seek alternative routes in talks with Turkey, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

Both Israel and Turkey have also been very interested in this strategic project. Ankara has had discussions with Qatar about setting up an oil terminal that would reach Turkey via Iraq. The Turkish government has attempted to get Iraq to link its southern oil fields, like Iraq’s northern oil fields, to the transit routes running through Turkey. This is all tied to Turkey’s visions of being an energy corridor and important lynchpin of transit.

The aims of re-routing oil away from the Persian Gulf would remove an important element of strategic leverage Iran has against Washington and its allies. It would effectively reduce the importance of the Strait of Hormuz. It could very well be a prerequisite to war preparations and a war led by the United States against Tehran and its allies.

It is within this framework that the Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline or the Hashan-Fujairah Oil Pipeline is being fostered by the United Arab Emirates to bypass the maritime route in the Persian Gulf going through the Strait of Hormuz. The project design was put together in 2006, the contract was issued in 2007, and construction was started in 2008. [8] This pipeline goes straight from Abdu Dhabi to the port of Fujairah on the shore of the Arabian Sea. In other words it will give oil exports from the U.A.E. direct access to the Indian Ocean. It has openly been presented as a means to ensure energy security by bypassing Hormuz and attempting to avoid the Iranian military. Along with the construction of this pipeline, the erection of a strategic oil reservoir at Fujairah was also envisaged to also maintain the flow of oil to the international market should the Persian Gulf be closed off. [9]

Aside from the Petroline (East-West Saudi Pipeline), Saudi Arabia has also been looking at alternative transit routes and examining the ports of it southern neighbours in the Arabian Peninsula, Oman and Yemen. The Yemenite port of Mukalla on the shores of the Gulf of Aden has been of particular interest to Riyadh. In 2007, Israeli sources reported with some fanfare that a pipeline project was in the works that would connect the Saudi oil fields with Fujairah in the U.A.E., Muscat in Oman, and finally to Mukalla in Yemen. The reopening of the Iraq-Saudi Arabia Pipeline (IPSA), which was ironically built by Saddam Hussein to avoid the Strait of Hormuz and Iran, has also been a subject of discussion for the Saudis with the Iraqi government in Baghdad.

If Syria and Lebanon were converted into Washington’s clients, then the defunct Trans-Arabian Pipeline (Tapline) could also be reactivated, along with other alternative routes going from the Arabian Peninsula to the coast of the Mediterranean Sea via the Levant. Chronologically, this would also fit into Washington’s efforts to overrun Lebanon and Syria in an attempt to isolate Iran before any possible showdown with Tehran.

The Iranian Velayat-90 naval drills, which extended in close proximity to the entrance of the Red Sea in the Gulf of Aden off the territorial waters of Yemen, also took place in the Gulf of Oman facing the coast of Oman and the eastern shores of the United Arab Emirates. Amongst other things, Velayat-90 should be understood as a signal that Tehran is ready to operate outside of the Persian Gulf and can even strike or block the pipelines trying to bypass the Strait of Hormuz.

The first Trans-Arabia pipeline designed to keep tankers out of Iran’s range.

Geography again is on Iran’s side in this case too. Bypassing the Strait of Hormuz still does not change the fact that most of the oil fields belonging to GCC countries are located in the Persian Gulf or near its shores, which means they are all situated within close proximity to Iran and therefore close Iranian striking distance. Like in the case of the Hashan-Fujairah Pipeline, the Iranians could easily disable the flow of oil from the point of origin. Tehran could launch missile and aerial attacks or deploy its ground, sea, air, and amphibious forces into these areas as well. It does not necessarily need to block the Strait of Hormuz; after all preventing the flow of energy is the main purpose of the Iranian threats.

The American-Iranian Cold War

Washington has been on the offensive against Iran using any means at its disposal. The tensions over the Strait of Hormuz and in the Persian Gulf are just one front in a dangerous multi-front regional cold war between Tehran and Washington in the broader Middle East. Since 2001, the Pentagon has also been restructuring its military to wage unconventional wars with enemies like Iran. [10] Nonetheless, geography has always worked against the Pentagon and the U.S. has not found a solution for its naval dilemma in the Persian Gulf. Instead of a conventional war, Washington has had to resort to waging a covert, economic, and diplomatic war against Iran.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

China Criticizes New U.S. Defense Policy

BEIJING - Beijing said Jan. 9 that a new U.S. defense strategy focused on countering China's rising power was based on "groundless" charges, and insisted it posed no threat to any nation.

U.S. President Barack Obama unveiled the strategy Jan. 5, calling for a leaner U.S. military focused on the Asia-Pacific region and signaling a shift away from large ground wars against insurgents.

But China, whose People's Liberation Army has benefited from a huge and expanding budget boosted by the nation's rapid economic growth, said the fears were baseless, urging the U.S. to "play a more constructive role."

"The charges against China in this document are groundless and untrustworthy," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Weimin said in response to a question from state media about whether China poses a threat to U.S. security.

Liu was referring to the strategy document released last week, which said the growth of China's military power "must be accompanied by greater clarity of its strategic intentions in order to avoid causing friction in the region."

"To maintain the peace, stability and prosperity of the Asia-Pacific region serves the common interest of all countries within the region," Liu added. "We hope the U.S. side will play a more constructive role to this end."

Washington's focus on Asia is fueled by concerns over China's growing navy and its arsenal of anti-ship missiles that could jeopardize U.S. military dominance in the Pacific. China's responses to recent U.S. moves to boost its military presence in Asia - including the deployment of up to 2,500 Marines to northern Australia - have so far been restrained.

China's official Xinhua news agency said Jan. 6 it welcomed a bigger U.S. presence in Asia as "conducive to regional stability and prosperity," while urging it against "warmongering."

China "adheres to the path of peaceful development, upholds an independent foreign policy of peace and a defense policy that is defensive in nature," Liu said. "Our national defense modernization serves the objective requirements of national security and development and also plays an active role in maintaining regional peace and security. It will not pose any threat to any country."

Iran to Hold New War Games in Strait of Hormuz

TEHRAN - Iran is to hold fresh military exercises in and around the strategic Strait of Hormuz within weeks, the naval commander of its powerful Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying Jan. 6.

The maneuvers are to be held in the Iranian calendar month that runs from Jan. 21 to Feb. 19, the Fars news agency quoted Ali Fadavi as saying.

They will underline Iran's assertion that it has "full control over the Strait of Hormuz area and controls all movements in it," Fadavi added.

The announcement - which narrowed down a timeframe for the exercises the Guards had previously only given as "soon" - risked aggravating tensions with the West over the strait.

The waterway is the world's "most important chokepoint" for oil tankers, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administrations. Some 20 percent of the world's oil flows through the narrow channel at the entrance to the Gulf.

Iran's regular navy completed 10 days of war games to the east of the strait, in the Gulf of Oman, early this week with tests of three anti-ship missiles.

Iran's military and political leaders have warned they could close the strait if increased Western sanctions halt Iranian oil exports.

The navy has also warned it will react if the United States tries to redeploy one of its aircraft carriers to the waterway.

The Revolutionary Guards, who use high-speed skiffs mounted with missile launchers and other lightweight vessels, periodically hold maneuvers in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

The last ones took place in July 2011 and included the firing of several anti-ship missiles, including two Khalij Fars missiles with a range of 190 miles.

Fadavi did not give details of the new maneuvers.

"The 7th in the series of Great Prophet Maneuvers will be conducted in the area of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. They will have significant differences from the previous ones," Fars quoted him as saying.

Iran Keeps Tensions High Over Oil Strait

TEHRAN - Iran kept tensions simmering Dec. 31 over its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz to oil tankers by readying war game missile tests near the entrance to the Persian Gulf.

AN IRANIAN WAR-BOAT fires a missile Dec. 30 during the 'Velayat-90' navy exercises in the Strait of Hormuz. (Ali Mohammadi / AFP via Getty Images)

Washington has warned a closure of the strait "will not be tolerated" after Iranian Vice President Reza Rahimi's threat this week that "not a drop of oil" will pass through the channel if more Western sanctions are imposed over Tehran's nuclear program.

Iran has brushed off the warning from the United States, which bases its Fifth Fleet in the Gulf, with Iranian navy chief Adm. Habibollah Sayari saying it would be "really easy" to close the strait.

A spokesman for the Iranian navy, Commodore Mahmoud Mousavi, told state television on Dec. 31 that, "in the next days, we will test-fire all kinds of surface-to-sea, sea-to-sea and surface-to-air as well as shoulder-launched missiles" in the final stages of the war games.

He did not say exactly when the launches would start, but explained they would involve tests of "medium- and long-range missiles" to evaluate their operational effectiveness.

The navy exercises started Dec. 24 and are due to end on Jan. 2.

Twenty percent of the world's oil moves through the Strait of Hormuz, at the entrance of the Gulf, making it the "most important chokepoint" globally, according to information released Dec. 30 by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Around 14 crude oil tankers per day pass through the narrow strait, carrying a total 17 million barrels. In all, 35 percent of all seaborne oil transited through there this year.

On Dec. 29, a U.S. aircraft carrier and an accompanying missile cruiser passed through the zone where the Iranian navy was conducting its drill. U.S. officials insisted it was a routine passage.

No confrontation occurred, though an Iranian military aircraft flew in close to record video of the aircraft carrier, which was then shown on state television.

Analysts and oil market traders have been watching developments in and around the Strait of Hormuz carefully, fearing that the intensifying war of words between arch foes Tehran and Washington could spark open confrontation.

With tensions rising, the United States said it has signed a $29.4-billion dealto supply Iran's chief rival in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, with 84 new fighter jets.

The sale was a "strong message" to the Gulf region, Washington said.

Iran is subject to four rounds of U.N. sanctions over its nuclear program, which many Western countries allege is being used to develop atomic weapons.

Tehran denies the allegation.

The United States and its allies have also imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran's economy.

The last lot of unilateral sanctions triggered a demonstration in Tehran that led to members of the Basij militia controlled by the Revolutionary Guards ransacking the British embassy. London reacted by closing the mission and ordering Iran's embassy in Britain closed.

More sanctions are on the way.

U.S. President Barack Obama is expected to soon sign into law additional restrictions on Iran's central bank, which acts as the main conduit for Iranian oil sales.

The European Union is considering other measures that could include an EU embargo on Iranian oil imports, with foreign ministers to meet on the issue in a month's time.

Iran's oil minister, Rostam Qasemi, told the Aseman weekly that sanctions "will drive up the price of oil to at least 200 dollar" per barrel.

Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, was quoted by the Iranian media telling Islamic republic's envoys who have been gathered in Tehran that "we will give a resounding and many-pronged response to any threat against the Islamic Republic of Iran."

But he and other officials also left the door open to resuming long-stalled talks on Iran's nuclear program.

Addressing world powers involved in the talks, Jalili said: "We officially told them to come back to the negotiation based on cooperation."

Iran's ambassador to Germany, Alireza Sheikh-Attar, told the Mehr news agency on Dec. 31 that "we will soon send a letter, after which (new) talks will be scheduled."

Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi was also quoted by a website of the state broadcaster as telling a visiting Chinese foreign ministry official that "Iran is prepared for the continuation of nuclear negotiations" on the basis of a Russian proposal.

Iran to Test-Fire Missiles in Hormuz War Games

TEHRAN - Iran, which has been carrying out war games in the Strait of Hormuz over the past week, is to test fire shorter- and longer-range missiles in the key oil waterway on Dec. 31, the navy said.

"Shorter- and longer-range, ground-to-sea, surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles will be tested on Saturday," the ISNA news agency quoted navy spokesman Commodore Mahmoud Mousavi on Dec. 30.

The move is likely to stoke tensions between Tehran and Washington, already running high over a warning by Iran this week that "not a drop of oil" would pass through the strait if Western governments followed through with planned additional sanctions over its nuclear program.

The U.S. State Department said Dec. 29 that Iran's threat to close the waterway, through which more than a third of the world's tanker-borne oil passes, exhibited "irrational behavior" and "will not be tolerated."

The naval maneuvers launched by Iran in the strait on Dec. 24 have so far included mine-laying and the use of aerial drones, according to Iranian media.

Analysts and oil market traders have been watching developments in and around the Strait of Hormuz carefully, fearing that the intensifying war of words between arch foes Tehran and Washington could spark open confrontation.

Taiwan Navy Retires 2 Missile Boats

TAIPEI, Taiwan - Taiwan on Dec. 28 retired two patrol boats, the navy's first vessels armed with ship-to-ship missiles, that were hailed as "critical" to safeguarding the island, officials said.

Hundreds of former and active soldiers who had served on board the 240-ton Lung Chiang and Sui Chiang bid farewell to the ships at a ceremony in southern Kaohsiung city, the navy said.

Vice Admiral Chiang Lung-an said the ships "have played a critical role in safeguarding Taiwan over the past 30 years".

The U.S.-made Lung Chiang joined Taiwan's navy in 1978, while the Taiwan-built Sui Chiang came three years later in 1981. Each was armed with four homemade "Hsiung Feng I" (Brave Wind I) anti-ship missiles.

Earlier this year, Taiwan's navy put a squadron of 10 guided-missile boats into service featuring what was described as "stealth" technologies as it looked to boost its defenses amid Beijing's military buildup.

Tensions in the Taiwan Strait have eased since President Ma Ying-jeou of the China-friendly Kuomintang party came to power in 2008, pledging to boost trade links and allowing more Chinese tourists to visit the island.

But Beijing considers Taiwan part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary.

The island has governed itself since its split with mainland China in 1949 at the end of a civil war.

Bids Submitted for Aegis Follow-On System

Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing have submitted proposals to take over support and development of the Aegis combat system, the companies said Dec. 14.

The Combat System Engineering Agent (CSEA) competition also is intended to provide a follow-on system to Aegis, the U.S. Navy's most capable weapon system and the foundation for its fleet air defense, surface warfare and ballistic missile defense (BMD) missions.

Lockheed has held the Aegis development and support contract since 1995, when it acquired Martin Marietta. The system was first developed by RCA starting in the late 1960s. General Electric then bought the company, which in turn was sold to Martin Marietta and subsequently merged with Lockheed.

Aegis, perhaps the world's most effective naval combat system, has been worth many billions of dollars to Lockheed over the years. All 27 Ticonderoga-class cruisers and at least 70 DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers have been built with the system. Spain, Norway, Japan and the Republic of Korea operate Aegis warships, and Australia is building a new class of Aegis destroyers.

A combination of radars, computers and weapons, Aegis was first developed to counter massed attacks by Soviet anti-ship missiles, and has evolved into an effective surface warfare system. Although not designed to target ballistic missiles, the system has been modified with more powerful processors as the basis for the Navy's BMD systems, and is the foundation for the Phased Adaptive Approach effort for the land-based missile defense of Europe.

According to the Missile Defense Agency, 24 Aegis ships - five cruisers and 19 destroyers - have BMD capability. That number is to increase to 32 ships by the end of 2013 as more units are upgraded.

The CSEA effort is intended to provide for the design, development and integration of Aegis weapon system and Aegis combat system future capabilities for existing cruisers and destroyers, and potentially create a new system for DDG 51 Flight III ships beginning in 2016.

Dependent on development, Flight III ships may be fitted with a new combat system or continue with Aegis.

The Navy is expected to award the CSEA contract in the fall of 2012.

A separate competition is underway to develop a new phased-array radar for Aegis. The Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) is to provide new radars to replace existing SPY-1 radars beginning with the U.S. Navy's 2016 Flight III destroyers.

Lockheed, Raytheon and Northrop are working to develop the AMDR, which will be a dual-band system. All three companies are working under Navy contracts to develop an S-band (AMDR-S) radar, with development contracts yet to be issued for the AMDR-X X-band system. The AMDR systems will also include a radar suite controller to integrate the radars.