DTN News - CHINA DEFENSE NEWS: China Celebrates Another Grand Theft

Asia News Report: DTN News - CHINA DEFENSE NEWS: China Celebrates Another Grand Theft

Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Strategy Page
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - January 5, 2013: China has officially revealed its copy of the Russian Su-30MK2 and is calling it the J-16, claiming that the aircraft is of Chinese design. Many unauthorized pictures of the J-16 have shown up in the past year. These made it clear that the J-16 was a copy of the Russian Su-30MK2. At least 24 J-16s have been built and are being delivered to the Chinese Navy.

Russia and China jointly developed the two seat version of the Su-30, as the Su-30MKK in the late 1990s, and, a decade ago, an upgraded version (the Su-30MK2). China has received about a hundred legal Su-30MK2s but now nearly identical J-16s are showing up. Russia is not amused or fooled.

This kind of blatant technology theft is nothing new. The Chinese J-11 jet fighter is an illegal Chinese copy of the Russian Su-27. This plagiarism has been a source of friction between Russia and China for nearly a decade. It all began, legally, in 1995, when China paid $2.5 billion for the right to build 200 Su-27s. Russia would supply engines and electronics, with China building the other components according to Russian plans and specifications. But after 95 of the Chinese built aircraft were built Russia cancelled the agreement. They claimed that China was using the knowledge acquired with this Su-27 program to build their own copy of the Su-27, the J-11. Russia kept the piracy issue quiet for as long as it could and warned the Chinese that simply copying Russian technology would produce an inferior aircraft. Apparently the Chinese did not agree and are continuing their work on the J-11, using only, what they claim, is Chinese technology.

The J-11 is believed to now include better electronics and some other Chinese design modifications. China can manufacture most of the components of the J-11, the one major element it must import are the engines. China believes it will be free from dependence on Russia for military jet engines within the next 5-10 years. Currently, China imports two Russian engines, the $3.5 million AL-31 (for the Su-27/30, J-11, J-10) and the $2.5 million RD-93 (a version of the MiG-29s RD-33) for the JF-17 (an F-16 type aircraft developed in cooperation with Pakistan). Despite the ongoing technology theft dispute, Russia still sells jet engines to China for its illegal copies of Russian aircraft. China agreed, in 2008, to stop stealing Russian military tech but went on to ignore that agreement and deny that it had reneged on its promise to stop the tech theft.

The Su-30MK2 is a 34 ton fighter-bomber similar to the American F-15E. The Su-30MK2 can carry 8 tons of smart bombs and missiles. It can be refueled in the air and is equipped to operate over land and open water. The Chinese Navy is operating 24 Su-30MK2s and some of the J-16s that have already been built.

China also has a stealthy version (J-17) of the Su-27. There is also an aircraft carrier version of the Su-30 (the Su-33, obtained from Ukraine) that is now being produced as the J-15. China insists these are all Chinese designs that just happen to bear some resemblance to Russian fighters. In response, Russia had halted (for nearly a decade) combat aircraft sales to China but still sold jet engines for these aircraft. So far China has been unsuccessful in building copies of these engines. The engine sales are too lucrative to pass up, as they enable the Russian engine manufacturers to continue developing new designs. The Chinese plan to steal these as soon as they figure out how to handle the exotic manufacturing methods and skills required to build these engines.

Recently, after years of negotiating, especially over how to prevent technology theft, Russia agreed to sell China 48 Su-35BM fighter-bombers. This aircraft is the latest version of the Su-27 design, with a more robust airframe (good for 6,000 flight hours) and better maneuverability and reliability. It’s unclear if the Chinese are also going to get all the improved electronics.

The long negotiations were the result of Russia seeking ways to halt unauthorized Chinese copying and production of the Su-35BM. This proved very difficult, especially since Russia and China are supposed to be allies these days. Earlier this year this deal was stalled because China refused to allow a "no unauthorized duplication" clause in the contract. The Chinese wanted to buy the Su-35s but were not willing to sign a binding agreement to not copy the Russian design. That appears to have changed, although just how enforceable this is remains to be seen. 

Disclaimer statement

Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated, opinions expressed herein are those of the author of the page and do not necessarily represent the corporate views of DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News.

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Strategy Page
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS

DTN News - DEFENSE & INTELLIGENCE NEWS: China's Cyber Thievery Is National Policy—And Must Be Challenged

Asia News Report: DTN News - DEFENSE & INTELLIGENCE NEWS: China's Cyber Thievery Is National Policy—And Must Be Challenged
*It is more efficient for the Chinese to steal innovations and intellectual property than to incur the cost and time of creating their own.
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources WSJ – Mike McConnell, Michael Chertoff, William Lynn
 (NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - February 5, 2012:Only three months ago, we would have violated U.S. secrecy laws by sharing what we write here—even though, as a former director of national intelligence, secretary of homeland security, and deputy secretary of defense, we have long known it to be true. The Chinese government has a national policy of economic espionage in cyberspace. In fact, the Chinese are the world's most active and persistent practitioners of cyber espionage today.

Evidence of China's economically devastating theft of proprietary technologies and other intellectual property from U.S. companies is growing. Only in October 2011 were details declassified in a report to Congress by the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive. Each of us has been speaking publicly for years about the ability of cyber terrorists to cripple our critical infrastructure, including financial networks and the power grid. Now this report finally reveals what we couldn't say before: The threat of economic cyber espionage looms even more ominously.

The report is a summation of the catastrophic impact cyber espionage could have on the U.S. economy and global competitiveness over the next decade. Evidence indicates that China intends to help build its economy by intellectual-property theft rather than by innovation and investment in research and development (two strong suits of the U.S. economy). The nature of the Chinese economy offers a powerful motive to do so.

According to 2009 estimates by the United Nations, China has a population of 1.3 billion, with 468 million (about 36% of the population) living on less than $2 a day. While Chinese poverty has declined dramatically in the last 30 years, income inequality has increased, with much greater benefits going to the relatively small portion of educated people in urban areas, where about 25% of the population lives.

The bottom line is this: China has a massive, inexpensive work force ravenous for economic growth. It is much more efficient for the Chinese to steal innovations and intellectual property—the source code of advanced economies—than to incur the cost and time of creating their own. They turn those stolen ideas directly into production, creating products faster and cheaper than the U.S. and others.

Cyberspace is an ideal medium for stealing intellectual capital. Hackers can easily penetrate systems that transfer large amounts of data, while corporations and governments have a very hard time identifying specific perpetrators.

Unfortunately, it is also difficult to estimate the economic cost of these thefts to the U.S. economy. The report to Congress calls the cost "large" and notes that this includes corporate revenues, jobs, innovation and impacts to national security. Although a rigorous assessment has not been done, we think it is safe to say that "large" easily means billions of dollars and millions of jobs.

So how to protect ourselves from this economic threat? First, we must acknowledge its severity and understand that its impacts are more long-term than immediate. And we need to respond with all of the diplomatic, trade, economic and technological tools at our disposal.

The report to Congress notes that the U.S. intelligence community has improved its collaboration to better address cyber espionage in the military and national-security areas. Yet today's legislative framework severely restricts us from fully addressing domestic economic espionage. The intelligence community must gain a stronger role in collecting and analyzing this economic data and making it available to appropriate government and commercial entities.

Congress and the administration must also create the means to actively force more information-sharing. While organizations (both in government and in the private sector) claim to share information, the opposite is usually the case, and this must be actively fixed.

The U.S. also must make broader investments in education to produce many more workers with science, technology, engineering and math skills. Our country reacted to the Soviet Union's 1957 launch of Sputnik with investments in math and science education that launched the age of digital communications. Now is the time for a similar approach to build the skills our nation will need to compete in a global economy vastly different from 50 years ago.

Corporate America must do its part, too. If we are to ever understand the extent of cyber espionage, companies must be more open and aggressive about identifying, acknowledging and reporting incidents of cyber theft. Congress is considering legislation to require this, and the idea deserves support. Companies must also invest more in enhancing their employees' cyber skills; it is shocking how many cyber-security breaches result from simple human error such as coding mistakes or lost discs and laptops.

In this election year, our economy will take center stage, as will China and its role in issues such as monetary policy. If we are to protect ourselves against irreversible long-term damage, the economic issues behind cyber espionage must share some of that spotlight.

Mr. McConnell, a retired Navy vice admiral and former director of the National Security Agency (1992-96) and director of national intelligence (2007-09), is vice chairman of Booz Allen Hamilton. Mr. Chertoff, a former secretary of homeland security (2005-09), is senior counsel at Covington & Burling. Mr. Lynn has served as deputy secretary of defense (2009-11) and undersecretary of defense (1997-2001).

*LINK FOR THIS ARTICLE COMPILED BY ROGER SMITH FROM RELIABLE SOURCES WSJ – MIKE MCCONNELL, MICHAEL CHERTOFF, WILLIAM LYNN

*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS