Tough Fights: These Last Stands Will Live Forever in History Books As Military Legends Utterly astounding.

Militaries around the world study these battles. They are also great tales of heroism that regular citizens will never forget. 

The Siege of the Alamo – February 23 – March 6, 1836

This famous battle pitted rebellious Texans, some of whom were Americans, against a Mexican army sent to crush their nascent independence movement. Mexican leader General Antonio Lopez De Santa Anna laid siege to the small mission, bombarding it for days and having several small skirmishes before a final assault on the night of March 5-6. All the combatants in the Alamo were killed other than one man, a slave of the Texan officer Col. William Travis, and several women. This short term Mexican victory backfired when “Remember the Alamo!” became the rallying cry. It has since become arguably the most famous battle of the American West.

The Battle of Rorke’s Drift – January 22-23, 1879

Immediately after their victory at nearby Isandlwana, a large Zulu army attacked a company of British soldiers at the Rorke’s Drift outpost. Though badly outnumbered, the English managed to hold off their opponents and inflict heavy casualties through sheer determination and bravery. The successful defense was a bright spot compared to the debacle at Isandlwana and 11 Victoria Crosses were awarded among the participants.

The Battle of Camarón – April 30, 1863

This is the French Foreign Legion’s defining battle. A company-sized patrol of 65 Legionnaires escorting a supply convoy was overtaken by a force of 800 Mexican cavalry, later reinforced by some 2,200 infantry. The French soldiers took cover in the nearby Hacienda Cameron Inn and swore to defend it to the death. The ensuing battle lasted around seven hours and ended only when the last 5 Legionnaires made a bayonet charge. The last two men alive were given permission by the Mexican commander to leave with the body of their commander, Captain Danjou, who had a wooden hand. Today that hand is the most revered artifact in the Legion’s long history.

The Fetterman Massacre – December 21, 1866

Captain William Fetterman longed for action against the local Native Americans, who had carried out a campaign of raids against the encroaching Americans. On December 21, he received all the action he could want and more. The native warriors, led by such braves as Crazy Horse, laid an ambush by attacking a wood-gathering party away from the camp. This brought out Fetterman at the head of 80 infantry and cavalry. Estimates are about 1,000 warriors attacked and overwhelmed them, killing all the Americans. Since the native accounts vary, it is still not known exactly what happened.

The Lost Battalion: The Men of the 77th Division, October 2-8, 1918

Some 554 men of the US 77th Division were surrounded by German troops when the French forces on their flank were stopped, leaving them isolated. Wishing to restore this hole in their lines the Germans attacked the American for six days; almost two-thirds of them became casualties. Despite this and shortages of food, water and ammunition, the Americans held out until other allied attacks forced a German retreat, relieving the beleaguered Yanks.

Siege of the International Legations, Peking Boxer Rebellion – June 20 – August 14, 1900

When the Chinese Boxer Rebellion attempted to drive foreign influence out of China the legations belonging to a number of foreign nations were besieged. The Boxers received on-and-off assistance from elements of the Chinese government. The siege was punctuated by periods of truce intersperse with heavy fighting. The 409 European, Japanese and American soldiers and sailors defending the legations suffered almost 50% dead and wounded. Two forces, one Japanese and one French, suffered over 100% casualties as wounded men returned to action only to be wounded again!

The Battle of the Little Big Horn – June 25-26, 1876

America’s most famous last stand. Lt. Col. George A. Custer led the 7th Cavalry Regiment against a large Native American encampment. Underestimating his foe, Custer split his command into three separate elements and attacked a much larger force of native warriors. The column led by Custer was wiped out. The remaining columns later linked up and made their own stand on a hill, surviving when their enemy moved off the next day. The events of the battle are even today the subject of much speculation and argument.

Wake Island – December 8-23, 1941

This isolated Pacific outpost was attacked the day after Pearl Harbor but a mixed forces of US Marines, Sailors and civilian workers managed to fend off the first landing attempt by the Japanese on December 11, sinking two destroyers and damaging a cruiser. Afterward the Japanese applied more resources to taking the island and a second attempt on December 23 succeeded despite heavy casualties. The small American force inflicted casualties all out of proportion to its size but suffered greatly in captivity after the battle.

Stalingrad – July 17, 1942 – February 2, 1943

This famous battle was also the last stand of the entire German 6th Army, proving everything was indeed bigger on the Eastern Front. After being cut off by Soviet counteroffensives, Nazi forces were prohibited from breaking out by Adolf Hitler, who was loath to ever retreat or give up territory. Unable to break the encirclement from outside, the Germans watched as their brethren in Stalingrad were slowly ground up in bitter urban warfare. Eventually their food and ammunition were exhausted and the 90,000 survivors surrendered. Only around 5,000 survived the war and returned to Germany in 1955.

Battle of Thermopylae – 480 BC

The sacrifice of King Leonidas and his 300 Spartans has been told and retold until it is now practically a cliché. Though there were many more Greeks present, including Arcadians, Thebans and Thespians, the Spartans have received credit for the spirited defense of the Greek army’s rear guard. The main Greek army, variously estimated from 5-7,000 held off a much larger Persian force for two days. While ancient chroniclers claim the Persian force at over a million, modern estimates are much lower, at most a few hundred thousand, still long odds. On the third day, with the Persians now outflanking the Greeks Leonidas, his Spartans and around a thousand others remained to act as a rear guard. They were slaughtered but entered the annals of military history where they are celebrated to this day.

The Swiss Guard During the Sake of Rome – May 6, 1527

On this day a Hapsburg army entered Rome to sack and occupy it. Many of the troops were mutinous Lutheran mercenaries eager to claim loot. As this force closed on the Vatican, it became clear the Pope’s life was in jeopardy. To buy him time to flee 189 Swiss Guards made a stand on the Vatican grounds; only 42 survived the onslaught but Clement VII was able to reach relative safety. Today each new group of recruits to the Papal Guard is sworn in on May 6.

Battle of Shiroyama – September 24, 1877

This battle marked the end of the Samurai and ushered in a new age for Japan. Takamori Saigo, the leader of a group of 500 Samurai which had been defeated earlier, took position on a hill named Shiroyama near the city of Kagoshima. The Japanese army of 30,000 equipped with modern weapons surrounded them and began a punishing artillery bombardment. By morning only 40 Samurai remained. Saigo had been wounded earlier and either died or committed ritual suicide. The last 40 warriors charged, sword in hand, only to be shot down. The battle was used as a general influence for the final battle scene in the movie The Last Samurai.

The Battle off Samar – October 25, 1944

With a large Japanese fleet bearing down on them, the destroyers, destroyer escorts and escort carriers of the US task force designated Taffy 3 made a desperate stand. Beyond them was the US amphibious force conducting landings at Leyte Gulf. If the Japanese battleships and cruisers reached them it would be a slaughter. Taffy 3’s sailors fought with such aggressiveness the enemy fleet was turned back, though at a loss of 5 ships sunk, including two of the tiny carriers, and 2,496 casualties. It is still lauded as one of the US navy’s proudest moments.

Defense of Arnhem Bridge – September 17-26, 1944

The most distant of the airborne attacks of Operation Market Garden, British paratroopers were able to seize this bridge over the Lower Rhine River in order to hold it for advancing British 2nd Army. That force was delayed by a stubborn German defense, leaving the paratroopers isolated and with little supply. After holding for 9 days, the survivors withdrew, leaving a large number of wounded to be taken prisoner. It was a dark day for the British Army despite the valiant performance of the airborne troops.

The Warsaw Ghetto – April 19 – May 16, 1943

As the Nazis began to round up the last Jews from the Warsaw Ghettos, an underground group of Jewish fighters chose to resist. The ensuing battle was desperate and uneven as the poorly armed Jews fought to stave off almost-certain death in the camps. The Nazis used the incident as an excuse to murder thousands of ghetto residents and quickly deported the rest, leaving the Ghetto an empty and haunted place.

Battle of Karbala – October 10, 680 

This battle took place in what is now Iraq between the Umayyad caliph Yazid and supporters of Hussein Ibn Ali, grandson of Muhammad. Hussein’s followers numbered perhaps 72, facing thousands of enemy soldiers. All of them were killed making their stand which is now an important day in Shia Islam. Even today in Muslim culture struggling against long odds is known as “facing one’s Karbala.”

The Stand of the Saxon Housecarls at Hastings – October 14, 1066

Hastings is widely known as a critical battle of European history, but less well known is the stand made by the English Housecarls, essentially household troops in service to King Harold. When that ruler was killed during the battle, his Housecarls took positions around his body and fought until they were wiped out. While the battle was ultimately lost the Housecarls honored their oaths and fought to the last man.

Listen: The Comforting Appeal of Conspiracy Theories Why false narratives can sometimes outrun facts

On this episode of Social Distance, James Hamblin and Katherine Wells talk with Adrienne LaFrance, the executive editor of The Atlantic, who wrote the June cover story, about the QAnon conspiracy theory, as part of “Shadowland,” a project about conspiracy thinking in America. They discuss the viral disinformation campaigns creating even more uncertainty about COVID-19.

What follows is an edited and condensed transcript of their conversation.

Katherine Wells: A listener named Ashley wrote into the podcast asking about an alarming video she came across online that she couldn’t get out of her head. She sent us a link to the video, which has since been taken down, but is called Plandemic. This video has gotten a lot of attention, and to discuss it we decided to call Adrienne LaFrance. Adrienne, what is this Plandemic video?

Adrienne LaFrance: It’s a conspiracy theory positing that a secret group of elite world leaders unleashed the coronavirus on the global population as part of a plot to either enact population control or force people to get vaccinated. There is no evidence to support any of it.

Wells: How widespread is this video? Is this just something on the fringe of the internet?

LaFrance: It’s really difficult to quantify the reach of these sorts of theories, but it’s clear that it quickly spread very quickly across the internet. It’s murky how many people saw it in communities that are either QAnon-friendly or otherwise fringe communities, and then how many further saw it because it started getting more media attention as news organizations felt compelled to debunk it.

Wells: For the uninitiated, what is QAnon?

LaFrance: QAnon is a conspiracy theory. The basic premise is that Q is a military insider who has proof that a secret group of world leaders are working with the deep state to torture children and that Donald Trump is aware of this and working to fight them. Q posts clues on the internet known as “Q drops” that advance these ideas. It’s a real-time, participatory conspiracy theory.

Wells: Is the Plandemic video directly related to QAnon?

LaFrance: It’s extremely QAnon-esque. It borrows a lot of the same language and narrative structure, if you can call it that. The same people who promote QAnon are now promoting Plandemic. The video fits very squarely within the QAnon worldview.

Wells: One of the claims made in Plandemic is that the virus was made in a lab, potentially by the U.S. and Chinese governments. Did the virus come from a lab?

LaFrance: Not to my knowledge. But this is an advantage of conspiracy theorizing, because people can always say they’re just asking questions. It’s premised as a desire to find the truth, but with a total rejection of empiricism. When you encounter conspiracy theorists and present them with facts that don’t fit into their worldview, they’ll reject them. But then they’ll still say they’re only trying to find the truth. It’s a brain-melting contradiction that I encountered in reporting the QAnon story and see in the Plandemic universe as well.

Wells: Jim, is the idea that the virus originated in a lab a legitimate question?

James Hamblin: When people ask that, they’re often asking it with innuendo, implying that the virus was made deliberately. As best as science can know, there’s no evidence that this was manufactured by people for deliberate purposes or released in a deliberate way. It is impossible to know if there was potentially someone studying this virus in some lab and it somehow was not contained, but that does not seem likely and we don’t have any evidence that that happened. But like so many conspiracy theories, it’s just a negative that we can’t prove. It’s really hard to prove that something 100 percent did not happen. All we can say is there’s no evidence to suggest it did.

Wells: Is it common that kernels of legitimate questions are embedded in conspiracy theories?

LaFrance: On the one hand, any question is legitimate, right? So making a worldview all-encompassing enough that it answers or cleanly resolves something that’s otherwise inexplicable has some appeal. There are people who claim that terrible events like terrorist attacks or mass shootings didn’t happen. One could imagine the emotional appeal of explaining away a terrible reality. But when I talk to people who study conspiracy theories, they often say that a desire for coherence is not the driving thing that contributes to a propensity to believe in absurdities like this.

Wells: Do conspiracy theories like QAnon or Plandemic have consequences? Why do they matter?

LaFrance: They matter because they represent a mass rejection of reason and Enlightenment values and empiricism. They discount all of the ways we’ve learned to understand our world. It’s a rejection of reality, and it’s dangerous when we can’t agree on a common set of facts that make up the world we share.

For Plandemic, the extent to which it’s challenging science and the efficacy of vaccines is extraordinarily dangerous because people will decide not to get vaccinated or get their children vaccinated. That presents a very real public-health threat.

With QAnon, I think a lot about Pizzagate, which was a precursor to QAnon that shares a lot of the same core beliefs about a secret cabal of elite, high-profile politicians, celebrities, and CEOs abusing children ritualistically. Someone who had been really drawn into this conspiracy theory drove from his house in North Carolina to Washington, D.C., and took weapons into a local pizza shop, ready to uncover what he thought was the secret child-abuse ring. Of course, he didn’t find it, because it didn’t exist. But he did fire his weapon, and there were families and kids sitting there eating pizza. No one was hurt, but that’s obviously still a very frightening and real outcome.

Hamblin: Obviously, we all want answers. It’s much nicer to have things wrapped up in a nice little package, but Plandemic is not even a nice little package. It doesn’t even provide a motive. It makes less sense than what I’m hearing on the news. What do you think is drawing people to things like this?

LaFrance: When I talked to the QAnon true believers, I kept language that borrowed from an end-times worldview. There’s a lot of picking apart the Book of Revelation and talking about a battle between good and evil and casting Donald Trump as a savior. There is this very strong spiritual aspect of it that I wasn’t aware of before I started following it really closely.

Hamblin: Do you have a solution?

LaFrance: I hope journalism will help a little. It’s especially tricky for the people who see their loved ones sharing stuff that is so patently absurd and dangerous, because we know that just confronting someone doesn’t work. You can’t just tell someone how ridiculous they’re being and expect them to trust you more.

Wells: A listener actually wrote in about experiencing this, because her mom is being sucked into coronavirus conspiracy theories. When she tried to send her mom accurate journalism about the pandemic, her mom texted, “The media needs to shut down and then 80 percent of the world’s problems would be gone” and then two pink heart emojis.

LaFrance: In the course of my reporting, I talked to Joseph Uscinski, a professor of political science who has been studying conspiracy theories for ages. It came up in one of our conversations that his mom had started believing in QAnon.

Wells: He’s a conspiracy-theories expert, and his mom believes in QAnon?

LaFrance: Yes. I talked to both of them, and they understand that their worldviews are at odds. They don’t try to convince each other. But to me, like, if even your conspiracy-theory-expert son can’t convince you, how are the rest of us supposed to do it? I think it’s on all of us to be disciplined in how we share information and vet the things that we encounter. I also think that platforms have a much bigger role to play in making sure that the informational environment is not harmful to all of us.

Arash: Iran's Really Big Sniper Rifle That Fires One Massive Bullet Too big to handle? by Caleb Larson

The Arash, as it is known in Farsi, is almost too big to handle. 

Boom

Large caliber sniper rifles give a shooter the distance needed to put rounds down range and on target—sometimes from really far away. In theory, the Arash could do that—big gun, big bullet. But it’s actually not that simple.

The Arash is massive—based on pictures readily available online, the shoulder-fired rifle looks like it’s around six feet, or nearly two meters long. It has an odd cone-shaped quadruple baffle on the end of the barrel which would help to mitigate the recoil somewhat. And the recoil would be huge.

Big Guns

The Arash is chambered in a 20 millimeter round, likely the 20x102mm, which is quite a large round. Rather than targeting individual soldiers, the 20x102mm is better suited in an anti-material role, against lightly-armored vehicles or against buildings, though rarely by a one-man shooter.

In the United States, the 20x102mm round is used in the M61 Vulcan, a 6-barreled rotary cannon originally developed after the Second World War—but for jet airplanes, not for individual soldiers. It was an upgrade from earlier .50 caliber machine guns that lacked the range and stopping power to effectively engage enemy aircraft during the Second World War. Needless to say, a 20x102mm round’s recoil is beyond manageable.

Bad Ergonomics

The Arash has a pistol grip and an odd-looking buttstock. The rifle actually rests on the shooter’s shoulder, similar to how a rocket-propelled grenade launcher is held. Though the Arash is somewhat similar to a bullpup configuration (the magazine is inserted behind the trigger assembly), it is even further back, actually behind the shooter’s back. Thanks to these unhelpful ergonomics, reloading would probably be somewhat awkward.

The scope is also oddly set up. From the prone position, it would likely be very difficult to get a good view through the scope, since the scope attachment is so high. The Arash may be operated by two-man motorcycle-mounted teams, which would solve the prone shooting problem, though shooting from the back of a motorcycle would likely be challenging.

In keeping with Iran’s quasi-tradition of reverse-engineering foreign weapon tech, the Arash appears to mount a Barrett-derived ballistics computer. This neat gadget attaches directly to the top of a scope and can take into account factors like atmospheric pressure and temperature to better aid shooters in getting shots on target.

This video shows just how powerful the Arash’s recoil is—and how unwieldy the platform seems to be. Like other Iranian weapon platforms, the Arash may be more smoke and mirrors than actual firepower.

Why Iran’s Reverse Engineered TOW Missile Is a Powerhouse A clever weapon. by Caleb Larson

Iran’s Toophan missile is so similar to America’s TOW anti-tank missile, it can be used interchangeably with the U.S. system.

Anti-revolutionary Allies

Before the 1979 Iranian Revolution, both the United States and Iran were on friendly terms—so friendly in fact, the U.S. decided to allow Iran to import TOW anti-tank missiles. Iran gladly did, and even had TOW repair facilities built to service the TOW missile and its launchers. The Revolution spoiled Iran’s relations with the U.S.—but Iran already had the technology it needed to maintain and grow its American-made arsenal.

The TOW, and the Toophan copy are wire-guided missiles that are not fire-and-forget missiles, but need to be aimed at their target for the duration of flight.

At War

During the Iran-Iraq War, Iraqi armor suffered significant losses thanks to American TOWs. Though Iran attempted to manufacture reverse-engineered copies of the TOW, they did not preform as well as their American parent, which were prized for their effective anti-armor capabilities. By the 1990s however, the Iranian TOW copy was in business.

Like the TOW, the Toophan has evolved steadily since introduction, with later variants having increase range and armor penetration. Some even have a tandem warhead to defeat modern explosive-reactive armor paneling. The Toophan comes with a large tripod that is essentially indistinguishable from the TOW. In fact, the Iranian TOW copy is supposedly so similar, the launcher and ammunition can be used interchangeably with genuine TOW systems, and vice-versa.

Toophan

According to CSIS, the Toophan is optically tracked and wire guided, with an 8-pound or approximately 3.5 kilogram warhead and a range of 2 miles. Thanks to Iran’s extensive client-state network thought the Middle East, Toophan missiles have seen combat service in Syria, Yemen, and Iraq with Shiite militias where they’ve done a number on many tanks.

There have been quite a few variants of the Toophan missile in production in Iran. One of the most advanced variants is said to forgo the TOW’s wire guidance system in favor of laser-guidance, and a tandem-warhead arrangement for punching through more modern armor. According to the Iranian PressTV, the Toophan 5 as this variant is known, is also resistant to electronic jamming, since it essentially “rides” a laser to target, rather than depending on radio guidance. 

In addition to enemy armor, the Toophan can also target low and slow enemy aircraft like turboprops or helicopters, and there are apparently a couple Toophan variants that can be used in an anti-bunker role rather than for targeting enemy armor.

As I previously wrote, Iran excels at replicating foreign tech, especially for platforms that Iran would otherwise struggle to produce domestically—like high-end tanks and airframes. The TOW/Toophan is no exception, though in this case, Iran’s manufacturing base seems to have found a winning formula and created something that may in some ways be better than the original.

France Bets That The Dassault Rafale Can Survive Until Europe's Stealth Fighter Takes Flight These upgrades give the Rafale an estimated Radar Cross Section (RCS) of slightly above one square meters—comparable to peers like the Super Hornet and Typhoon, but orders of magnitude greater than that of the F-35 jet. by Sebastien Roblin

The Rafale will also be modified to integrate future upgrades of the French SCALP-EG stealthy subsonic cruise missile and the supersonic ASMP-A cruise missile which carries a 300-kiloton-yield nuclear warhead.  Reportedly France may develop a hypersonic AS4NG variant increasing range from 300 miles to over 660 miles.

In January 2019, French Defense Minister Florence Parly announced France would commit $2.3 billion to develop an F4 generation of the Dassault Rafale twin-engine multirole fighter.  This would include production in 2022–2024 of the last twenty-eight of the original order of 180 Rafales, followed by the purchase of an additional thirty Rafales F4.2s between 2027–2030, for a total of 210.  Since 2008, France has deployed land- and carrier-based Rafales into combat in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Mali and Syria.   

Despite incorporating stealth technology, the Rafale (“Burst of Fire” or “Gust of Wind”), is not a true stealth aircraft like the F-35. True, the French jet’s wings and fuselage are primarily composed of radar-absorbent composite materials and lightweight titanium.  Other stealthy design features include S-shaped engine inlets, serrated edges and a channel exhaust cooling scheme designed to reduce infrared signature.

These give the Rafale an estimated Radar Cross Section (RCS) of slightly above one square meters—comparable to peers like the Super Hornet and Typhoon, but orders of magnitude greater than that of the F-35 jet.  Land-based Rafales are currently priced $76–$82 million per plane, only modestly cheaper than the F-35A which benefits from vastly greater economy of scale, though the Rafale’s operating costs are likely lower.

Paris particularly prizes maintaining an independent domestic arms industry and has never seriously considered purchasing F-35s.  Instead, France is working with Germany and other partners to develop a sixth-generation Future Combat Air System stealth jet to enter service in 2035-2040.  Until then, France is doubling down on the 4.5-generation Rafale by integrating additional F-35-style avionics and improving its network-centric warfare capabilities.

The Rafale is much more agile than the F-35, with superior climb rate, sustained turn performance, and ability to super-cruise (maintain supersonic flight without using fuel-gulping afterburners) at Mach 1.4 while carrying weapons.  The Rafale’s all-moving canards—a second set of small wings near the nose—give the Rafale excellent lift and low-altitude speed and performance, as you can see in this majestic airshow display.

However, compared to larger fourth-generation twin-engine jets like the Su-35 or F-15, the Rafale can’t fly quite as high (service-ceiling of 50,000 instead of 60,000 ft), and has a lower maximum speed (only Mach 1.8 compared to Mach 2-2.5).

The Rafale’s agility won’t help as much if it is engaged at long distances by enemy surface-to-air missiles and stealth jets.  To compensate, the Rafale boasts an advanced Spectra electronic warfare system that supposedly can reduce the Rafale’s cross-section several times over—it is rumored by reflecting back signals using ‘active canceling.’  Spectra also incorporates powerful jammers and flare and chaff dispensers, provides 360-degree early-warning, and can even assist Rafale pilots in targeting weapons to retaliate against attackers.

Spectra’s capabilities reportedly allowed Rafales to deploy on raids over Libyan airspace in 2011 before air defense missiles had been knocked out.

Other key capabilities include sensor fusion of the Rafale’s RBE-2AA Active Electronically Scanned Array multi-mode radar, which can track numerous targets over 124 miles away, with its discrete OSF infrared-search and track system, which has an unusually long range of sixty-two miles.  Rafale pilots also benefit from uncluttered instrumentation combining voice command with flat-panel touch screens.

The multirole jet carries a punchy thirty-millimeter revolver cannon and up to twenty-one thousand pounds of weapons on fourteen hardpoints, making it a versatile air-to-ground platform.  Because Paris requires expeditionary capability in Africa, the Rafale can refuel in flight and carry up to five fuel tanks for very long transits, and can be operated from relatively unprepared airfields, unlike most high-performance jets.

What’s new in the Rafale F4?

Dassault produces three basic types of Rafales: the single-seat Rafale-C, the two-seat Rafale-B (the additional weapon systems officer being preferred for strike and reconnaissance missions) and the carrier-based single-seat Rafale-M, which has an arrestor hook, reinforced landing gear and buddy-refueling pod capability. Each type has evolved in common generations designated F1, F2, F3 and F3R.

The F4 generation introduces additional network-centric warfare capabilities and data-logistics similar to those on the F-35 Lightning, enabling Rafales on patrol to build a more accurate picture of the battlespace by pooling their sensors over a secure network, and even exchange data using new satellite communications antenna.  The pilots also benefit from improved helmet-mounted displays.

The Spectra defensive system will receive more powerful jammers and new threat libraries tailored to meet the improving capabilities of potential adversaries.  Furthermore, Dassault seeks to use “Big Data” technology to develop a predictive maintenance system reminiscent of the F-35’s troubled ALIS system to cost-efficiently implement preventative repairs.

Other systems to be tweaked include the air-to-ground mode of the RBE-2AA radar, the M88 turbofan’s digital computers, and a new AI-system for its reconnaissance and targeting pod allowing it to rapidly analyze and present information to the pilot.  Rafale-Ms will also receive a new automated carrier landing system.

New weapons set for integration most notably an improved model of the Mica short-to-medium range air-to-air missile, which has a range of forty-nine miles.  The Mica can be launched without initially being locked and guided remotely by a data link on the fighter before engaging either an infrared or AESA radar seeker to close in for the kill, using a vector-thrust motor to pull off tight maneuvers.  Because both the Rafale and the Mica missile can employ passive infrared targeting without using an indiscrete active-radar for guidance, the MICA can be launched with little warning for the target.

The Mica-NG model will incorporate new infrared-matrix sensors for better performance versus stealth fighters, carry additional propellant for longer range, and integrate internal sensors to reduce maintenance costs.  Its dual pulse motor will allow it to accelerate just prior to detonation for a greater probability of achieving a kill.

For longer range engagements, newer Rafales F3Rs and F4s can launch British Meteor missiles which can sustain Mach 4 speeds.

Another weapon set for integration is heavier 2,200-pound variants of the AASM HAMMER, a guidance kit similar to the U.S. JDAM.  Previously, the Rafale could only carry 485-pound variants of the weapon which can use either GPS-, laser- or -infrared guidance to deliver precise strikes.  Unlike the JDAM, the HAMMER also incorporates a rocket-motor, allowing it to hit targets up to thirty-seven miles away when released at high altitude.

The Rafale will also be modified to integrate future upgrades of the French SCALP-EG stealthy subsonic cruise missile and the supersonic ASMP-A cruise missile which carries a 300-kiloton-yield nuclear warhead.  Reportedly France may develop a hypersonic AS4NG variant increasing range from 300 miles to over 660 miles.

Currently, the French Armée de l’Aire has three Rafale multi-role squadrons and two nuclear-strike squadrons based in Mont-de-Marsan (south-western France), Saint-Dizier (north-eastern France) and al-Dhafra in the UAE.  There are also an operational conversion unit and a testing and evaluation squadron.  

The French Navy has three Rafale-M squadrons which rotate onboard France’s nuclear-powered carrier Charles de Gaulle.  In 2018, a squadron of Rafale-Ms proved their capability to operate from the U.S. carrier George H. W. Bush.

The forthcoming Rafale F4s will progressively replace France’s fourth-generation Mirage 2000s, over 110 of which remain in service today.  French periodical Le Figaro claims that older Rafales will also eventually be updated to the F4 standard.

Abroad, Dassault is finish delivery of orders from Egypt (twenty-four), Qatar (thirty-six) and India (thirty-six).  All three countries may order additional Rafales, though the price of its initial Rafale order has caused a political scandal in New Delhi.

As France must wait nearly two decades before a European stealth fighter can enter service, its armed forces are betting that in the interim adding networked sensors and weapons to the Rafale’s superior kinematic performance and powerful electronic warfare systems will keep the agile jet relevant in an era of proliferating stealth aircraft and long-range surface-to-air missiles.

Chinese, Indian troops engage in border conflicts 2 skirmishes have occurred so far this month as talks break down again

Confrontations between soldiers of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the Indian Army engaged in border skirmishes on May 5 and 9, reports said Monday (May 25).

On May 5, a conflict erupted between PLA and Indian Army troops near the China-India border close to Pangong Tso (Pangong Lake) in the union territory of Ladakh. The two sides did not use conventional weapons, deciding instead to throw rocks at each other, according to Newtalk.

A total of 250 men joined the melee, with both sides tallying multiple injured.

On May 9, some 150 Chinese and Indian soldiers engaged in another scuffle in the northeastern state of Sikkim. Although mid-level military officials from both countries met on May 18 and 20, the two sides failed to reach an agreement regarding Pangong Tso.

The Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh is still an unresolved issue, as India has rejected China's attempts to curtail the South Asian nation's reach in the region. The lack of a willingness to compromise on both sides has led to a breakdown in negotiations.

In response to the recent confrontations, Indian Army Commander Manoj Mukund Naravane on May 22 went to the 14 Corps headquarters in Leh, the capital of Ladakh, to assess the situation, The Hindu reported. The Indian military subsequently ordered the reinforcement of eastern Ladakh, deploying several infantry battalions to Leh.

According to Newstalk, China has recently dispatched more troops to the border, and its behavior is increasingly aggressive. Chinese military maneuvers in the region fall under the command of the PLA's Western Theater Command.

China and India share a border that stretches approximately 4,056 kilometers.

Due to the lack of clear demarcation lines recognized by both sides, clashes between Chinese and Indian border patrols are common. In 1962, there was a brief border war, which China won.

US adds 33 Chinese entities to export blacklists American companies barred from exporting technologies, services to listed companies, government institutions

 Washington on May 22 added 33 Chinese companies to two different trade blacklists for activities that run contrary to U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, including their connections to the People's Liberation Army and human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region.

A year ago, the U.S. added Chinese telecom giant Huawei and 68 non-U.S. affiliates to the list, and last October, an additional 28 Chinese entities were added due to growing concerns over their contributions to human rights violations in China. The companies have been blocked from buying certain American technologies

The new restrictions are believed to be detrimental to the blacklisted Chinese entities, most of which are cybersecurity and AI-focused companies and research institutions, as these are critical to their operations.

The U.S. Department of Commerce has slapped sanctions on 33 Chinese companies based in China, Hong Kong, and the Cayman Islands deemed to "represent a significant risk of supporting the procurement of items for military end-use in China" and those engaged in "human rights violations and abuses committed in China's campaign of repression, mass arbitrary detention, forced labor and high-tech surveillance against Uighurs, ethnic Kazakhs, and other members of Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region."

With regard to the 24 Chinese companies, government-backed research institutions, and one individual that comprise the first sanctions list, American companies will not be allowed to export, re-export, or transfer the regulated items in-country without prior authorization.

As for the nine institutions named on the second list, American companies will be barred from providing them with items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR).

The 24 Chinese entities on the first list:

• Beijing Cloudmind Technology Co., Ltd.
• Beijing Computational Science Research Center
• Beijing Jincheng Huanyu Electronics Co., Ltd.
• Center for High Pressure Science and Technology Advanced Research
• Chengdu Fine Optical Engineering Research Center
• China Jiuyuan Trading Corporation
• Cloudminds (Hong Kong) Limited
• Cloudminds Inc.
• Harbin Chuangyue Technology Co., Ltd.
• Harbin Engineering University
• Harbin Institute of Technology
• Harbin Yun Li Da Technology and Development Co., Ltd.
• JCN (HK) Technology Co. Ltd.
• K Logistics (China) Limited
• Kunhai (Yanjiao) Innovation Research Institute
• Peac Institute of Multiscale Science
• Qihoo 360 Technology Co. Ltd.
• Qihoo 360 Technology Company
• Shanghai Nova Instruments Co., Ltd.
• Sichuan Dingcheng Material Trade Co., Ltd.
• Sichuan Haitian New Technology Group Co. Ltd.
• Sichuan Zhonghe Import and Export Trade Co., Ltd.
• Skyeye Laser Technology Limited
• Zhu Jiejin (individual)

The nine Chinese entities on the second list:

• China’s Ministry of Public Security’s Institute of Forensic Science
• Aksu Huafu Textiles Co.
• CloudWalk Technology
• FiberHome Technologies Group
• FiberHome's subsidiary Nanjing FiberHome Starrysky Communication Development
• NetPosa
• NetPosa's subsidiary SenseNets
• Intellifusion
• IS’Vision