DOCSLIB.ORG

Open Skies Aircraft and Sensors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Open Skies Aircraft and Sensors ‘The treaty opens up the full territory of its member states, ‘from Vancouver to Vladivostok’, to co-operative aerial observation flights. It embodied the determination of its states parties to overcome decades of bloc-to-bloc confrontation and secrecy in military matters by enhancing transparency and openness. ’ VERTIC BRIEF • 8 • FEBRUARY 2009 BRIEF News from Open Skies A co-operative treaty maintaining military transparency Hartwig Spitzer Hartwig Spitzer is the Introduction1 New tensions have emerged in relations spokesperson for the Center between the United States and the When the Treaty on Open Skies was signed for Science and International Western alliance on the one hand and the at the Conference on Security and Co- Security (CENSIS) and an Russian Federation on the other. These associate member of the operation in Europe (CSCE) Summit in culminated, inter alia, in Russia’s suspen- Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker Helsinki, Finland, on 24 March 1992, it was sion of implementation of the Treaty on Center for Science and Peace seen as one of the most far-reaching and Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Research at the University of intrusive confidence-building measures ever 2 (CFE) on 13 December 2007. Hamburg, Germany. He is agreed. The treaty opens up the full terri- The Open Skies Treaty, which was meant also a professor in the tory of its member states, ‘from Vancouver Department of Physics at to Vladivostok’, to co-operative aerial to support the transition process after the the University of Hamburg. observation flights. It embodied the deter- end of the Cold War, only came into effect He has participated in the mination of its states parties to overcome on 1 January 2002. Hence it is appropriate Open Skies Consultative to ask: how well does it work? And what Commission’s Informal decades of bloc-to-bloc confrontation and is its role in the changed circumstances? Working Group on Sensors secrecy in military matters by enhancing The author has observed the Treaty on since 2005. transparency and openness. Today, the treaty’s 34 states parties find Open Skies from its emergence. This paper themselves in a fundamentally transformed sketches out the main provisions of the security environment. Political changes and treaty and discusses the interest of the remarkable reductions in armed forces original and new states parties in the agree- since 1990 have made a large conventional ment. It focuses primarily, though, on events war in Europe now very unlikely. The dan- since 2005: the first Review Conference, ger of destabilization in many transition preparations for use of additional sensor states has been nearly eliminated by their categories, the flight allocation for 2008, integration into the European Union (EU) and the outcome of treaty implementa- and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization tion—that is, support for monitoring of (NATO). However, regional wars have been arms control treaties and military trans- 1. Updated and extended version of 3 Hartwig Spitzer, ‘Open Skies: Enter- fought and crisis-prone regions remain. parency in a co-operative setting. ing full implementation at low key’, Helsinki Monitor, no. 17, 2006, pp. 83–91, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden/ Figure 1 Boston. C-130 Hercules, which are used on Open Skies observation missions 2. Peter Jones and Márton Krasznai, ‘Open Skies: Achievements and Prospects’, in John B. Poole and Richard Guthrie (eds), Verification Report 1992, VERTIC, London, 1992, pp. 47–56; Peter Jones, ‘Open Skies: A Review of Events at Ottawa and Budapest’, in John B. Poole (ed), Verification Report 1991, VERTIC, London and Apex Press, New York, 1991, pp. 73–82; Peter Jones, ‘Open Skies: Events in 1993, in John B. Poole and Richard Guthrie (eds), Verification 1993, VERTIC, London and Brassey`s, London, New York, 1993, pp. 145– 161; Sergey Koulik and Richard Kokoski, Conventional Arms Control – Perspectives on Verification, Oxford University Press (for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute), Oxford, 1994; Michael Krepon and Amy E. Smith- son (eds), Open Skies, Arms Control, and Cooperative Security, St.Martin´s Press, New York, 1992. 3. The 2008 war in the Caucuses involved two states parties to the treaty (Georgia and the Russian Federation). Source: Federal Armed Forces Verification Centre, Germany. 2 News from Open Skies: A co-operative treaty maintaining military transparency Hartwig Spitzer Overview become more severe, perhaps even fatal “All states parties for the treaty. The treaty foresees co-operative observation One possibility to keep the Open Skies have the right flights at a ground resolution that allows approach relevant and vital is an extension of access to for identification of major weaponry. to crisis regions which are not yet covered Between 2002 and 2007, 430 such flights images from by the treaty and to engage in outreach were conducted over military sites not only 4 beyond the OSCE area. Another is to each flight— in Europe, but also in the vast territories operate different sensors beyond photo- of North America and Siberia, which are a remarkable graphic cameras with black-and-white inaccessible to inspections under the CFE film. With some luck, 2009 will see an achievement— Treaty and the 1999 Vienna Document on agreement on the use of digital aerial which puts Confidence- and Security-Building Measures. cameras with up to four colour channels The imagery has been used to support them on an as well as certification of the first thermal monitoring of arms control treaties, as infrared imaging device onboard the equal footing.” well as for achieving the treaty’s general Turkish Open Skies aircraft. objective of military openness and trans- parency. All states parties have the right of access to images from each flight—a remark- able achievement—which puts them on an equal footing. Since 2002, the treaty has attracted Provisions of the treaty eight new members from the Nordic It is worthwhile remembering the inten- region, the Baltic States and the former tions and purpose of the treaty, as stated Yugoslavia, bringing the number of states in the Preamble: ‘to improve openness parties to 34. At the first Review Confer- and transparency, to facilitate the monitor- ence in February 2005, the states parties ing of compliance with existing or future confirmed their intention to adhere to the arms control agreements and to strengthen agreement as signed and to keep it open the capacity for conflict prevention and to all states participating in the Organi- crisis management in the framework of the zation for Security Co-operation in Conference on Security and Co-operation Europe (OSCE). in Europe and in other relevant interna- It is noteworthy that the Russian Federa- tional institutions’.5 In this context, the states parties also saw the possible contri- tion and the US have not clashed over the 4. Unfortunately, due to the rivalry Treaty on Open Skies, but rather support bution that an aerial observation regime between Armenia and Azerbaijan it. They seem to have a genuine interest in of this kind could make to security and over Nagorno-Karabakh and the flaring up of conflicts on the terri- the imagery and in the demonstrative stability in other areas (outside of the tory of Georgia, there is little chance character of the agreement. In fact, among OSCE zone), as well as potential for its that Open Skies could be extended further in the South Caucasus, the three so-called pillars of European extension to other fields such as protec- although Georgia (unlike Armenia security—the CFE Treaty, the Open Skies tion of the environment. and Azerbaijan) is a party to the Treaty, and the Vienna Document—Open At the core of the treaty is the right to treaty. 5. The full text of the treaty as well Skies has proved the least contended, so far. observe any point on the territory of the as the Decisions of the Open Skies In spite of this generally positive picture, observed state party, including areas desig- Consultative Commission (OSCC) nated as hazardous air space. It is completely with respect to annual quota assign- clouds are gathering on the horizon. A ments and other implementation major concern is fundamental asymmetry, up to the observing state to select the sites issues can be found at www.dod. as NATO states have agreed not to inspect to be over-flown and photographed.6 The mil/acq/acic/treaties/os/index. htm. See also Rüdiger Hartmann each other. The Open Skies missions of legitimate interests of the observed state and Wolfgang Heydrich, Der Ver- these states are solely directed towards the party with regard to avoidance of espio- trag über den Offenen Himmel [The Treaty on Open Skies], Nomos, Russian Federation and the five remaining nage are taken into account by ensuring Baden-Baden, 2000. The authors non-aligned states (Bosnia-Herzegovina, that the ground resolution of the sensors illuminate the negotiation process Croatia, Georgia, Sweden and Ukraine). to be used, while allowing for the reliable and the intentions of the negotiators. 6. Different national agencies, Should these latter countries, in particular identification of major weapons systems, including the verification centres, Ukraine, join NATO, the imbalance would does not enable detailed analysis. take part in the selection process. News from Open Skies: A co-operative treaty maintaining military transparency Hartwig Spitzer 3 Box 1: Treaty provisions • A system of flight quotas has been negotiated, which reflects to some extent the geographic size and the military ‘weight’ of the states parties.7 Since 2006, for example, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Ukraine have been 7. The passive quota of the initial entitled to carry out 12 observation flights per year (active quota) and have had to accept up to 12 over-flights (passive signatories that later ratified the quota), whereas Russia (along with Belarus) and the US each have had an active quota of 42 flights and a passive treaty was fixed in Annex A of the quota of 42 flights.8 treaty after consideration of the ‘wishes’ of the parties regarding • Flights are conducted by fixed-wing unarmed aircraft with inspectors from both sides onboard.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Treaty on Open Skies, 2
    DECISION No. 1/06 REVISION OF THE OSCC SCALES OF DISTRIBUTION FOR 2005–2007 DUE TO THE REVISION OF THE OSCE STANDARD SCALE OF CONTRIBUTIONS FOR 2005–2007 The Open Skies Consultative Commission (OSCC), 1. Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 4 (D) of Article X and paragraph 9 of Section I of Annex L of the Treaty on Open Skies, 2. In accordance with the provisions and Annexes of Decision Number Ten to the Treaty on Open Skies of 16 July 1993 (OSCC/III/ Dec.10) contained in the Appendix to this decision, 3. Pursuant to the provision of paragraph 1 of OSCC Deci- sion No. 21/02 of 9 September 2002 (OSCC.DEC/21/02) that “the scale of distribution of the Open Skies Consultative Commission shall be revised to reflect any revisions of the Standard Scale of Contributions” (replacing the OSCE’s “Helsinki scale”), 4. Taking into account OSCE Permanent Council Decision No. 704 of 24 November 2005 on the scales of contributions for 2005–2007 (PC.DEC/704), which revised the OSCE Standard Scale of Contribu- tions for 2005, 2006 and 2007, 5. Taking into account that the special regime established by OSCC/III/Dec.10 continues to apply for the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia, and that respective ad hoc additional contributions of these States Parties in 2005, 2006 and 2007 amount to 0.05, 0.02, 0.01 and 0.01 (in percentages), Decides to redistribute OSCC costs and agrees on the fol- lowing revised scales of distribution for the common expenses associ- ated with the operation of the OSCC: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Gik 1-2015.Indd
    GEODESY AND CARTOGRAPHY © Polish Academy of Sciences Vol. 64, No 1, 2015, pp. 65-74 DOI: 10.1515/geocart-2015-0003 Entering the digital era of the Open Skies Treaty Agata Orych Military University of Technology Faculty of Geodesy and Civil Engineering Geodesy Institute, Department of Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry 2 Kaliskiego Street, 00-908 Warsaw, Poland [email protected] Received: 8 April 2015 / Accepted: 24 April 2015 Abstract: The Open Skies Treaty has been a peace-building instrument between North American and European nations for over two decades. This agreement is based on the possibility for each country-signatory of the Treaty to independently conduct observation fl ights and obtain aerial imagery data of the territories of other Treaty States-Parties. This imagery data was originally acquired only using traditional photographic fi lm cameras. Together with the rapid development and advancement of digital sensor technologies, the logical step forward was to amend the Treaty provisions to allow for the use of these types of sensors during observation missions. This paper describes this transition process and highlights a number of technical problems which needed to be addressed by experts working within the Open Skies Consultative Commission workgroups. Keywords: Open Skies Treaty, Digital sensors, spatial resolution 1. Introduction The Treaty on Open Skies is an international agreement between 34 States-Parties, the main aim of which is to strengthen mutual openness and transparency between its signatories from a military point of view. The Treaty is based on the possibility for all States-Parties to independently conduct observation fl ights over the territories of other States-Parties.
    [Show full text]
  • The Open Skies Treaty: Background and Issues
    The Open Skies Treaty: Background and Issues Updated January 15, 2021 The United States announced its intention to withdraw from the Treaty on Open Skies on May 22, 2020; this withdrawal took effect on November 22, 2020. Russia has also announced its plans to withdraw, noting that it would begin the domestic procedures for withdrawal on January 15, 2021, and would then send the official notification to the other treaty parties. The United States, Canada, and 22 European nations signed this treaty on March 24, 1992. It entered into force on January 1, 2002, and had 34 members before the U.S. withdrawal. The parties permit unarmed observation aircraft to fly over their entire territories to observe military forces and activities. The treaty is designed to increase transparency, build confidence, and encourage cooperation among European nations. The parties had conducted 1,500 observation flights through early October 2019. Some parties provide their own aircraft, but they can also join overflights on aircraft provided by other nations. Both the observing nation and observed nation have access to the data from each flight; other parties can purchase copies of the data, so all can share information collected during all flights. According to the State Department, the United States conducted nearly three times as many flights over Russia as Russia did over the United States. Further, the parties can invite flights over their territories in special circumstances, as Ukraine did in 2014, when Open Skies flights helped monitor activities along the Ukraine-Russian border. With the United States withdrawal from the Treaty, it will no longer participate in flights or share data collected by others.
    [Show full text]
  • Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law (114:4 Am J Int'l L)
    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 10-2020 Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law (114:4 Am J Int'l L) Jean Galbraith University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the International Law Commons, Military, War, and Peace Commons, National Security Law Commons, and the President/Executive Department Commons Repository Citation Galbraith, Jean, "Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law (114:4 Am J Int'l L)" (2020). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 2227. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/2227 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Copyright © 2020 by The American Society of International Law CONTEMPORARY PRACTICE OF THE UNITED STATES RELATING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW EDITED BY JEAN GALBRAITH* In this section: • U.S. Supreme Court Holds that the New York Convention Does Not Displace Domestic Doctrines Permitting Nonsignatories to Enforce Arbitration Agreements • U.S. Supreme Court Rules that Victims of State-Sponsored Terrorism Can Sue Foreign States for Retroactive Punitive Damages Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act • Trump Administration Submits Notice of U.S. Withdrawal from the World Health Organization Amid COVID-19 Pandemic • United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Enters into Force • President Trump Authorizes Economic Sanctions and Visa Restrictions Aimed at International Criminal Court • United States Gives Notice of Withdrawal from Treaty on Open Skies * David Ta-wei Huang and Erica Rodarte contributed to the preparation of this section.
    [Show full text]
  • The Open Skies Treaty: Background and Issues
    The Open Skies Treaty: Background and Issues Updated May 21, 2020 According to Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, the United States will give notice of its intent to withdraw from the Treaty on Open Skies on May 22, 2020; the withdrawal will occur in six months, on November 22, 2020. The United States, Canada, and 22 European nations signed this treaty on March 24, 1992. It entered into force on January 1, 2002, and now has 34 members. The parties permit unarmed observation aircraft to fly over their entire territories to observe military forces and activities. The treaty is designed to increase transparency, build confidence, and encourage cooperation among European nations. The parties had conducted 1,500 observation flights through early October 2019. Some parties provide their own aircraft, but they can also join overflights on aircraft provided by other nations. Both the observing nation and observed nation have access to the data from each flight; other parties can purchase copies of the data, so all can share information collected during all flights. According to the State Department, the United States conducted nearly three times as many flights over Russia as Russia did over the United States. Further, the parties can invite flights over their territories in special circumstances, as Ukraine did in 2014, when Open Skies flights helped monitor activities along the Ukraine-Russian border. Background President Eisenhower proposed an Open Skies agreement in 1955 to reduce the risk of war. Before satellites existed, aerial overflights provided information for both intelligence and confidence-building purposes. The Soviet Union rejected the proposal because it considered overflights equal to espionage and believed the United States had more to gain than it did.
    [Show full text]
  • The Open Skies Treaty
    13 The Open Skies Treaty Ernst Britting and Hartwig Spitzer ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ When the Treaty on Open Skies was signed in March 1992 it was seen as one of the most far-reaching and intrusive confidence-building measures ever agreed.1 The treaty opens the full territory of its member states, ‘from Vancouver to Vladi- vostok’, to co-operative aerial observation overflights. After decades of bloc-to- bloc confrontation and secrecy in military matters it embodied the determination of its states parties to overcome the East–West military stalemate by enhancing transparency and openness. Ten years later, the treaty faces an unexpected and somewhat uncertain future. After a lengthy ratification period it finally entered into force on 1 January 2002. Russia, which delayed its ratification until 2001, is now a keen supporter of the treaty. On the other hand, the recent détente between Russia and the United States and other developments have made confidence building through observation overflights a much lower priority for the former adversaries than it was 10 years ago. In addition, the availability of high-resolution commercial satellite imagery calls for a re-evaluation of the relative value of Open Skies images. It is therefore time to address the role and potential of the treaty. Given sufficient political will the treaty’s implementation can be adapted to the changed security situation and security needs of its members in its vast application area, which covers the territory of 26 member states of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe ().2 The area of application includes Siberia and North America, which are not covered by the 1990 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (the Treaty) or the Vienna documents.
    [Show full text]
  • Saving the Open Skies Treaty: Challenges and Possible Scenarios After the U.S
    Saving the Open Skies Treaty: Challenges and possible scenarios after the U.S. withdrawal EURO-ATLANTIC SECURITY POLICY BRIEF Dr. Alexander Graef September 2020 The European Leadership Network (ELN) is an independent, non-partisan, pan-European NGO with a network of nearly 200 past, present and future European leaders working to provide practical real-world solutions to political and security challenges. About the author Alexander Graef is a researcher in the project „Arms Control and Emerging Technologies at the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg (IFSH). He received his PhD in 2019 from the University of St. Gallen (Switzerland) for a thesis on the network of Russian foreign policy experts and think tanks. His current research focuses on conventional arms control and Russian security and defense policy. Support for this publication was provided by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York Published by the European Leadership Network, September 2020 European Leadership Network (ELN) 100 Black Prince Road London, UK, SE1 7SJ @theELN europeanleadershipnetwork.org Published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 © The ELN 2020 The opinions articulated in this report represent the views of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the European Leadership Network or any of its members. The ELN’s aim is to encourage debates that will help develop Europe’s capacity to address pressing foreign, defence, and security challenges. Contents Introduction 1 1. Technical Challenges 2 2. Treaty Implementation and Quotas 9 3. Four Future Scenarios 13 4. Recommendations 15 Introduction expressed at the obligatory state con- ference that convened to discuss the implications of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressionally Mandated Notice Period for Withdrawing from the Open Skies Treaty
    (Slip Opinion) Congressionally Mandated Notice Period for Withdrawing from the Open Skies Treaty In establishing a mandatory waiting period for withdrawing from a treaty, section 1234(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 unconstitutionally interferes with the President’s exclusive authority to execute treaties and to conduct diplomacy. September 22, 2020 MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE LEGAL ADVISOR TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL The United States is a party to the Open Skies Treaty, which allows state parties to conduct unarmed surveillance flights over the territory of the other parties. Treaty on Open Skies, Mar. 24, 1992, reprinted in S. Treaty Doc. No. 102-37 (Aug. 12, 1992) (“OST”); 2 Pub. Papers of Pres. William J. Clinton app. A, at 2213 (Nov. 3, 1993). Article XV of the Treaty gives each party the right to withdraw after providing notice, at least six months in advance, to a Treaty depositary and to the other state parties. In section 1234(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (“FY 2020 NDAA”), Congress sought to require the Executive Branch to notify four congressional committees, at least 120 days in advance of sending the notice, that withdrawal is in the best interests of the United States national security and that the other state parties to the Treaty have been consulted about the United States’ planned withdrawal. Pub. L. No. 116-92, § 1234(a), 133 Stat. 1198, 1648 (2019). On May 22, 2020, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense jointly provided notice to congressional leadership of the President’s decision that the United States would withdraw from the Treaty.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treaty on Open Skies
    OCTOBER 2019 FACT SHEET 14 A PRIMER ON THE TREATY ON OPEN SKIES OC-135B Open Skies - RAF Mildenhall Feb 2010 . Credit: Tim Felce (Airwolfhound) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)] THE PURPOSE OF THE OPEN SKIES TREATY • Participating countries include the UK, the US, Russia and • Arms control treaties are negotiated between countries 31 NATO and former Warsaw pact countries. Of all NATO with conflicting interests where relationships are often countries, 27 of 29 areOST members. characterised by distrust. These treaties are designed to • The Open Skies Treaty is entirely distinct from accords on reduce tensions and alleviate concerns. civil aviation, which are often referred to as ‘Open Skies’ • By opening airspace for observation flights among its agreements. member countries, the Open Skies Treaty provides transparency and is designed to build confidence between WHAT IS THE TREATY’S VALUE FOR ITS countries about military activity. PARTICIPANTS? • Images are recorded on the flights using strictly certified WHAT IS THE OPEN SKIES TREATY? equipment and shared between all participating countries. • The treaty opens up the airspace of 34 countries from • Open Skies images have a unique level of international ‘Vancouver to Vladivostok’ for observational flights by other provenance, because all parties recognise they are authentic. countries. • Open Skies images are shared with all the members of the • The treaty has been in force for over 17 years. It was treaty, including the country that is being observed, making negotiated in 1992 and entered into force on 1st January this an important confidence-building tool for countries 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Making a Better Treaty on Open Skies CNS OCCASIONAL PAPER #50 · February 2021
    Making a Better Treaty on Open Skies CNS OCCASIONAL PAPER #50 · February 2021 Peter Jones Making a Better Treaty on Open Skies Peter Jones James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies | February 2021 iii James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies Middlebury Institute for International Studies at Monterey 460 Pierce Street, Monterey, CA 93940, USA Phone: +1 (831) 647-4154 Fax: +1 (831) 647-3519 www.nonproliferation.org www.middlebury.edu/institute The views, judgments, and conclusions in this report are the sole representations of the authors and do not necessarily represent either the official position or policy or bear the endorsement CNS or the Middlebury Institute of International Studiehs at Monterey. Cover image: OC-135B Open Skies aircraft. It’s primary function is unarmed observation to support the Treaty on Open Skies. [Source: Wikimedia Commons] © 2021, The President and Trustees of Middlebury College iv James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies | February 2021 Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... vi Background ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Compliance Issues ........................................................................................................................................ 4 The Trump Withdrawal .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • By Order of the Secretary of the Air Force Air Force
    BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 16-604 OF THE AIR FORCE 14 SEPTEMBER 2018 Operations Support THE TREATY ON OPEN SKIES, THE TREATY ON CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE, AND THE VIENNA DOCUMENT ON CONFIDENCE AND SECURITY- BUILDING MEASURES COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY ACCESSIBILITY: This publication is available on the e-Publishing website at http://www.e-Publishing.af.mil for downloading RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication OPR: AF/A10P Certified by: AF/A10P (Col David Rickards) Supersedes: AFI16-604, 31 May 2016 Pages: 26 This publication implements, in part, Air Force Policy Directive 16-6, International Arms Control and Nonproliferation Agreements, and the DoD Foreign Clearance Program. This instruction provides guidance for treaties and agreements involving military transparency and conventional forces, specifically, Air Force implementation of, and compliance with, the Treaty on Open Skies (hereinafter referred to as Open Skies), the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (hereinafter referred to as the CFE Treaty), and the Vienna Document on Confidence and Security-Building Measures (hereinafter referred to as Vienna Document). This publication applies to all Air Force personnel to include Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units. This Air Force Instruction may be supplemented at any level, but route all supplements to AF/A10P for coordination prior to certification and approval. Refer recommended changes and questions about this publication to the Office of Primary Responsibility using the Air Force Form 847, Recommendation for Change of Publication; route Air Force Forms 847 from the field through appropriate chain of command.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treaty on Open Skies – Status Quo and Prospects Hartwig Spitzer
    In: IFSH (ed.), OSCE Yearbook 2004, Baden-Baden 2005, pp. 369-380. Hartwig Spitzer The Treaty on Open Skies – Status Quo and Prospects Introduction The Treaty on Open Skies is the most wide-reaching and advanced instru- ment for military and security-related confidence building in the OSCE area. It opens the entire airspace between Vancouver and Vladivostok to co-opera- tive observation overflights,1 including the vast expanses of North America and Siberia, which are not open to inspections under the CFE Treaty and the Vienna Document. When the Treaty was signed in 1992, one of its main aims was to sup- port and verify efforts to reduce massed offensive capabilities (troops and heavy military equipment). The specifications of sensors were defined ac- cordingly: photographic cameras with a ground resolution of 30 cm, night- vision-capable thermal-imaging sensors with a ground resolution of 50 cm, and radar-imaging devices with a resolution of three metres. At the same time, however, the Treaty already contained several ele- ments that were highly progressive: - Establishing the rights and responsibilities of the States Parties to the Treaty irrespective of membership of existing or former military organi- zations - Providing all States Parties with equal access to the image data gener- ated by inspection flights - Planning and performing observation flights co-operatively. Today – twelve years after the Treaty was signed – the States Parties find themselves in a fundamentally transformed security environment: - The threat potential within Europe has been enormously reduced. - The danger of destabilization in most transition countries has been elim- inated by their integration into NATO and the European Union.
    [Show full text]