The Pandemic Revealed India’s Invisible Workforce

By Neeta Lal

Source Link

In this May 30, 2020 photo, Indian migrant workers and their children look out from the window of their train in Prayagraj, India as they return to their villages.Credit: AP Photo/Rajesh Kumar Singh

Images of thousands of Indian migrant laborers trudging home barefoot with women and children in tow, or packed sardine-like in overcrowded trucks and trains to be ferried to their native villages from host states have been tugging at the nation’s conscience for months.

Ever since the country of over 1.3 billion people was locked down on four hours’ notice on March 25, the migrants’ mass exodus from cities has created a humanitarian and health security challenge and an unprecedented logistical nightmare. Bereft of accommodation and savings, the poor suddenly found themselves out of jobs with the overnight shutdown of factories.

According to industry estimates, about 80 percent of India’s 470 million workers are employed in the unorganized sector. Pulling rickshaws, selling vegetables, building malls, or working as domestic help, they toil to keep the wheels of the informal economy turning.

The hitherto invisible migrants’ sudden explosion into mainstream media coverage amid the COVID-19 lockdown also shone a light on their Dickensian working conditions, exposing the dark underbelly of India’s labor industry. Reports have highlighted how the underpaid workers remain outside of the ambit of laws, with no social security nets to boot.

China and India Move to Defuse Tensions After Clashes in the Himalayas

By Steven Lee Myers
Source Link

The confrontations between troops along their shared border led to injuries and the most serious tensions between the two Asian powers in years.

Indian soldiers on patrol in Ladakh last year. Frictions with Chinese troops along the border, which stretches more than 2,100 miles, are frequent.

China and India have stepped back from a tense confrontation along their shared border high in the Himalayas, pledging to resolve disputes over territory through diplomatic and military channels, India’s Foreign Ministry said on Sunday.

The announcement came a day after military commanders from the two sides met near Chushul, a border village at the disputed frontier near Pangong Tso, a lake where troops from the two countries clashed last month.

China did not immediately discuss the talks at the border, but officials and the state news media had sought to play down the confrontation in the days leading up to them.

Afghan Lives Through the Lens of COVID-19

By Mohammad Aref Karim and Mariam Alimi

Source Link

An employee of the Ministry of Health measures the temperature of an internally displaced family outside of Herat. Despite the pandemic, violence has not come to a halt and forced over 75,000 people to flee their homes since January 2020. They are now particularly vulnerable.

A group of young female doctors, in the district hospital of Ghoryani in Herat, near the Iranian border. Hundreds of thousands of Afghans have returned from Iran since February 2020, making Herat the country’s first COVID-19 hotspot.Credit: FES/ Mohammad Aref Karim

Health officials, local authorities, and volunteers are disinfecting rickshaws, buses, and streets to prevent the virus from spreading further in Herat.Credit: FES/ Mohammad Aref Karim

45-year-old Muhammad sits on the sidewalk in Herat. Since the outbreak of the pandemic, there are no customers for shoe repairs and his situation has deteriorated significantly.

Boris Johnson’s excellent answer to Beijing’s move on Hong Kong’s freedom

Source Link

Cheers to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson for offering millions of Hong Kongers visas and a path to UK citizenship if Beijing goes ahead with its horrible new “security law.”

The mainland is inflicting the legislation on the city without going through Hong Kong’s own legislature, in blatant defiance of the 1997 handover, which guaranteed the city’s autonomy until 2047.

The law will effectively criminalize dissent and empower the mainland’s security forces to operate openly in the city. It is, as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Congress, the “death knell” for liberty and democracy in Hong Kong.

London is in no position to stop the massive treaty violation. But Johnson’s riposte will still wound: If the law goes ahead, he says, he’ll offer visas and potential citizenship to all 3 million Hong Kongers who qualify for British National (Overseas) passports, not just the 300,000 who now hold them.

The move infuriated the mainland regime, which immediately began issuing threats of reprisals if . . . the United Kingdom lets people escape its grasp.

A new global crisis is looming in east Asia

Source Link

China’s pride and paranoia are a dangerous mix for the world GIDEON RACHMAN Add to myFT © James Ferguson Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) Share on LinkedIn (opens new window) Save Gideon Rachman YESTERDAY 505 Print this page Be the first to know about every new Coronavirus story Get instant email alerts What is China up to? From Hong Kong to Taiwan and from the South China Sea to the Indian border, the Chinese government, led by President Xi Jinping, is pursuing more aggressive policies. There is growing concern about Beijing’s behaviour, not just in Washington but in Delhi, London, Tokyo and Canberra. The Chinese government may feel that coronavirus makes this a good time to act, while the world is looking away. The turmoil on the streets of America has further divided and distracted the west. 

But democracies cannot afford to lose focus on east Asia. A new global crisis could easily break out there, with even graver long-term consequences than the pandemic. Beijing’s growing assertiveness reflects both pride and paranoia. After 40 years of rapid economic growth, China is now — by some measures — the world’s largest economy. Its navy has more warships and submarines than that of the US. Its internet bubbles with nationalistic chatter about the inexorable rise of the nation. The biggest grossing film in Chinese history is Wolf Warrior 2 — a Rambo-style action movie, released in 2017, that features heroic Chinese soldiers battling against mercenaries, led by a racist American. 

There Is No Thucydides Trap Between the U.S. and China

By Richard Hanania

Source Link

The Thucydides Trap is among the most well-known concepts in international relations. Recently, discussions about the rise of China have invoked the phrase, arguing that the nation's growing economic and military strength potentially puts it on a collision course with the United States.

According to Graham Allison, “when one great power threatens to displace another, war is almost always the result.” If true, the possibility of great power war deserves a great deal more attention than it is currently getting.

China is indeed rising, and by some measures, is now the largest economy in the world. It appears to many to have become more assertive in various theaters from India to Hong Kong and the South China Sea. Does that mean that confrontation between the U.S. and China is inevitable, or even likely?

Not necessarily. To see why it is worth investigating the concept of the Thucydides Trap more closely. Begin with the first part of the definition. How exactly do we define great power? In international relations, it generally means a state that has enough military strength to spread its influence on a global scale.

Why the Trump Administration Has Helped China

by Kishore Mahbubani

Source Link

Undoubtedly, the Trump administration has been the most aggravating administration that China has had to deal with since the normalization process that Henry Kissinger began in 1971. It has launched a trade war that has damaged the Chinese economy a little. Restrictions have been placed on technology exports to China. A massive effort has been undertaken to cripple Huawei. Yet, the most galling move has been the effort to extradite Meng Wanzhou. Applying Western laws to Chinese citizens reminds the Chinese people vividly of the Century of Humiliation when Western laws were applied on Chinese soil. 

Yet, if the Chinese leaders think long-term and strategically, as they are wont to do, they could also calculate that the Trump administration may have helped China. Clearly, the Trump administration has no thoughtful, comprehensive and long-term strategy to manage an ever-rising China. Nor has it heeded the wise advice of key strategic thinkers, like Kissinger or George Kennan. Kennan, for example, advised that the long-term outcome of the contest with the then Soviet Union would depend on “the degree to which the United States can create among the peoples of the world” the impression of a country “which is coping with the problem of its internal life” and “which has a spiritual vitality.” No such impression has been created by the Trump administration. Post-coronavirus and post-George Floyd, America is delivering the opposite impression. In relative terms, the Trump administration has raised the stature of China, which is now perceived as the more competent country in the world. 

Can China Be Compelled Into Arms Control?

By Robert Farley

Source Link

Arms control is always complicated, and a multilateral agreement across multiple weapons systems between China, the U.S., and Russia would tax even the best diplomats. The Trump administration has adopted an adversarial approach to China, attempting to threaten China into compliance by withdrawing from other arms control agreements, to test nuclear weapons, and to overwhelm China through a massive increase in defense spending. But is there any reason to believe that China can be compelled?

States certainly do engage in arms control in order to protect their physical security, as well as their economic and financial well-being. Concerns about the economic impact of the arms race informed both the Soviet and American approaches to arms control in the 1980s. Fear that the industrial power of the United States might swamp them both convinced Japan and the United Kingdom to pursue naval arms limitation in the 1920s.

But the United States cannot, at present, threaten to swamp China. Both Japan and the Soviet Union struggled to compete with the U.S., devoting far greater percentages of their economies to defense spending than Washington. Today, the opposite holds; China spends less as percentage of its GDP than the United States. There surely are concerns about the vitality China’s long-term economic growth (although the same can be said of the United States) but China nevertheless has sufficient slack in its defense spending to maintain its military position relative to the United States without risking bankruptcy.

Why a US-China Détente Is Coming in 2021: The Failure of Trump’s Policy

By Dingding Chen

Source Link

Recently, the Trump administration has launched a series of all-round attacks, sanctions, and containment policies toward China, making many commentators very pessimistic about the future trend of China-U.S. relations. It seems that the “cold war” between China and the United States will really materialize under such circumstances. These concerns are not unreasonable, but they also ignore the patterns of development in China-U.S. relations, especially the dynamic of balance against the background of great historical change. Therefore, they may mislead on the driving forces and on the possibility of China-U.S. cooperation.

China-U.S. relations will improve next year for at least three reasons. This piece will be the first in a series of three to appear here at The Diplomat outlining these factors.

Since 2018, the containment policy of the U.S. administration led by Donald Trump, marked by a three-pronged strategy of the trade war, technological blockade, and ideological attacks, has not achieved significant results. In particular, the trade war has not created any noticeable impact on China’s economy. China’s economic problems are mainly caused by the contradiction between domestic supply and demand, the financial bubble caused by land financing, which has not been fully digested by society, and the bumpy economic cycle between the long-repeated Keynesian aggregate demand stimulus and the excessive issuance of M2 (per monetary school theory). China’s GDP growth rate was 6.6 percent in 2018 and 6.1 percent in 2019, both times exceeding the basic target of maintaining high economic growth of 6 percent. And judging from investment, consumption, and price levels, China’s economy has not been significantly affected by the crackdown on trade and science and technology from the United States, as various economic indicators have reached the expectations of the State Council. The recent economic difficulties, however, are mainly the result of the COVID-19 pandemic outside China, resulting in the shrinking of the demand by global market. This shows that the trade war launched by the United States has had a limited impact on China’s economy.

China Plays Defense in COVID-19 PR Battle With New Report

By Ken Moritsugu

Source Link

Senior Chinese officials released a lengthy report Sunday on the nation’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, defending their government’s actions and saying that China had provided information in a timely and transparent manner.

China “wasted no time” in sharing information such as the genome sequence for the new virus with the World Health Organization as well as relevant countries and regional organizations, according to the report.

An Associated Press investigation found that government labs sat on releasing the genetic map of the virus for more than a week in January, delaying its identification in a third country and the sharing of information needed to develop tests, drugs and a vaccine.

National Health Commission Chairman Ma Xiaowei did not address the specific findings in the AP report, but said it “seriously goes against the facts.” He added that there were many unknowns in the early stage of the outbreak and that it took time to gather evidence and figure out the characteristics of the new virus.

Can China Be Compelled Into Arms Control?

By Robert Farley

Source Link

Arms control is always complicated, and a multilateral agreement across multiple weapons systems between China, the U.S., and Russia would tax even the best diplomats. The Trump administration has adopted an adversarial approach to China, attempting to threaten China into compliance by withdrawing from other arms control agreements, to test nuclear weapons, and to overwhelm China through a massive increase in defense spending. But is there any reason to believe that China can be compelled?

States certainly do engage in arms control in order to protect their physical security, as well as their economic and financial well-being. Concerns about the economic impact of the arms race informed both the Soviet and American approaches to arms control in the 1980s. Fear that the industrial power of the United States might swamp them both convinced Japan and the United Kingdom to pursue naval arms limitation in the 1920s.

But the United States cannot, at present, threaten to swamp China. Both Japan and the Soviet Union struggled to compete with the U.S., devoting far greater percentages of their economies to defense spending than Washington. Today, the opposite holds; China spends less as percentage of its GDP than the United States. There surely are concerns about the vitality China’s long-term economic growth (although the same can be said of the United States) but China nevertheless has sufficient slack in its defense spending to maintain its military position relative to the United States without risking bankruptcy.

What Can Taiwan Do to Help Defend Hong Kong?

By Wu Jieh-min

Source Link

China’s National People’s Congress has passed a seven-point decision paving the way for legislation to apply a national security law to Hong Kong. One primary goal is to prevent “foreign forces interfering with Hong Kong affairs,” a phrase repeated three times in the bill. Beijing’s attempt to install its repressive national security apparatus is in effect laying the first building block of a “Berlin Wall” separating Hong Kong from the outside world and will gravely restrict the former colony’s global political connections. One of the countries that would be most deeply affected if the legislation comes into force is Taiwan, which has aided Hong Kongers in their civil protests over the years, especially during the Anti-Extradition Movement.

We are in unsettling and precarious times. The U.S.-China rivalry has upset the global order and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has been devastating. While the United States is occupied with nationwide protests against police violence and racial injustice, an unbridled Beijing has decided to speed up its power grab in Hong Kong.

The United States is trying to lead a coalition to agree on sanctions against China. But apart from a handful of countries that have shown limited support — the United Kingdom has pledged to offer visas to Hong Kongers, for instance — the coalition seems weak so far. The Australian government signed a joint statement expressing deep concern but is not considering sanctions. Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel has asserted that fundamental divisions between China and the European Union should not prevent dialogue and cooperation. The Chinese market remains a lure for most Western countries.

California in the US-China Rare Earths Race

By Mercy A. Kuo

Source Link

Trans-Pacific View author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners, and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Jane Nakano – senior fellow with the Energy Security and Climate Change Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and formerly with the Office of Policy and International Affairs in the U.S. Department of Energy – is the 240th in “The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.”

Explain the objective behind the U.S. Defense Department’s investment in Mountain Pass mine in California.

The Pentagon recently awarded funding for feasibility and engineering studies at the Mountain Pass mine in California as the first step in the Trump administration’s effort to re-establish a domestic supply chain for rare earths. The Mountain Pass mine had been a leading global supplier of rare earth minerals until the 1990s, but stringent domestic environmental regulations reduced the commercial viability of its rare earth production business, forcing the United States to become highly import dependent, mostly on China. In fact, over the past few decades, China has emerged as the dominant supplier of rare earths, accounting for about 85 percent of the global capacity to process rare earth ores and about 80 percent of rare earths supplies imported by the United States — the point of concern that the Pentagon aims to rectify through the grant program.

If China Invades Taiwan, This Is What The Fleet Could Look Like

H I Sutton
Source Link

Scenarios involving China taking military action against Taiwan have been a hot topic for decades. The most dramatic one would be a full-blown invasion involving amphibious landings. Back in the 1990s it was derided as the ‘million man swim’ because it was not believed that China had the naval means to pull it off. Some may still make that joke, but it may no longer reflect reality.

Reuters recently reported that the Chief of China’s Joint Staff, General Li Zoucheng, stated that the country could attack Taiwan to stop it becoming independent. The island has been de facto an independent country since the Communists took control of the mainland in 1948, but Beijing views it as a wayward province. The threat of force has always been there, but this latest comment is seen as an escalation of rhetoric.

The Modernized Chinese Navy

2020 Is Not 1968. It May Be Worse.

Niall Ferguson

Source Link

Niall Ferguson is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He was previously a professor of history at Harvard, New York University and Oxford. He is the founder and managing director of Greenmantle LLC, a New York-based advisory firm.

The American death toll is rising. An unpopular president fears for his re-election chances. The U.S. sends men into space. Down on Earth, the economy is in trouble. Racial tensions boil over into rallies, looting and violent confrontations with police in cities across the nation, intensifying political polarization and widening the generational divide. The president considers invoking the 1807 Insurrection Act, which empowers a president to deploy the armed forces and National Guard in any state.

Yes, as writers across the political spectrum such as David Frum, James Fallows, Max Boot, Julian Zelizer and Zachary Karabell have pointed out, 2020 is looking a lot like 1968. For Vietnam, read Covid-19. For Lyndon B. Johnson, read Donald J. Trump. For Apollo 8’s successful orbit of the moon, read the docking of SpaceX’s Crew Dragon with the Space Station. And for Washington, Chicago and many other cities in 1968, read Minneapolis, Atlanta and many other cities in the last few weeks.

The World’s Weakest Strongman

BY STEPHEN M. WALT
Source Link

If you know where the continuing wave of public protests in the United States is going to lead us, you’re smarter than I am. In fact, figuring out what is going to happen when mass protesters go up against the coercive apparatus of the government is inherently difficult to predict and maybe impossible.

Part of the reason, as Timur Kuran explained in a seminal article (and subsequent book), is that an individual’s propensity to rebel (or, in this case, join a demonstration) is a form of private information that is impossible to ascertain in advance, even in a democracy. Even today, it is hard for outside observers to know what might be the final straw that would provoke more people to go out into the streets or what sort of government response might lead them to stay home. And as Susanne Lohmann and other theorists have argued, protests also benefit from “cascade effects”: You might not be willing to be the first person out in the street, but you might be willing to be number 5,000. In this way, protest movements can grow larger over time and especially if the government reacts in ways that reinforce the initial burst of popular anger.

President Donald Trump (and other violence junkies like Republican Sen. Tom Cotton) seems to think that all that is needed to make the demonstrations cease is a ruthless show of force. He should think again. Overwhelming force sometimes works, especially when there is a genuine threat to regime stability, the public at large is supportive, and one can count on the security forces to obey orders and respond brutally. But as the Shah of Iran and other autocrats have discovered, wielding the mailed fist can also turn peaceful protests violent, drive more people into the opposition and onto the streets, and eventually cause the security apparatus to switch sides or dissolve. Even if a tyrant ultimately “wins,” the country may be but a hollow shell (see: Syria).

Ghost Fleet Overlord Test Vessels Continue To Accelerate U.S. Navy’s USV Programs

Martin Manaranche 

Source Link

Two existing commercial fast supply vessels were converted into USVs for Overlord testing. The Overlord program, developed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense Strategic Capabilities Office (OSD SCO) in partnership with Program Executive Office Unmanned and Small Combatants (PEO USC), are playing a vital role in informing the U.S. Navy’s new classes of USVs.

The U.S. Navy’s Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) announced a milestone for the program: 1 of 2 Ghost Fleet Overlord test vessels completed a total of two 4-day autonomous transits, with 181+ hours of autonomous operations–over 3,200 nautical miles.

1 of 2 Ghost Fleet Overlord test vessels completed a total of two 4-day autonomous transits, with 181+ hours of International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGs)-compliant autonomous operations--over 3,200 nautical miles.#ExpandingTheAdvantage

Space Development Agency to deploy hypersonic missile defense satellites by 2022

by Sandra Erwin 
Source Link

Hypersonic missiles are a new class of military threat capable of maneuvering and flying faster than 5,000 kilometers per hour. Credit: RAND Corp.

A June 5 solicitation for a “tracking phenomenology experiment” is a step in the development of a sensor network in space to track hypersonic missiles.

WASHINGTON — The Space Development Agency is soliciting bids to integrate a missile-warning sensor with a satellite bus and launch it to low Earth orbit by late 2021.

The June 5 solicitation is for a “tracking phenomenology experiment” to develop sensor algorithms for a future missile detection network in space. Proposals are due July 6.

The experiment is an initial step in the SDA’s plan to deploy a large constellation of low orbiting satellites in 2022 to detect and track maneuvering hypersonic missiles that the Pentagon predicts China and Russia will field in the near future.

The tracking experiment is central to the development of sensors that can accurately identify missile signals in background noise and clutter, according to SDA. “It will characterize scene backgrounds for a range of satellite viewing conditions to optimize algorithms, concepts of operations and wavebands for advanced missile detection and tracking,” said the June 5 request for proposals.

Is the Left Trying to Get Trump Reelected?

by Daniel McCarthy

Source Link

"In decades past the scenes of arson and looting that followed the Floyd protests in many cities would have driven voters to a Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan—or a Donald Trump. The Campus America kids think the country has changed, and their parents and grandparents will now see the police as bullies who sadistically pick on their always well-meaning if sometimes troubled and delinquent, sons, and daughters."

The protesters who took to the streets after the killing of George Floyd have something in common with Donald Trump: they share an interest in his re-election.

The protesters want nothing more than to see Trump defeated, of course. But for the last 15 years, American politics has seen new social movements rise in response to a presidential administration they oppose and fade away once a new president is elected. Remember the antiwar movement of 2006? It didn’t survive the Obama administration. The Tea Party movement and its calls for restraint on government spending haven’t been a force since the election of Donald Trump. And if Joe Biden wins in November, what are the odds that woke young Democrats will be protesting outside his White House the next time a black man dies in police custody?

What’s in Russia’s New Nuclear Deterrence ’Basic Principles’?

By Ankit Panda

Source Link

On June 2, the Russian government published a single document outlining its national perspective on nuclear deterrence. The short, six-page document — formally titled “Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence” — was authorized for publication on June 2 in an executive order signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin. An official English translation was made available by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Monday, June 8.

The document serves to largely reinforce conventional understandings of Russian nuclear policy, with no shocking new statements on the role of nuclear weapons in the country’s national defense strategy. While the document is unprecedented as a public release, previous analogs that likely existed in the Russian system were kept classified. Previous public statements on the role of nuclear weapons in Russia’s strategy appeared in the country’s military doctrine, but not with the same level of detail.

The timing of the document’s publication is notable. June 2, 2020, is barely seven months before the slated expiration of the 2010 U.S.-Russia Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. The United States continues to hold out on this treaty’s extension, despite Russian offers for an unconditional agreement to move ahead with the Treaty’s provision for a single five-year extension. There’s little common understanding between the two sides; the 2019 end of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, spurred by Russia’s violation, also doesn’t help matters.

What’s in Russia’s New Nuclear Deterrence ’Basic Principles’?

By Ankit Panda

Source Link

On June 2, the Russian government published a single document outlining its national perspective on nuclear deterrence. The short, six-page document — formally titled “Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence” — was authorized for publication on June 2 in an executive order signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin. An official English translation was made available by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Monday, June 8.

The document serves to largely reinforce conventional understandings of Russian nuclear policy, with no shocking new statements on the role of nuclear weapons in the country’s national defense strategy. While the document is unprecedented as a public release, previous analogs that likely existed in the Russian system were kept classified. Previous public statements on the role of nuclear weapons in Russia’s strategy appeared in the country’s military doctrine, but not with the same level of detail.

The timing of the document’s publication is notable. June 2, 2020, is barely seven months before the slated expiration of the 2010 U.S.-Russia Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. The United States continues to hold out on this treaty’s extension, despite Russian offers for an unconditional agreement to move ahead with the Treaty’s provision for a single five-year extension. There’s little common understanding between the two sides; the 2019 end of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, spurred by Russia’s violation, also doesn’t help matters.

Expanding the G-7 Makes Sense. Including Russia Does Not

Stewart M. Patrick 

Source Link

Pity the U.S. officials in charge of planning this year’s Group of 7 summit. President Donald Trump initially planned to convene the annual summit at his own private golf resort in Miami. When this bit of self-dealing elicited bipartisan blowback, he shifted the site of the meeting, originally scheduled for this week, to Camp David. Then COVID-19 intervened, and the White House announced plans for a virtual summit, only to have Trump propose on May 20 that the leaders would gather in person after all. When German Chancellor Angela Merkel demurred, the peeved president pivoted again. On May 30, without consulting his G-7 partners, Trump abruptly cancelled their meeting and declared the group obsolete.

“I don’t feel that as a G-7 it properly represents what’s going on in the world,” he told reporters aboard Air Force One. “It’s a very outdated group of countries.” To remedy this situation, he announced that he would invite Australia, India, Russia and South Korea to join the existing members at an inaugural summit of the “Group of 11” in September, or perhaps November.

This is Not a Civil-Military Crisis

BY JAMES JOYNERP
Source Link

Recent statements by uniformed leaders are anodyne expressions about U.S. law. Those by retired four-stars are more problematic.

Mara Karlin, a former senior defense official and national security scholar, rightly laments that retired general officers are having an outsized role in our national political debate. But she’s off the mark when she exclaims, “If this isn’t a civil-military relations crisis, I don’t know what is.” Rather, the crisis is that they’re having to speak out at all.

Katie Bo Williams rounded up the recent events that inspired Karlin’s comments in a Thursday report, “The Generals Are Speaking Up. Is That a Good Thing?” But the generals (and at least two admirals) and other senior defense leaders who are speaking up are in different categories and doing so about slightly different things. The distinctions at play are important.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper, having been excoriated by many of the aforementioned generals and others for allowing himself to be used as a prop in an outrageous photo opportunity made possible by tear-gassing peaceful protestors at a house of worship, tried to regain some dignity by issuing a memo extolling the Department’s “commitment to protecting the American people’s right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly” and reminding the uniformed military of their commitment to “stay apolitical.” Separately, Esper issued statements that “Racism is real in America, and we must all do our very best to recognize it, to confront it, and to eradicate it” and arguing that, despite President Trump’s threat to invoke the Insurrection Act to put down violence associated with nationwide protests against police brutality, the conditions do not call for such drastic measures.

Russia Puts Defensive Face on Its Nuclear Doctrine Ahead of Arms-Control Negotiations

BY PATRICK TUCKER
Source Link

Moscow’s new strategic-arms decree appears to be an attempt to win advantage whether New START lives on or not.

Russia’s new strategic-arms decree adds a bit of ambiguity and defensive flavor, but its main task is positioning Moscow for a critical round of arms-control talks, experts said.

On its face, the document reiterates key points in Russia’s doctrine on the use of strategic nuclear weapons, as opposed to its smaller nukes. Strategic nukes, it says, may be maintained to ensure “sovereignty, territorial integrity, deter direct aggression against Russia or allies, and in the event of aggression preclude escalation,” according to Michael Kofman, a senior research scientist at CNA, a nonprofit research and analysis organization in Arlington, Virginia. 

However, Kofman notes some ambiguity in the language, particularly around the idea of using nuclear weapons during a war to bring about a resolution. 

“Notably, the standard formulation of ‘cease hostilities on terms favorable to Russia’ (or Russian interests), was changed to ‘conditions acceptable’ to Russia & allies, which is a more fair reading of the escalation management strategy,” Kofman wrote Thursday on his blog.

Five Reasons The Air Force’s B-52 Bomber Will Be The First Jet Ever To Stay In Service For 100 Years

Loren Thompson

Source Link

This Friday marks the anniversary of the day in 1946 when the Air Force announced that Boeing BA had won the competition to build the plane that would become the B-52 Stratofortress.

That event unfolded so long ago that the Air Force was not yet an independent service, and the plane Boeing initially proposed was propeller-driven. It isn’t likely anybody at the time imagined the new bomber would become the most iconic military aircraft in history, and still be operating two decades into the 21st century.

In fact, if the Air Force sticks with current plans, the B-52 will operate through 2050, making it the first jet, and maybe the only jet, to stay in continuous operation for a hundred years. The plan is to retire bombers that debuted decades later before the B-52 flies its last mission, and buy a stealthy new strike aircraft designated the B-21 to populate a heavy bomber force ultimately consisting of 220 planes (there are 157 today).

Some facets of the Air Force’s “Bomber Vector” might change. Maybe the B-1 and B-2 bombers will stick around longer than expected. Maybe the B-52 won’t get new engines as presently planned. But one thing is certain: the B-52 will be with us through mid-century, making it the longest-lived combat system in an era supposedly characterized by rapid technological change.