India’s Foreign Policy May Fall Between Two Stools – Analysis

P. K. Balachandran

Source Link

In its quest for “strategic autonomy” India has alienated both the US and China and is not powerful enough to resist either.

In his first term as India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi signalled that his government will seek accommodation, cooperation and peace with all countries particularly Pakistan, China and the US.

He made an unscheduled visit to Pakistan in 2015 to demonstrate his bonhomie with Premier Nawaz Sharif. He met Chinese President Xi Jinping 18 times between 2014 and 2020 and concluded landmark defence agreements with the US between 2016 and 2020 to become its “strategic partner”.

But come 2024, India’s foreign policy is a bundle of contradictions and earning all round displeasure.

India’s relations with Pakistan broke when New Delhi abrogated Art.370 of the Indian constitution which had guaranteed the autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, an Indian State claimed by Pakistan. India’s relations with China soured in 2020 over a border clash amidst accusations that China was in occupation of over 4,000 sq.km of Indian territory in Ladakh.

India responded by putting curbs on Chinese trade and investment and tried to prevent China from weaning away its neighbours with investments.

To counterbalance China, India became a member of the US-led anti-China QUAD in 2017. And to bolster its military strength, it signed a number of defence agreements with the US increased military purchases from the US from near zero in 2008 to US$ 25 billion in 2024.

Putting People First Means Following Gandhi’s Talisman – OPED

Shobha Shukla

Source Link

What can be a better explanation of what #PutPeopleFirst means than what was explained so candidly by Mahatma Gandhi. He had said: “I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test- Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man [or woman or any gender] whom you may have seen, and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him [or her or them]. Will he [or she or they] gain anything by it? Will it restore him [or her or them] to a control over his [or her or their] own life and destiny? Then you will find your doubts melt away.”

Our health system seems to be following Gandhiji’s Talisman upside down. Instead of serving the most marginalised it is getting more geared to leave them behind. Our health system must meet the needs of the poorest of the poor and weakest of the weak. And the same quality of service which goes to this person should be a benchmark for everyone else.

Putting people first means thinking of solutions from the point of view of those most affected. People are not hard to reach. It is the healthcare services that are hard to reach and serve (most of) them with equity and human dignity.

Responses to HIV and TB, and for that matter any other health condition, must be built keeping the most vulnerable in mind. Quality health services should be made available to all, and the healthcare delivery systems should keep in mind people’s needs, their gender, age and socioeconomic status.

Here are some responses from people living with HIV, people who have survived TB, other community advocates, policymakers, programme implementers, clinicians, and the private sector to the question- “What does #PutPeopleFirst mean to you?”

Space: the next ‘frontier’ of UK–India cooperation?

Simran Brookes

Source Link

Recent years have seen sustained efforts to enhance UK–India ties under the umbrella of their Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, established in May 2021, and guided thus far by their unprecedented and ambitious 2030 Roadmap for future relations. Although attention has largely focused on enhancing trade and defence cooperation, rhetoric on technology cooperation, including the space domain, has quietly increased as well. Recent statements suggest this could be the next priority area, signalling an ambition to cooperate in new and increasingly critical areas and potentially strengthening the strategic dimension of the UK–India partnership.

Space as a growing considerationIndia’s Chandrayaan-3 mission made history in August 2023 as the first spacecraft to land on the moon’s south-pole region, making India the fourth country to achieve a soft lunar landing. The mission showcased India’s scientific and technological capabilities and signalled its ambitions to become a leading space nation.

Indeed, India’s 2020 Spacecom policy recognises that space is becoming a ‘vital frontier for strategic applications’ and that India needs to augment its space capabilities to ‘ensure its national security and sovereignty’. The same year, India also established a New and Emerging Strategic Technologies division within its Ministry of External Affairs to collaborate with foreign governments and seek technology exchange in emerging areas, including that of space.

Similarly, the UK’s 2021 Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy identified space as one of the ‘future frontiers’ for shaping the ‘open international order’. At the relaunch of the UK’s National Space Council in July 2023, the government announced plans to make the UK a globally competitive ‘space superpower’. Notably, among the other ‘key space leaders’ with which it plans to keep pace, it made explicit reference to only two such countries – the US, its closest ally, and India, indicating the growing importance that the UK places on India within this domain.

Does Vietnam and Bangladesh’s Cheap Labor Threaten ‘Made in China’ Textiles?

Andey Ng

Source Link

There is rising chatter about Vietnam and Bangladesh harnessing cheap labor to compete head on with the textile manufacturing “Made in China.” What does this mean for the 20 million people in China whose livelihoods are tied to the textiles industry?

When economic reforms began in the 1970s, China desperately needed a way to stimulate its economy and employ its large unskilled, cheap, yet willing workforce. Policymakers turned their attention to making China the manufacturing powerhouse of the world. Their success eventually coined the label “Made in China,” with 83 million people working in factories by 2000.

This push to manufacturing, particularly in the textiles industry, played a large role in pulling a stunning 800 million people in China out of extreme poverty, defined as those living on less than $1.90 per day. As of 2018, more than 700 million people in China have moved into the middle class.

Most of China’s textile manufacturing is clustered around the coastal regions of China, such as Guangdong, Zhejiang, Jiangsu, and Shandong. These provinces have historical and geographic advantage because their proximity to the ocean allows them to reap the benefits of logistics and shipping. After all, the cheapest way for transporting cargo is still via ships despite advances in aviation and trains. Especially with fashion trends constantly changing so rapidly, it’s crucial that the textile manufacturing hubs are near trade ports.

Do we have friends in Asia? Why revitalizing our Asian alliances is key to dealing with China

Morgan Ortagus

Source Link

Asian Alliances and American Interests

America’s strong alliance with Japan and South Korea and its large military presence in the Asia-Pacific region have kept the peace and promoted stability in this region since the end of World War II. Out of the ashes of that terrible war, Japan has become one of America’s closest and most trusted allies.

America’s relationship with South Korea is just as strong and has ensured deterrence along the Korean DMZ for the past 70 years. America’s strong support of Taiwan, coupled with its policy of “strategic ambiguity,” has prevented war with Communist China and helped safeguard the island republic’s freedom and security.

In recent years, the term “Asia-Pacific” has been replaced by some national security experts with the term “Indo-Pacific.” This is because of the growing threat posed by China both to Asia-Pacific nations and to India. Growing Chinese aggression against Taiwan, in the South China Sea, and along the India-China border has led regional states to pursue joint strategies to defend against China, such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the Quad), discussed later in this chapter.

Maintaining and strengthening America’s alliance with its Asian allies is crucial in light of growing threats in the region, not just from China but also from North Korea and Russia. Too often, American presidents become so distracted by conflicts in other areas of the world, especially the Middle East, that they neglect the security concerns of their Asian allies. This was true of the Obama Administration, which claimed it would “pivot to Asia” to deal with growing threats from Beijing. Instead, Obama and his team became obsessed with striking the disastrous 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.

[Vantage Point] China’s silent invasion of the Philippines

SPEECHIFY

Source Link

What if I tell you that China could invade the Philippines without firing a single shot? That it doesn’t even need to escalate the smoldering trouble in the West Philippine Sea? And the much talked about Mutual Defense Treaty would be rendered inutile because it precisely requires armed aggression to trigger intervention from the United States?

By this time, it is no longer a secret how the People’s Republic of China salivates over global dominance and that, unfortunately, the Chinese government finds the Philippines a strategic puzzle piece to achieve its ambition.

An article published recently by Italian quarterly Eurasia Magazine observes that China now practically owns a country, the People’s Democratic Republic of Laos, by putting it in debt to the tune of $5.25 billion, a debt that the latter can only hope to repay by signing away to the former its most important national assets: railways, airports and seaports, even roads and bridges.

A fate worse than that was awaiting the Philippines, but for the fact that then-president Rodrigo Duterte had run out of time. His six-year, non-renewable term had expired in 2022. He tried to revise the Constitution with the express purpose of removing the prohibition against re-election, but failed due to strong opposition from the Filipino people.

Russia and China Send Multiple Warships to Contested South China Sea

Ryan Chan

Source Link

The quasi-alliance of China and Russia is holding joint naval activities in the South China Sea, China's navy announced.

On Monday, the Chinese navy reported details about its fourth joint patrol with the Russian navy since 2021 in a post on a social platform. It said the joint naval formation had entered the South China Sea via the Balintang Channel the previous day.

The formation began the patrol in waters around South Korea's Jeju Island in the East China Sea earlier, the report said. It then transited the Osumi Strait near Japan eastward before heading southward to the South China Sea.

The U.S. Navy regularly holds joint exercises and patrols with its allied navies in the South China Sea. But it is rare for China to do the same, as it views the contested waters as its "backyard."

The Palestinian Authority Is Collapsing

Shira Efron and Michael J. Koplow

Source Link

Since April, nine countries—Armenia, the Bahamas, Barbados, Ireland, Jamaica, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, and Trinidad and Tobago—have formally recognized the state of Palestine. Belgium, Luxembourg, and Malta have hinted that they may soon follow suit. So has the United Kingdom’s new prime minister, Keir Starmer; in France, meanwhile, left-wing parties that joined the coalition that won the country’s recent election advocated for recognition. Nearly as many countries now recognize the state of Palestine (149, as well as one disputed territory, Western Sahara) as recognize Israel (165). The accelerating pace of recognitions could soon bring the two countries close to parity—and significantly, the new wave of states recognizing Palestine includes several large Western European countries whose leaders have openly said that they hope the rest of Europe will follow their lead.

The new recognitions of Palestine constitute a symbolic act of frustration with the bloody war in Gaza and Israeli policies in the West Bank. Leaders of the countries now recognizing Palestine have also indicated that they hope diplomatic recognition will have practical effects on the ground, boosting Palestinians’ sovereignty and bargaining power and improving the chances that the war could end with a successful two-state solution. Most of the outside actors trying to broker a long-term cease-fire between Israel and Hamas believe that advancing the creation of a viable Palestinian state must underpin any such deal. Norway’s prime minister, Jonas Gahr Store, called recognizing Palestine “an investment in the only solution that can bring lasting peace in the Middle East.”

The Lebanon War Is Coming

JUDITH MILLER

Source Link

Israel faces a conundrum to which there is no easily discernible, sustainable solution: how best to counter the growing strategic threat posed by Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite terrorist group that runs Lebanon.

On July 4, Hezbollah fired 200 rockets and more than 20 drones into northern Israel—one of its largest attacks to date—after Israel killed yet another of its high-ranking commanders in a drone strike in the Lebanese coastal city of Tyre. Lebanon’s National News Agency said that Muhammad Nimah Nasser, aka Abu Nimah, was killed along with two other passengers in the drone strike on July 3. Nasser, the head of Hezbollah’s Aziz unit, was reportedly responsible for military operations in southwestern Lebanon and for firing hundreds of rockets into Israel.

Nasser is the latest senior Hezbollah commander to be killed since Oct. 7, when Palestinian Hamas slaughtered some 1,200 people in southern Israel and took 240 hostages in the deadliest single attack on Jews since the Holocaust. Since then, Israel has killed seven Hezbollah lieutenant generals and some 360 fighters and commanders overall, according to estimates. For its part, Israel has lost at least 19 soldiers and 12 civilians in rockets fired from Lebanon.

Hezbollah’s latest rocket and drone barrage—part of a total of some 7,000 rockets and missiles that it has fired into Israel since Oct. 7—has increased concern about a possible escalation of the Israeli-Hamas war in Gaza into a full-scale conflict between the two heavily armed foes. With some 45,000 fighters and an arsenal of more than 150,000 rockets, drones, and missiles, many of them precision-guided, Hezbollah has always posed a far greater strategic threat to Israel than Hamas, which has been significantly degraded since Israel’s offensive in Gaza.

Israel's defense establishment in shock by Houthi Tel Aviv drone attack - analysis

YONAH JEREMY BOB

Source Link

The Israeli defense establishment is in a state of complete shock.

Though the writing was on the wall, no one saw it coming from a couple thousand kilometers away.

That is despite the fact that Hezbollah has managed to successfully strike Israel dozens of times with drones without being detected.

The Houthis and an Iranian militia from Iraq have successfully hit parts of Eilat, including a naval base, using drones from late 2023 to mid-2024, without being detected.

Israel has essentially outsourced its defense responses regarding the Houthis to the US.

Israeli security and rescue personnel at the scene of a drone explosion in Tel Aviv on July 19, 2024. (credit: ERIK MARMOR/FLASH90)

Only pre-October 7 thinking would have missed the possibility that the Houthis might attack other parts of Israel with drones.

And now one Israeli is dead and around a dozen wounded in the heart of one of Israel's two most important cities, Tel Aviv.

No sense of immediacy

Israel has been moving in slow motion when attempting to improve their agency of shooting down low-flying drones, which can outwit Israeli radar, anti-air batteries, and aircraft much better than ballistic rockets.

Trump allies draft AI order to launch ‘Manhattan Projects’ for defense

Cat Zakrzewski

Source Link

Former president Donald Trump’s allies are drafting a sweeping AI executive order that would launch a series of “Manhattan Projects” to develop military technology and immediately review “unnecessary and burdensome regulations” — signaling how a potential second Trump administration may pursue AI policies favorable to Silicon Valley investors and companies.

The framework would also create “industry-led” agencies to evaluate AI models and secure systems from foreign adversaries, according to a copy of the document viewed exclusively by The Washington Post. The framework — which includes a section titled “Make America First in AI” — presents a markedly different strategy for the booming sector than that of the Biden administration, which last year issued a sweeping executive order that leverages emergency powers to subject the next generation of AI systems to safety testing.

Employees from the America First Policy Institute, a nonprofit led by Trump’s former chief economic adviser Larry Kudlow and other ex-Trump officials, have been involved in the effort, according to a person familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private plans.

The Case for Inclusive Alliances

Jeremy Friedman

Source Link

“It is clear, absolutely clear,” said Joe Biden, speaking about today’s key geopolitical contest at his first press conference as president, “that this is a battle between the utility of democracies in the twenty-first century and autocracies.” It was a striking statement, but one that should not have come as a surprise. Many U.S. analysts and officials believe that Washington’s struggle against Beijing and Moscow is fundamentally an ideological one.

As precedent, these analysts cite the United States’ triumph against its last great competitor: the autocratic Soviet Union. For example, Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and

BRICS ‘Suspends’ Its Strategic Expansion: Implications And Challenges – Analysis

Kester Kenn Klomegah

Source Link

Russia has suspended BRICS expansion. It happened on the eve of the XVI summit under the motto “Strengthening Multilateralism for Equitable Global Development and Security” when a multitude of countries with interconnected interest are scheduled for converge in Kazan, capital city of the antonomous Republic of Tatarstan, Russia’s window to the lands of Islam and 2024 BRICS+ capital.

BRICS, most often described as an informal association comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, has unexpectedly backed away from its symbolic rhetoric of enlargement or expansion under Russia’s leadership. It has enrolled five new members: Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, thus transforming BRICS into a powerful association that challenges United States and Europe for their rules-based order and hegemony. Assessing its trending line of activities, BRICS unreservedly aspires to re-arrange the global economic architecture, criticizes the ‘exceptionalism’ of the well-established institutions such as the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

In addition, BRICS has set significant task to ensure a fairer interconnectedness between states, and enlist their active participation in the reconstruction of global economic architecture away from existing unipolarity. In order to realize this, BRICS introduced the concept of ‘de-dollarization’ and the term ‘multipolarity’ to the admiration of majority of developing countries in the Global South. An appreciated driver for this process is BRICS platform created to voice out broader common objectives, to engage in steadfast reforms and to roadmap better alternative socio-economic and political directions.

Expansion Controversy

Under Kremlin’s control during 2024, BRICS is envisioned on three distinctive policy principles: a shift towards bolstering a new economic architecture, respect for equal rights and protection of sovereignty, and sustaining a fairer participation in international relations. In a typical practice and as the geopolitical contest widens, BRICS approach focuses on ways to limit United States and Europe’s overarching strategic interests around the world. Then moreover, academic narratives have re-enforced the primary facts that BRICS is being transformed into a consolidated force to counterbalance Western-led economic institutions such as the G7, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank.

Pentagon Says US Goal In Middle East Is Easing Tensions, Finding Diplomatic Solutions

David Vergun

Source Link

The United States would like to see a ceasefire in Gaza, an easing of tensions along the Israel-Lebanon border and a cessation of Houthi aggression in the Red Sea area, said Pentagon Press Secretary Air Force Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder, who spoke to the media Tuesday.

The U.S. is working hard to obtain a ceasefire in Gaza, he said, which would allow humanitarian aid to flow in.

“This war is undoubtedly tragic. Way too many civilians have died. It’s heartbreaking to see the images that we see,” Ryder said.

The U.S. has been very clear, both privately and publicly, to its Israeli partners on the need to mitigate civilian harm in Gaza, the general said. “We know that they need to do more on this front, and we’re going to continue to communicate that to them.”

However, Hamas bears some responsibility for loss of life as they continue to embed among the civilian population, he said.

There is an urgent need for humanitarian assistance for the people of Gaza. The Defense Department will continue to support the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is the lead for the U.S.’s work with the international community, he said.

Regarding the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore temporary pier, which had been used to provide humanitarian support for Gaza, it remains in Ashdod, Israel, he said.

A potential re-anchoring date has not been set. The pier has always been intended as a temporary solution, and it will conclude its mission soon although no date has been set, the general said.

North And South Korea: Let Seoul Hit Back – Analysis

Yong Suk Lee

Source Link

(FPRI) — Long-time Korea observers Robert Carlin and Sieg Hecker claimed in an online article on January 11 this year that Kim Jong Un has made a strategic decision to go to war. Carlin and Hecker argue that Kim’s (tactical) decision for war would “only come after he concluded [that] all other options had been exhausted, and that the previous strategy shaping North Korea policy since 1990 had irrevocably failed.” Just a few days later, Kim Jong Un abandoned reunification as a national aspiration in a speech and declared that South Korea is a “primary foe and principal enemy,” further fueling regional and international concerns about a possible conflict on the peninsula.

North Korea’s martial declarations or threats of war should not come as a surprise for Korea experts, however. The North has been at war with the United States and South Korea since 1950. North Korea in its current form is an ideological expression of the Kim family of rulers, from Kim Il Sung to Kim Jong Il and now Kim Jong Un. Pyongyang has made clear that its primary goal is preservation of the Kim family regime and dynastic succession, not the well-being of the North Korean people, dedicating North Korea’s meager economic resources to build strategic arms to guard the throne. Kim Jong Un’s right to rule comes from the barrel of a gun, as it did for his father and grandfather, and a constant state of conflict with his own people or foes, real or imagined, is the paranoid reality of his regime.

No amount of assurances and economic aid from the United States and South Korea can soothe Pyongyang’s paranoia, although successive South Korean administrations have tried. Unfortunately, South Korea’s very existence is an existential threat to North Korea because it runs counter to the ideological foundation of the Kim family of rulers, showing the world that Koreans can live just fine—free, wealthy, and vibrant—without the Kims.

North Korea has frequently lashed out against South Korea militarily. In March 2010, the North sank a South Korean warship, killing forty-six sailors. In November of the same year, it bombarded a South Korean–held island, Yeonpyeong Do, in the Yellow Sea, resulting in four dead and eighteen seriously wounded. Pyongyang used a South Korean marine corps military exercise occurring on the island as an excuse for the artillery attack. The North Korean attack was well rehearsed and coincided with an internal propaganda campaign to boost the standings of the heir apparent at the time, Kim Jong Un, as an “artillery genius,”according to South Korean officials.

IMF And World Bank Working Together To Scale Up Climate Finance – Speech

Tobias Adrian

Source Link

International Roundtable for Scaling Up Climate Finance for Benin

I would like to warmly thank the authorities for hosting this kickoff meeting for scaling up climate finance for Benin. I would also like to thank the World Bank Group for co-convening and co-chairing this meeting with the government and the IMF.

The IMF, the World Bank Group, and development partners have supported climate-relevant policy reforms through budget support and through funding for relevant investment projects, across a diversity of sectors—primarily energy, transportation, and agriculture. Benin has been a front-runner on climate policy and finance in the region, both to build climate change resilience and to ensure low-carbon development. The agreement reached by Benin with the IMF in December last year, on a US$200 million Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF), aims to support the authorities in implementing their vision. This lending arrangement aims not only at supporting overall socio-economic resilience, but also at mainstreaming climate change in policymaking and addressing key structural challenges that expose Benin to climate shocks. It should help mitigate balance-of-payment risks and catalyze other sources of climate financing. The RSF has also contributed to creating momentum to implement recommendations from the Benin Country Climate and Development Report (CCDR) of the World Bank.

Benin has taken ambitious commitments for climate change adaptation and mitigation, outlined respectively in the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) and the Nationally Determined Contribution. Under the 2022 NAP, the authorities have committed to focus on agriculture, water, forestry, coastal erosion, health, tourism, and more broadly on reducing vulnerability across all key sectors. In Benin’s updated 2021 Nationally Determined Contribution, the focus is primarily on energy, agriculture, manufacturing, waste, land use and forestry. It reflects an increase in ambition to reduce emissions by 20.5 percent by 2030. The country has significant potential in developing solar energy, a sustainable food production export model, and a clean mobility strategy. Co-benefits from a low-carbon and resilient energy mix would mostly accrue in the telecoms, agriculture, water management, and transportation sectors, while increasing energy security and preventing future stranding of assets.

Here Comes Terminator: Former Joint Chiefs Chairman Predicts U.S. Military Will be Armed With Robots

Peter Suciu 

Source Link

-Current policies mandate human control over lethal munitions, but AI advancements may change this. As recruitment struggles persist, autonomous systems are increasingly viewed as a solution.

-The U.S. Army, Air Force, and Navy are integrating AI and robotics into their operations. However, the ethical implications of AI making life-and-death decisions remain a concern. Other nations, including China and Russia, are also developing autonomous military platforms, raising global stakes.

Robots to Constitute One-Third of U.S. Military by 2039, Predicts Former Joint Chiefs Chairman

In what could almost certainly sound like the backstory for a future science fiction film, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that the U.S. military could see one-third of its force composed of robots and other autonomous systems by the end of 2039.

Cue the theme to The Terminator, and plan for the rise of the machines!

“Ten to fifteen years from now, my guess is a third, maybe 25% to a third of the U.S. military will be robotic,” retired U.S. Army general Mark Milley explained earlier this month at an Axios event to launch the outlet’s “Future of Defense” newsletter.

These wouldn’t be remotely controlled systems, like most of today’s unmanned aerial systems, but rather robotic platforms that could be controlled and even directly commanded by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. However, Milley acknowledged that technology doesn’t have any mortality. For that reason, current U.S. policy still stipulates that a human operator is in control when it comes to the use of lethal munitions and that it requires a human to maintain the “ethical framework” for any decisionmaking.

The Cost of Woke Ideology in Homeland Security

Brian J. Cavanaugh

Source Link 

The assassination attempt on President Donald J. Trump on July 13, 2024, has underscored a critical issue within the United States Secret Service and, more broadly, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS): the problematic influence of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies. Initially introduced under former President Obama and aggressively expanded under President Biden, these policies have prioritized ideology over merit and mission, with severe consequences for our nation's security.

In a future Trump administration, the role of Secretary of Homeland Security will be crucial, leading efforts to restore security and sovereignty to our borders and deporting illegal immigrants who have violated our laws. Now, there is an additional, pressing priority: the termination of DEI policies and the department's focus on its primary national security mission. While the intentions behind DEI initiatives can be debated, the unintended consequences have proven detrimental. These policies have diverted critical resources, introduced divisive practices, and impeded merit-based performance and decision-making.

The primary argument for eliminating DEI policies is their detrimental impact on operational effectiveness. DEI initiatives have imposed additional administrative burdens and operational constraints that detract from DHS's core mission. Instead of streamlining processes to respond swiftly to national security threats, the focus has shifted to meeting DEI benchmarks. This shift has compromised the department's ability to perform its essential functions efficiently. In the case of the Secret Service, the prioritizing DEI over meritocratic standards may have contributed to the lapses leading up to the assassination attempt on President Trump and have played a role in the vacuum of leadership and accountability within the Secret Service.

The US Needs a Techno-Industrial Strategy

LIZA TOBIN and ADDIS GOLDMAN

Source Link

China’s efforts to shift its economic model toward advanced industries demand a powerful US response. By driving investments toward advanced manufacturing, pursuing a strategic trade policy, and strengthening its workforce, the US can leverage its existing advantages to cement its leadership in the industries of the future.

WASHINGTON, DC – In the wake of the Great Recession of 2008-09, practically everyone seemed convinced that China’s economy would surpass that of the United States by 2030. Today, China is facing a range of crises that could spell doom for its economic “miracle.” In an effort to get back on track – and strengthen its strategic position – China has lately been seeking to position advanced industries, rather than real estate, as the economy’s main growth engine. How the US responds will help determine the outcome of the two countries’ strategic competition – and the future of the global economy.

Israel Is Enabling Iran’s War of Attrition

SHLOMO BEN-AMI

Source Link

TEL AVIV – In 2017, Iran unveiled a digital clock counting down the days to the destruction of Israel in 2040. The display, located in Tehran’s Palestine Square, embodies the Islamic Republic’s long-held commitment to annihilating the Jewish state. Some view this promise as a mere rhetorical exercise to rally support at home and throughout the Muslim world. But as the Gaza war drags on and seems poised to expand, many in Israel, including former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, see an actionable plan that Iran seeks to execute, the consequences be damned.

The drive to eliminate Israel is rooted in the Shia eschatological belief that the Mahdi, the Twelfth Imam and Islamic messiah, will reappear at the end of the world. The Iranian regime increasingly sees Israel’s eradication as a necessary step for the Mahdi’s return. The founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, attributed Islam’s historical decline to a foreign conspiracy, accusing Western powers of using Zionism to penetrate the Middle East. From this perspective, liberating Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem from Israeli control and destroying the Zionist regime would redeem and renew contemporary Islam.

Worryingly, many in the Iranian regime have indicated that the time is right to achieve this sacred goal. In 2020, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Khomeini’s successor as supreme leader, called the Zionist regime a “cancerous tumor” that will “undoubtedly be uprooted and destroyed.” Late last year, Hossein Salami, the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, vowed to remove Israel “from the face of existence” after an Israeli airstrike in Damascus killed a high-ranking Iranian general.

From Adolf Hitler to Vladimir Putin and even Osama bin Laden, history has taught us to take threats of ideologically inspired attacks at face value. But the Islamic Republic has amply demonstrated its cautiousness – being radical doesn’t necessarily mean being irrational and suicidal. Rather than a historic showdown, nuclear or conventional, Iran seems to be waging a long-term war of attrition against Israel.

Israel’s Undercover Forces Emerge as Gaza’s Newest Battlefield Player

Dov Lieber

Source Link

TEL AVIV—The Israeli commandos who rescued four hostages in Gaza drove a pair of battered white trucks—one displaying a soap advertisement, the other bearing a mattress and furniture on the roof. They were armed, but their main weapon was disguise, blending into a Hamas stronghold until the guns started firing.

The early June rescue mission has become the most prominent example of Israel’s famous undercover units on the battlefield in the Gaza Strip, a dangerous foray into a territory that its covert forces once found nearly impenetrable. Subterfuge is a skill set that Israel’s security services have honed for decades in the West Bank, with operatives known as “mista’arvim”—a Hebrew moniker borrowed from an Arabic term for people steeped in Arab culture.

Now, the covert unit’s presence in Gaza adds a volatile new element to the war zone, where a blown cover could be disastrous and civilian disguises sometimes constitute a war crime.

Hamas fighters are also operating in civilian garb in Gaza.

Who Is Usha Vance, J.D. Vance’s Wife?

NIK POPLI

Source Link

As Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance was getting ready to make his debut as former President Donald Trump’s new vice presidential pick on the first day of the Republican National Convention, he stopped for a second to soak in the moment with his wife, Usha Vance.

The couple, who met at Yale Law School, shared a kiss backstage and then strode onto the floor together, greeted by a wave of cheers and “J.D.” chants reverberating through the arena as he was nominated by voice vote to be Trump’s running mate. The moment culminated a dramatic evolution for the first-term Senator and former Trump critic who has quickly ascended to become a pivotal figure in the MAGA movement. But it also marked a significant new chapter for Usha Vance, as she was thrust into the national spotlight alongside her husband.

Notably, if the Trump-Vance ticket were to win in November, Usha Vance would make history as the first Indian American and first practicing Hindu to serve as Second Lady.

When she took the stage on the third night of the convention to introduce her husband, she remarked on their cultural differences: “That J.D. and I could meet at all, let alone fall in love and marry is a testament to this great country,” she said. “It is also a testament to J.D., and it tells you something about who he is… He wanted to know everything about me, where I came from, what my life had been like. Although he’s a meat and potatoes kind of guy, he adapted to my vegetarian diet and learned to cook food for my mother—Indian food. Before I knew it, he’d become an integral part of my family.”

J.D. Vance has spoken highly of his wife in interviews, describing her as exceptionally intelligent and more accomplished than himself. Here’s what to know about Usha Vance.

Playing Catch-Up on Grand Strategy

Source Link

“Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” – Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War

In his lead essay, Jerry Hendrix argues that the United States and its leaders are unprepared for the re-emergence of great power competition. We agree that the leaders and populations of the free world are unprepared, but differ slightly on the character of that competition. Hendrix divides the world between authoritarian and liberal democracies. The world is a lot fuzzier and not as binary as this simplistic formula would suggest. We would propose that there is an older, more elemental framework at play today. The ghosts of the early twentieth-century prophets of geopolitics—Halford Mackinder, Alfred Thayer Mahan, and Nicholas Spykman—have returned to haunt the twenty-first century, to deliver a warning and to offer a framework for understanding how grand strategy and geopolitics should be shaped in relation to emerging global forces and power structures.

Mackinder, as a continental power proponent, believed that control of the “World-Island”—the interlinked continents of Europe, Asia, and Africa (Afro-Eurasia)—would confer dominance of the international system. The key advantage of the World-Island was the Heartland, stretching from the Volga to the Yangtze and from the Himalayas to the Arctic, with the combined entity’s large East Asian coastline enabling it to become a major sea power. Meanwhile, he envisaged that the offshore continents of North America, South America, and Oceania, as well as the British Isles and Japan, would struggle to compete with a Heartland that, with expansion into Afro-Eurasia and internal lines of communication, could access and exploit over half of the world’s resources.

The Case for Inclusive Alliances

Jeremy Friedman

Source Link

“It is clear, absolutely clear,” said Joe Biden, speaking about today’s key geopolitical contest at his first press conference as president, “that this is a battle between the utility of democracies in the twenty-first century and autocracies.” It was a striking statement, but one that should not have come as a surprise. Many U.S. analysts and officials believe that Washington’s struggle against Beijing and Moscow is fundamentally an ideological one.

As precedent, these analysts cite the United States’ triumph against its last great competitor: the autocratic Soviet Union. For example, Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and

Why the United Nations Is Chasing Its Tail on Cybersecurity

James Andrew Lewis

Source Link

Sometime in late October 1963, the United States and the Soviet Union reached the brink of nuclear war. Fortunately, war was averted, but the experience of the near miss led both sides to negotiate seriously on how to reduce the risk of nuclear war and how to manage the horrific consequences of new weapons. The threat of nuclear war in 1963 was the starting point of a long series of talks between opponents that ultimately produced meaningful agreements on weapons of mass destruction and on measures to promote stability and reduce the risk of armed conflict. While that edifice of agreements has recently begun to crumble as Russia and the United States reconsider concessions and as the older, bipolar arrangement is pressed by the emergence of China (which was never party to these agreements), 1963 still provides a vantage point for assessing cybersecurity negotiations.

The nuclear experience shaped cybersecurity agreements—for example, the 2015 consensus report of the UN Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security used language on confidence-building measures from Cold War agreements—and still offers lessons. First, opponents must want to negotiate. They are more likely to do so if they perceive serious, even existential, risk. Cyber actions do not create that kind of risk. No one has died from a cyberattack, and economic losses are easily absorbed. Hostile cyber actions, particularly espionage, produce a steady erosion of security, but this has not reached the point where it is unacceptable. There is apparently no desire for serious negotiation (i.e., negotiations leading to concessions by those who possess advanced cyber capabilities).