Asian Powers Set Their Strategic Sights on Europe

C. Raja Mohan

Source Link

What has often been circumscribed as “the rise of the rest”—the relative ascendancy of the non-Western powers—has been felt particularly acutely in Asia. When the Portuguese navigator Vasco da Gama reached India’s southwestern Kerala coast in 1498, it marked the start of 500 years of European (and later U.S.) dominance over Asia—colonial, imperial, and geopolitical. Decolonization from the middle of the 20th century onward did not much alter Western dominance, nor did it end Asia’s deference to Europe.

How Taliban Rule Has Reshaped Higher Education in Afghanistan

Abdul Aziz Mohibbi and Noah Coburn

Source Link

Women wave Taliban flags as they sit inside an auditorium at Kabul University’s education center during a demonstration in support of the Taliban government in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sept. 11, 2021.Credit: AP Photo/Felipe Dana

Three years ago, Roya was well on her way to her lifelong dream of a career in medicine. She excelled in her high school classes and took extra tutoring sessions to prepare for the Kankor or university entrance exam. When she took the exam in early 2021, she was thrilled to receive one of the highest marks in the country.

Now she says she regrets all that work. “There is no future for me in Afghanistan,” Roya said.

Three years of Taliban rule have made it clear that policies toward higher education are not just about separating men and women, but are about remaking Afghan society. Taliban policies and oppression have worked to gradually, but effectively, undo much of the expansion of higher education between 2001 and 2021 and have changed how a generation of Afghans are thinking about their futures.

While international media attention focused mostly on the banning of girls from secondary education, the Taliban’s strategy toward higher education suggests they view this area as a priority in their work to remake Afghan society. Minister of Higher Education Neda Mohammad is a close ally of Hibatullah, the supreme leader of the Taliban regime, and the head of the Office of the National Examination Authority is a key member of the Haqqani group.

This is an extreme reorientation from the Ministry of Higher Education of the democratically-elected government, which with international support, expanded the number of students in universities to almost half a million between 2001 and 2021.

Hasina is out. Yunus is in. Here are the three biggest factors to watch in Bangladesh.

Ali Riaz

Source Link

The spectacular and rapid fall of Sheikh Hasina and her regime, followed by her ignominious exit from Bangladesh on August 5, is not only unprecedented in the history of the nation, which has previously experienced several, albeit less dramatic mass upsurges and downfalls of dictators in its turbulent history. It also surprised many Bangladesh watchers. The aura of invincibility that she and her party created over the past decade and a half crumbled in a matter of hours. A few weeks of demonstrations led by students and joined by people from all walks of life brought down the state’s administrative edifice. Moreover, the demonstrations did so despite the fact that the most lethal state apparatuses—the police, the Border Guard Bangladesh, the Rapid Action Battalion, and Awami League activists—were unleashed against the protesters with shoot-on-sight orders during the state-imposed curfew. The country, which was standing at the crossroads of closed autocracy and a democratic turnaround since the stage-managed election in January, suddenly watched a groundswell that appeared to be unthinkable even days ago.

Such dramatic developments have put the country in uncharted territory. Three aspects of the developing situation warrant attention.

What will the interim government look like?

On August 6, a day after Hasina fled Bangladesh, the country’s only Nobel Prize winner, Muhammad Yunus, was selected to lead the interim government. His name was proposed by the student protesters, who have spearheaded the movement. The choice of Yunus is a clear testimony that unlike on previous occasions, when political parties, in consultation with the military and bureaucracy, decided who would head the government, a new political force is making the decision this time around. The students have emerged as the center of power, and will seek to exercise that power in the selection of the interim government’s cabinet.

It is notable that the appointment of Yunus is beyond the purview of the existing constitution. While the political actors and army leaders appear to be operating with the understanding that Bangladeshi President Mohammed Shahabuddin is the chief executive, they seem to recognize that under the circumstances, all actions draw their legitimacy from the student-led movement.

Residents Flee From Myanmar Military Garrison Town as Resistance Attack Looms

Sebastian Strangio

Source Link

The clock tower in the center of Pyin Oo Lwin, Myanmar.

Residents of the hill town of Pyin Oo Lwin in Myanmar, including relatives of civil servants and military personnel, are reportedly fleeing south amid rumors of an attack by resistance groups on the town.

The Irrawaddy and other local sources yesterday published photos of cars choking the highway down to Mandalay, Myanmar’s second-largest city, which lies just 64 kilometers to the west. Radio Free Asia (RFA) quoted one resident as saying that “family members of civil servants have been sent to Mandalay and Naypyidaw,” adding, “The locals are worried.”

Pyin Oo Lwin, a scenic hill town in Mandalay Region formerly known as Maymyo, is the home of the Myanmar military’s Defense Forces Academy and is a key garrison town for the armed forces.

Following recent advances in Shan State and Mandalay Region, there are reports that the Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) and allied People’s Defense Forces (PDFs) will soon begin an offensive on the town. In late June, the TNLA and its allies in the Three Brotherhood Alliance launched the second phase of their Operation 1027 offensive, which has made rapid progress along the axis of the major highway linking Mandalay to the Chinese border.

In northern Shan State, the TNLA’s ally, the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, has succeeded in capturing Lashio, the largest city in northern Shan State, consigning the military junta to perhaps its most significant defeat since the coup of February 2021.

Steps Needed To Stem Bangladesh’s Return To Dictatorship And Communalism – Analysis

P. K. Balachandran

Source Link

The newly appointed Chief Advisor to the Interim Government of Bangladesh, Nobel Laureate Dr.Muhammad Yunus, has called for an end to the violence and vandalism that a re continuing even after the flight of the despised dictator Sheikh Hasina.

President Mohammad Shahabuddin has asked policemen who had left their posts fearing violent retribution, to return to their posts in 24 hours. In the absence of the police, university students are directing traffic on roads and have formed committees to protect the lives and properties of the Hindus including their temples that were being targeted by the supporters of the Jamaat-e-Islami and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

The government of India, which is particularly concerned about the safety of the Hindu minority, has not taken a hostile stand and is hoping that the new regime will protect the minorities. But the same cannot be said about sections of the Indian media which are using the current spurt in attacks on Hindus to sharpen anti-Muslim feelings in India and benefit from it politically.

Kinmen Is Unlikely to Become Taiwan’s Crimea

Justyna Szczudlik

Source Link

As a China and Taiwan analyst, the so-called Kinmen issue has been on my mind, especially amid Xi Jinping’s increasing intimidation of Taiwan. I have to admit that it was very easy for me to imagine why Xi would want to seize Kinmen (or/and the Matsu Islands, or even the Pescadores) and then wait and see what the United States and the world would do. Annexing Kinmen and Matsu in particular seems very easy given their geographical proximity and the capabilities of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), or – even easier – the option of cutting off Kinmen’s water supply from the PRC.

This scenario seems very appealing – easy, cheap, and a good way to test Taiwan’s defense capabilities, U.S. commitments, and the free world’s true adherence to international law. But after visiting Kinmen and talking to people in Taiwan about this particular scenario, I realized that my assumptions were, at the very least, oversimplified.

I fully agree with Sam Goodman’s thesis, put forth in a recent Diplomat article, that Kinmen is the frontline of China’s gray zone operations against Taiwan. I also agree with his recommendations that the international community should be aware of and consider the possibility that a crisis between China and Taiwan could begin with the annexation of Kinmen. No scenario can be ruled out.

However, I disagree with Goodman’s main idea that Beijing could follow the Crimea example and use Russia’s playbook of “encouraging local actors to publicly push for reunification,” which would “create a smokescreen for the PRC to annex Kinmen.” China’s gray zone and cognitive warfare tactics are one issue; a Crimea-like scenario is another. We should not confuse the two. The latter, in my view, is too simplistic and unlikely to happen in Kinmen for five reasons.

The Annexation Of Taiwan In Xi Jinping’s Timeline – OpEd

Sarah Neumann

Source Link

The conflict between China and Taiwan regarding independence or annexation has persisted since the end of World War II. However, since the mid-2000s, this issue has escalated significantly, largely due to the intensifying global competition in economic, political, and geopolitical spheres between the United States and China, which has become a defining element of the new world order. Additionally, Taiwan’s transformation into a major hub for semiconductor production—crucial to modern industrial, technological, financial, and logistical advancements—has heightened tensions among Beijing, Taipei, and Washington.

Taiwan’s strategic geographical location further underscores its importance. China is encircled by archipelagos hosting U.S. military bases and allied nations. For the United States, Taiwan serves as a critical pressure point on China’s access routes, whereas for China, it represents the “first island chain.” By integrating Taiwan and artificial islands under construction, China aims to complete its Anti-access/Area denial (A2/AD) strategy in the Western Pacific, thereby disrupting the U.S. containment efforts.

In 1972, Mao Zedong told Richard Nixon that Beijing could wait a century to reclaim Taiwan. However, Xi Jinping appears far less patient. According to U.S. intelligence, Xi has instructed the People’s Liberation Army to be ready for an operation to annex Taiwan by 2027. Various factors, however, could accelerate this timeline, potentially prompting a forcible annexation sooner.

Taiwan seeks independence and requires the support of a major power to counter China, making the United States its best ally. Taiwan leverages its semiconductor production capabilities to gain this support. It manufactures over 60% of the world’s advanced digital, analog, and mixed-signal chips, serving as a primary supplier to U.S. tech companies and defense contractors. Moreover, Taiwan fully cooperates with U.S. sanctions against China, especially regarding the use of integrated circuits made by Taiwanese companies like TSMC, thereby intensifying China’s determination to pursue Taiwan’s annexation more seriously.

China Is Neither Collapsing Nor Booming

Howard W. French

Source Link

I felt a sense of relief last week when I got into the hired car that would take me to my hotel after arriving at Shanghai Pudong International Airport, exhausted and a little disoriented after a long flight from New York.

How Primed for War Is China?

Michael Beckley

Source Link

How likely is China to start a war? This may be the single-most important question in international affairs today. If China uses military force against Taiwan or another target in the Western Pacific, the result could be war with the United States—a fight between two nuclear-armed giants brawling for hegemony in that region and the wider world. If China attacked amid ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, the world would be consumed by interlocking conflicts across Eurasia’s key regions, a global conflagration unlike anything since World War II.

China Is Betting Big on Its ‘Little Giants’

Sarah Mujeeb

Source Link

In 2018, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) defined China’s “little giants” (小巨人) as companies with an annual revenue of 100-400 million yuan (roughly $14 million to $56 million), annual profit growth of at least 10 percent, R&D or innovation staff accounting for more than 15 percent of their total workforce, and at least five innovation patents related to products or 15 design patents.

China’s 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025) clearly stated the goal to “promote the increase of professional advantages by SMEs and cultivate specialized and new ‘little giant’ enterprises and single- product champion (单项冠军) enterprises in the manufacturing industry.” The target of 10,000 little giants set by the 14th Five-Year Plan has already been attained; as per media reports at the end July 2024, China’s push to promote small and medium enterprises (SMEs) for technology advancement and new product development resulted in the creation of 140,000 SMEs with 12,000 of those being little giants.

China’s little giants are found in all the industrial categories in the U.N. Industrial Classification and are forming a key part of supply chains. 90 percent of these little giants cater to the requirements of big firms, locally and globally.

The strategy of supporting little giants is in sync with China’s Made in China 2025 campaign. Policy implementation is evident, with little giants receiving incentives both from the central and provincial governments. The central government created an exclusive package of 10 billion yuan for 1,000 little giants during the 14th Five-Year Plan.

Beijing’s reactions to supply chain shifts away from China – dubbed “de-risking” by the United States and European Union – can be gauged from the highlights of its state media reports. There is a repetitive insistence that China’s manufacturing remains insulated from the global headwinds and small shifts in labor intensive sectors, with the caveat that the firms still need to import intermediate parts from China. Often, these intermediate parts are made not by China’s global champions, by the its little giants.

What Iran Might Do Next

Ravi Agrawal

Source Link

All of the Middle East can agree on one thing right now: Something big is coming. Airlines are canceling flights to major cities in Iran, Israel, and Lebanon as they await a major new escalation in the conflict that has roiled the region for 10 months.

Who Are These Houthis? – OpEd

Neville Teller

Source Link

Who are these Houthis? The short answer is: pawns in Iran’s master plan.

For 45 years the upholders of Iran’s Islamic Revolution have been intent on consolidating and extending its sphere of influence across the Shia Muslim world. Once known as the Shia Crescent, and more recently, as Sunni extremists have been added, as the Axis of Resistance, regimes and organizations subservient to Iran stretch through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon down to the Gaza Strip. By converting the Houthis of Yemen into a dependent entity, Iran has now gained a foothold on the Arabian peninsula. It brings the Iranian leadership one step closer toward the fundamental purpose of the regime’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

On July 24, during his address to a joint session of Congress, prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to this.

“When he founded the Islamic Republic,” said Netanyahu, “Ayatollah Khomeini pledged: We will export our revolution to the entire world.”

Is Ukraine’s raid into Russia a ‘crossing the Delaware’ moment?

Daniel Fried

Source Link

Ukrainian forces, on the defensive in eastern Ukraine, have mounted an audacious raid into Russia’s Kursk Province, capturing enemy soldiers and destroying equipment, surprising and discomforting the Kremlin. What strategic significance might it have?

Some raids have no impact on the course of a war. In the summer of 1864, with Union forces besieging Richmond and Petersburg, Confederate General Jubal Early mounted a large and spectacular raid north into Maryland and then southeast into the District of Columbia. Early’s troops stopped just five miles from the US Capitol. It was spectacular but inconsequential, however: The raid distracted the Union command for a few days but made no difference to the outcome of the war.

Other raids do have strategic impact. In 1776, George Washington’s forces had been routed from New York and chased out of New Jersey. Morale was low and political support for the American fight for independence was flagging. In a risky maneuver that December, Washington led a large raid across the Delaware River, surprised enemy forces, and returned to Pennsylvania with captured prisoners and supplies. The raid revived morale and support for the war, demonstrated the Continental Army’s tactical cunning, audacity, and tenacity against a superior foe, and presaged eventual victory.

An expert's point of view on a current event.

Markus Garlauskas

Source Link

In this handout image released by the South Korean Defense Ministry, South Korean Navy's destroyer Yulgok Yi I (R) U.S. Navy's aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (C) and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force's Umigiri, (L) sail in formation during a joint naval exercise in international waters off South Korea's southern island of Jeju on Apr. 4, 2023

In this handout image released by the South Korean Defense Ministry, South Korean Navy's destroyer Yulgok Yi I (R) U.S. Navy's aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (C) and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force's Umigiri, (L) sail in formation during a joint naval exercise in international waters off South Korea's southern island of Jeju on Apr. 4, 2023 Photo by South Korean Defense Ministry via Getty Images

Ukraine pierces Russian border, triggering fierce clashes

Guy Faulconbridge and Lidia Kelly

Source Link

MOSCOW, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Russia said on Wednesday it was fighting intense battles against Ukrainian forces that had penetrated its southern border near a major natural gas transmission hub, in one of the largest incursions into Russian territory since the war began.

The acting governor of Kursk region, Alexey Smirnov, said he had introduced a state of emergency in the border region. Regional officials said that meant restricting access to specific areas.

Russia's health ministry said 31 civilians, including six children, had been wounded. Smirnov said on Tuesday that five people had been killed.

No information on military casualties was available.

Russia's National Guard said it had beefed up security around the nearby Kursk nuclear power station and its four reactors.

Russia has advanced this year after the failure of Ukraine's 2023 counteroffensive to achieve major gains, and has taken 420 square km (162 square miles) of territory from Ukrainian forces since June 14, Russian officials say.

Ukraine struck back on Tuesday, and battles continued through the night into Wednesday as Ukrainian forces pushed to the northwest of the border town of Sudzha, 530 km (330 miles) southwest of Moscow, Russia's defence ministry said.

"The Kyiv regime has launched another major provocation," President Vladimir Putin told members of the Russian government, referring to the attack in Kursk region.

Campus Protests Embolden Terrorist Groups

David Fridovich & Kim Cole , Jacob Olidort

Source Link

The aftermath of the burning of an effigy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and also an Israeli flag as protestors look on, Wednesday, July 24, 2024, in Washington near Union Station and the U.S. Capitol. 

Although colleges are closed for the summer, the anti-Israel demonstrators continue to provide fodder to terrorist groups and leaders, including Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei who praised the protesters as a “branch of the Resistance Front” who are “on the right side of history.”

The encampments – which mushroomed to over 40 campuses in less than a week in late April and whose stated goal is divesting U.S. universities from Israel – have been a key propaganda tool for global jihadists’ radicalization campaign since their emergence.

In early May, U.K.-based al-Qaeda preacher Hani al-Siba’i lauded university protests as “the university intifada” – referencing Palestinian terrorist waves in the late 1990s and early 2000s – and called on followers to support their efforts against the United States, which he described as “based on terrorism” and “founded on murder and blood.”

Hezbollah’s deputy head Naim Qassam similarly praised the protesters in an early May interview, noting not only how they help change U.S. policy but can help drive terrorist recruitment. “The Israelis and the Americans will discover that with this type of aggression, they have laid the foundation for perpetual resistance of children and fetuses at an earlier age than the age fighters become qualified in the past,” he explained. “They will have an impact on the American position,” he noted, “Even if Biden says that he will not be influenced by this, he will whether he likes it or not.”

Kyle Balzer, “Knowing Your Enemy”: James Schlesinger and the Origins of Competitive, Tailored Deterrence Strategies, No. 596, August 8, 2024

Dr. Kyle Balzer

Source Link

In the years ahead, the United States will confront an unprecedented geopolitical challenge that threatens its far-flung alliances and, more directly, the security of the American homeland. For the first time in the nuclear age, the United States will face two peer nuclear adversaries, China and Russia. The bipartisan Strategic Posture Commission recently addressed this unparalleled situation, concluding that the United States “must urgently prepare for the new reality, and measures need to be taken now to deal with these new threats.”[1]

But how should the United States prepare for a two-peer threat environment? The strategic sensibility of James R. Schlesinger, a pioneering Cold War strategist who confronted the rise of a peer nuclear adversary, can help address this question. Given the confounding nature of the emerging strategic landscape, it may seem puzzling to turn to the past. Schlesinger, after all, thought and wrote about deterring just one great-power adversary, the Soviet Union.

Notwithstanding this glaring difference, Schlesinger recognized a fundamental feature of peacetime competition that transcends time, space, and number of peer rivals: Adversaries hold distinctive values and behavioral tendencies that defy “rational” mirror-imaging. Moreover, a wise competitor, as Schlesinger understood, will exploit his opponent’s self-damaging proclivities to secure competitive advantages. U.S. nuclear strategy, as such, should be tailored to adversary thinking—not that of American planners. The totality of Mutual Assured Destruction—the idea that the nuclear balance is irreversibly stalemated—has not nurtured a community of like-minded nuclear powers. Nor has it erased the need to compete for comparative advantage.

This Information Series proceeds in three parts, stretching Schlesinger’s career as a University of Virginia economics professor (1956-1963), RAND Corporation analyst (1963-1969), and secretary of defense (1973-1975). The conclusion offers lessons for today, underscoring that “knowing your enemy” is a demanding challenge that deserves sustained attention.

Where is U.S. Foreign Policy Headed?

Lawrence J. Korb 

Source Link

The first presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump resulted in a media blitzkrieg of hysteria about Biden’s performance, which continued through the Republican convention and led to Biden’s eventual withdrawal from the race. The New York Times editorial board and other prestige media sites, supported by some leading Democratic fundraisers and politicians, including from the Democratic Senate and House leaders, called for Biden to withdraw from the race for the White House. It’s understandable to some extent that the media, whose professional obsession is with communication, and the many Democratic members of the House and Senate, who are concerned about their own elections, would declare Biden’s performance a disaster. On the other hand, with respect to the substance of policy, as opposed to the optics of stage performance, the debate was one blip in a journey that will require more months of campaigning and electioneering between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris to sort out.

Of particular importance in this regard are the candidates’ and parties’ respective positions on foreign policy and U.S. military strategy. The world is transforming an immediate post-Cold War euphoria of American triumphalism and liberal democratic hubris to a more complicated picture. The return of wars and other conflicts among major powers, especially with respect to the rising capabilities and aspirations of China and Russia, creates uncertainty about the United States’ political objectives and military readiness in Europe and Asia. In addition, unprecedented challenges in climate change and pandemics; efforts to dethrone the dollar as the benchmark currency for international transactions; mass migration in unprecedented numbers; and new technologies for cyberwar, artificial intelligence, and the military uses of space all contribute to a possible bow wave of political regime destabilization and military planning vexation. Today’s certainties for politicians and their military advisors are tomorrow’s guesswork.

Securing America’s Critical Minerals: A Policy Priority Conundrum

Ansel Bayly and Sarah Tzinieris

Source Link

U.S. President Joe Biden (second from left) participates in a roundtable on securing critical minerals for a future made in America, in the South Court Auditorium in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building at the White House, Feb. 22, 2022.

“When I think about climate change, I think jobs,” U.S. President Joe Biden has repeatedly said. His landmark Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) embodies this idea, tying together U.S. climate and industrial policies with a vast array of subsidies aimed at sparking a green manufacturing boom. Built into these subsidies are mechanisms to secure U.S. supply chains and to shore up domestic manufacturing, which has atrophied in recent decades, strategic priorities that Biden inherited from his predecessor, Donald Trump.

Although recent U.S. policymaking has exhibited a hyperfocus on supply chain security for semiconductors and other dual-use items, an area of equal – arguably greater – strategic significance is the supply of critical minerals, the building blocks of most advanced technologies, including those with military application.

Ever-present, but often unspoken, in Washington’s supply chain strategy is China. From the nickel used in fighter jet engines to the rare earth elements used in wind turbines, China’s dominance in the global supply of critical minerals presents a potential chokehold on U.S. industry. China accounts for 77 percent of the world’s refined cobalt, 65 percent of its chemical lithium, and 91 percent of its battery-grade graphite. All three minerals are essential for the production of lithium-ion batteries, a key component in the green transition.

China’s market dominance exists in part due to generous state subsidies. Analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies calculates a “conservative estimate” of $230 billion in electric vehicle (EV) subsidies for the period 2009-2023. Increasingly, green technologies are fundamental to Xi Jinping’s “high quality growth” strategy, which aims to spur high-productivity advanced manufacturing sectors amid a broader slump in the Chinese economy.

Commissioning 1000 New Ballistic Missiles Demonstrates North Korea’s Massive Production Capacity

A. B. Abrams

Source Link

This photo provided by the North Korean government shows a ceremony to mark the delivery of 250 nuclear-capable missile launchers to frontline military units, in Pyongyang, North Korea, Aug. 4, 2024. The content of this image is as provided and cannot be independently verified.

On August 4 the armed forces of North Korea – the Korean People’s Army – made an unprecedented display of ballistic missile firepower, with a ceremony marking the commissioning of 250 launchers for the KN-24 short range tactical missile system. Each launcher carries four missiles, for a total arsenal of 1,000.

The ceremony was attended by party, government and military officials, as well as defense scientists, technicians, munitions industry workers and “persons of merits in Pyongyang Municipality.” Commanding officers and other service members, presumably from associated missile units, were also confirmed to be in attendance.

The ceremony saw the missile systems handed over to Korean People’s Army “frontline units” near the Demilitarized Zone, where the bulk of the country’s ground forces have been deployed for decades.

National Character and Wartime Abuses

Paul R. Pillar

Source Link

With the record of newly minted Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris being freshly scrutinized, one recently recalled item is her reaction to revelations several years ago of the torture of suspected terrorists who the CIA detained. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Harris was a leading interrogator of Gina Haspel, then-nominee for CIA director, regarding the torture issue. She eventually voted against Haspel’s confirmation. Another recent reminder of this black chapter in American history is the first public release of a photograph of the gaunt, naked body of one of the prisoners involved.

Harris’s firm stand regarding torture is admirable, as is a wider sentiment—by no means universal, but now held by many Americans—that torture is an unacceptable national security tool. The unacceptability involves the ineffectiveness as well as the immorality of the practice.

What was largely missing, however, from the focus on the Haspel nomination and what was going on inside CIA detention centers was how the torture reflected a broader condoning of “gloves-off” methods amid the wave of anger that swept across the nation after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Although the Senate committee’s report on the subject asserted that the CIA had misled Congress and the administration about the extent and success of the interrogation techniques, the use of torture was not kept secret from members of Congress and specifically members of the intelligence oversight committees, who could have objected at the time. However, in the prevailing post-9/11 mood, members quietly looked the other way (this did not involve Harris, who did not enter the Senate until 2017). It was only with the passage of time and the quelling of some of the rage that was the immediate reaction to the terrorist attacks that second thoughts about torture arose and became politically significant.

UK Riots: Racism And Islamophobia Meets Community Unity – OpEd

Graham Peebles

Source Link

The legacy left by the Conservatives after 14 years in government is not just economic stagnation, and the destruction of public services, it is social division, far right extremism and anger.

Violence, racism and hate are the common language of far-right groups/individuals the world over, all of which has been writ large on the streets of some towns in the UK over the last week. “Far-right thuggery,” as the Prime-Minister, Kier Starmer, called it, has wreaked havoc, and created fear among minority communities, particularly Muslims and asylum seekers.

White male thugs mounted vicious attacks on police, looted and vandalised businesses, homes and civic buildings, set fire to parked cars and attacked hotels where, the hooligans believed, asylum seekers were staying. In opposition to fascism, thousands of people have come together at anti-racist protests across the country. Community groups have worked to clean up the streets and individuals have launched funding campaigns to raise money to repair the damage done by the rioters.

Climate Change Impact On Water Security In South Asia – OpEd

Faisal Khan Jamali

Source Link

According to Jeff Nesbit, founder of climate combating organization “Climate Nexus”, a nuclear country, facing some serious water scarcity issues that would be very dangerous.”

Water is a severe and volatile concern in South Asia, and the need for water for various purposes has enhanced its importance. In such a severe way, Climate change (unpredictable rainfall patterns) causes flash floods and droughts, water scarcity, and glaciers melting in the regions.

Due to climate change, the intensity of fluvial (river) and pluvial (rain) floods has increased. According to a report published by a scientific African journal in 2022, over the past 60 years, Pakistan has faced a total of 19 major flood events, of which 594,700 km of land and 166,075 villages were affected, causing a loss of 30 billion dollars and 10668 deaths. The 2010 and 2012 floods were devastating.

The aftermath of climate change will further impact the availability and quality of water in South Asia. Water availability is not the sole issue in South Asia; it is worldwide. According to the McKinsey report, it is estimated that by 2030, only 60% of the global population will use fresh water, while 40% of the world’s population of 3 billion will not have access to fresh water supplies. In that scenario, 70 percent of the water will be used for agriculture. Here is the question of whether this demand can escalate the water war because, by 2030, the world population will cross 8.3 billion. Therefore, climate change will likely impact water security in volatile regions across the globe.

AI Will Displace American Workers—When, How, and To What Extent Is Less Certai

Kevin Frazier

Source Link

There’s a tussle over the future of AI regulation.

One camp insists that “x-risk,” or existential risk, warrants the preponderance of regulatory focus. Another camp demands that privacy be the primary concern. A third cohort wants climate impacts to rise to the top of the agenda.

With U.S. politicians and agency officials unwilling to take a side, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) recently issued a "profile" on the risks generated by the research, development, deployment, and use of generative artificial intelligence (AI). Rather than concentrate on a small set of risks, NIST seemingly appeased each of the warring camps.

The NIST profile covered 12 risks, from chemical and biological to data privacy and harmful bias. Shockingly absent from the profile—“j-risk” or job risk.

J-risk is not a future concern. Americans previously employed in meaningful work have already been displaced by AI. Few signs suggest this trend will abate. Most evidence suggests it will accelerate.

AI will replace American workers—what’s less certain is when, how, and to what extent. Policymakers can avoid j-risk’s worst trend models only through the development of robust and novel social security programs aimed at displaced workers.

J-risks have been given insufficient attention in AI policy debates. Labor markets will continue to experience unexpected and significant disturbances as AI continues to advance. Rather than place excess hope on some positive economic forecasts coming true or to assume a reactive regulatory posture, lawmakers should consider pursuing anticipatory governance strategies. Two courses of action can further this approach: one, gathering more information on AI’s effects on labor and, two, creating more responsive economic security programs. These efforts would not only reduce the uncertainty surrounding j-risks but also stem the resulting long-term harms.

The Great IT Outage of 2024 is a wake-up call about digital public infrastructure

Saba Weatherspoon and Zhenwei Gao

Source Link

On July 19, the world experienced its largest global IT outage to date, affecting 8.5 million Microsoft Windows devices. Thousands of flights were grounded. Surgeries were canceled. Users of certain online banks could not access their accounts. Even operators of 911 lines could not respond to emergencies.

The cause? One mere faulty section of code in a software update.

The update came from CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm whose Falcon Sensor software many Windows users employ against cyber breaches. Instead of providing improvements, the update caused devices to shut down and enter an endless reboot cycle, driving a global outage. Reports suggest that insufficient testing at CrowdStrike was likely the cause.

However, this outage is not just a technology error. It also reveals a hidden world of digital public infrastructure (DPI) that deserves more attention from policymakers.

What is digital public infrastructure?

DPI, while an evolving concept, is broadly defined by the United Nations (UN) as a combination of “networked open technology standards built for public interest, [which] enables governance and [serves] a community of innovative and competitive market players working to drive innovation, especially across public programmes.” This definition refers to DPI as essential digital systems that support critical societal functions, like how physical infrastructure—including roads, bridges, and power grids—are essential for everyday activities.

Microsoft Windows, which runs CrowdStrike’s Falcon Sensor software, is a form of DPI. And other examples of DPI within the UN definition include digital health systems, payment systems, and e-governance portals.

As the world scrambles to fix their Windows systems, policymakers need to pay particular attention to the core DPI issues that underpin the outage.