Cyber war – TC Mech Wars http://tcmechwars.com/ Mon, 18 Oct 2021 03:48:52 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.8 https://tcmechwars.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/tc.png Cyber war – TC Mech Wars http://tcmechwars.com/ 32 32 Stronger deterrence will prevent war in Taiwan https://tcmechwars.com/stronger-deterrence-will-prevent-war-in-taiwan/ https://tcmechwars.com/stronger-deterrence-will-prevent-war-in-taiwan/#respond Sun, 17 Oct 2021 23:44:10 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/stronger-deterrence-will-prevent-war-in-taiwan/ Xi Jinping positions the People’s Liberation Army to bring Taiwan under the control of the Chinese Communist Party. The Taiwanese may estimate a three-year delay before an attack, while the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in Honolulu considers a military assault in six years to be possible. If a conflict does arise, it will be large-scale and […]]]>

Xi Jinping positions the People’s Liberation Army to bring Taiwan under the control of the Chinese Communist Party. The Taiwanese may estimate a three-year delay before an attack, while the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in Honolulu considers a military assault in six years to be possible.

If a conflict does arise, it will be large-scale and bloody. It will throw the world into two hostile camps – in fact, democracies versus authoritarian regimes. The war in Taiwan will inevitably involve Australia.

There will be no positive results from conflict. If China is defeated, Xi will fall from office and the CCP will face an existential crisis of legitimacy that could cause it to lose its grip on power amid large-scale political unrest.

If Beijing wins, it will face a bloody occupation on an island of 25 million people who overwhelmingly reject the idea of ​​Communist control. The Taiwanese will put up fierce resistance. Xi will face his own moment of occupation of Iraq, with nothing to offer Taiwan other than repression.

Beijing’s control of Taiwan would transform the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific. Japan would become vulnerable from the south and east, and face the reality that China could reduce its trade and energy supplies.

It’s hard to see how America’s Pacific alliances could survive a defeat like the Communist takeover of Taiwan. It all depends on how the situation develops. Imagine an American administration that decides that the war against Taiwan, contrary to all American claims, is not worth fighting.

If that happens, U.S. allies in the region, including Australia, will know they are on their own when it comes to facing a militarily prosperous Beijing. In this world, the choice for Japan, Australia and South Korea is either to appease Beijing or to develop a much stronger military capability at a breakneck pace.

Imagine another scenario where America does choose to stand up for Taiwan. Australia will receive the President’s second phone call after calling Tokyo, asking what military support we will offer. Does anyone imagine that Australia has a realistic option not to fight? If we try to pull out, we can say goodbye to ANZUS, intelligence cooperation, nuclear powered submarines, US foreign investment, and all the other things that have made us rich and secure.

It is claimed that the Pentagon’s computer war games invariably see the United States losing to the PLA against Taiwan. It doesn’t necessarily mean much. But to be clear, an American defeat and a resurgence of China would be a disaster for the interests of countries that do not want to bow to Beijing.

All of this means that the war for Taiwan is an outcome that must be avoided. Xi has built such momentum towards war, and such aggressive and nationalistic expectations among the Chinese people, that I think the only way to prevent a war is to change Xi’s calculation of the risk and costs of triggering it. a conflict.

Internationally, Xi has managed to take risks. He organized a takeover of the South China Sea and militarized recovered “island” bases without an effective international response; it has pursued wholesale intellectual property theft around the world with, until recently, most countries reluctant to even name China as the cause; he ransacked the Beijing agreement with the United Kingdom on Hong Kong and sets up a repressive regime on its 7.5 million inhabitants. The world responded by writhing empty-handed.

China continues to wage a campaign of economic coercion against Australia where our fellow Democrats have been happy to fill the export niches we once enjoyed. China supporters in Australia ask us to believe it is our fault because we provocatively wanted to investigate the origins of Covid-19.

Through it all, Xi has learned that being bold and taking risks worked. He got away with barely a scratch with international aggression, internal repression and Covid-19 cover-up. Xi will apply a similar cost and risk calculation to Taiwan. Large-scale military incursions into the Taiwan Air Defense Identification Zone, intensified propaganda about the inevitability of “reunification”, and attempts to exclude Taiwan from international engagement are all aimed at testing how far Xi can go without being pushed back.

It is certain that the PLA’s air incursions will continue, expand, and move closer to the Taiwanese mainland. In an important speech last week, Xi reverted to the old wording of calling for Taiwan’s “peaceful reunification”, but there is no doubt about his sense of urgency. Xi wants to be the leader who delivers this result and not leave it to his successors.

We can prevent this impending catastrophe by making it clear to Xi that democracies will not tolerate China’s forced incorporation of Taiwan. An emergency meeting of the G20 should be organized to unambiguously commit to its security.

Australia should accept Taiwan’s offer to exchange intelligence and security assessments as it does with our Quad partners, Japan, India and the United States. We should send a Defense liaison to our mission in Taipei and invite a counterpart to Canberra. Our uncompromising reading of the “one China” policy meant that as a senior defense official, I could not speak with my Taiwanese counterparts. We run the risk of being asked to defend Taiwan without ever having discussed the task with the Taiwanese military.

More importantly, the United States, Japan and Australia must make clear their intention to work together to protect Taiwan and give Taipei more opportunities to make its voice heard in international forums. More Australian leaders should follow Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbott and engage with Taiwan, strengthening political and economic ties.

Beijing will not accept this, but we know that the price of Xi’s approval is respecting his wishes. Xi must understand that the world will not look away as the PLA attacks Taiwan.

It is clear that Beijing will not give up its longing for unification with Taiwan, but if Xi realizes that the costs of such military madness will be too high, the hope is that it will leave that to future generations. Deterrence guarantees peace, while appeasement will surely lead to war.


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/stronger-deterrence-will-prevent-war-in-taiwan/feed/ 0
Playing for good: China made the free market a market for fools https://tcmechwars.com/playing-for-good-china-made-the-free-market-a-market-for-fools/ https://tcmechwars.com/playing-for-good-china-made-the-free-market-a-market-for-fools/#respond Sat, 16 Oct 2021 15:50:47 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/playing-for-good-china-made-the-free-market-a-market-for-fools/ The godfather of globalization, Thomas Friedman, recently published an editorial suggesting that the steps taken to defend the global economic security and prosperity of the United States could lead to a war with China. He begins by asserting that the US withdrawal from Afghanistan left Americans regretting their decision, stating that “If only we knew […]]]>

The godfather of globalization, Thomas Friedman, recently published an editorial suggesting that the steps taken to defend the global economic security and prosperity of the United States could lead to a war with China. He begins by asserting that the US withdrawal from Afghanistan left Americans regretting their decision, stating that “If only we knew then what we know now, we would never have taken this path.” Then he asks the question: Twenty years from now, what current foreign policy decisions could we look back on and say the same thing?

His answer in a nutshell: China.

Now, Friedman does not recommend changing the status quo of forty years of intolerable technology theft and penetration of American institutions by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Likewise, he sees no need to react to China’s decisions to stifle democracy in Hong Kong, eliminate Uyghur Muslim culture in western China, or use its economic might and diplomats. wolf warriors to intimidate neighbors like Australia’s even ask for a proper investigation into the origins of the novel coronavirus in Wuhan.

Friedman fears that the loss of the “benefits” of forty years of US-China globalization and integration could lead to outright confrontation. “Are we sure we understand China enough to decide that its mission is the worldwide spread of authoritarianism?” he asks.

The answer to this question is simple for us. We have been traveling to China since 1981 and we both love its culture, history and people. The reason we agreed to serve in the US State Department was that, despite our very different careers, we saw the CCP’s growing global authoritarian ambition for what it is: the evolution of competition on the market. Chinese market in recent years into a form of economic techno-economic aggression from Secretary-General Xi Jinping.

We now know that the free world is facing an ever-growing new reality of cyber warfare and a seemingly endless variety of intense, persistent and militarized economic competition. The CCP is playing the long game, and it is playing for good. It is playing a four-dimensional economic, military, diplomatic and cultural chess game with little respect for human rights, intellectual property, international law, transparency, the environment or the sovereignty of nations. These are ideals that we honor, and not the CCP. These are ideals that also protect our freedoms and form the basis of trust.

Globalization assumes that everyone plays fairly and that benign economic forces that regulate international trade avoid the need for protective measures. Friedman’s famous book, The world is flat, describes the many benefits of globalization. But it has one major flaw: it ignores disruptive actors like the CCP.

We believe in free trade. But when someone doesn’t play by the rules, the market is no longer free. Think about it. If I compete with you and you can steal my intellectual property, use slave labor, engage in bribes, subsidize your own businesses, increase the use of coal-fired power plants, and never having to be transparent, the rules of the game are level. on which the rules-based international order and globalization depend has disappeared. You have become the law, which means you are going to win every time. This is what China has been doing for forty years to give itself a strategic advantage, and there is not the slightest evidence that Xi is going to slow down anytime soon. It’s not a free market, it’s a fool’s market.

However, defending ourselves against CCP predations should not lead to open warfare, as Friedman suggests. Here is the proof. Take the example of Friedman of 5G and Huawei, one of China’s “national champions” that also serves as the backbone of its surveillance state. In February 2020, both sides of the political aisle were pressing the panic button. It seemed that Huawei was unstoppable, and the CCP’s master plan to control power grids, power generation systems, sanitation systems, manufacturing processes, and the Internet of Things through Huawei’s 5G hardware was inevitable. No one wanted to imagine a world where an authoritarian regime controls technology. Previous efforts to stem the tide had failed.

Many in Washington believed it was all about technological and economic supremacy and that the boat had sailed in 5G. But we realized that it was about something much bigger than technology and economics: it was about trust. Here’s the dirty little secret we discovered about the CCP: Its greatest weakness is its lack of confidence.

It was then that we harnessed America’s three greatest competitive advantages by rallying our allies, leveraging private sector innovation, and amplifying the moral height of democratic values. The result has been the Clean Network alliance between like-minded countries, businesses and civil society organizations that operate under a set of trusted principles to advance freedom and combat authoritarianism. These principles of trust included things like respect for human rights, transparency, reciprocity and national sovereignty.

In a jiu-jitsu movement, we have used these principles of trust to our advantage, arming them to protect our freedom and that of members of our growing “own” alliance around the world. The Clean Network eventually grew to include sixty countries, accounting for two-thirds of global GDP, 200 telecommunications companies, and dozens of other tech companies. In the face of Huawei’s seemingly unstoppable momentum, we’ve proven that China is beatable. And in the process, we have created a sustainable, proven and repeatable model for all areas of economic competition.

But perhaps more importantly, the bipartisan model of the Clean Network has ensured the unity and continuity of politics between the Republican and Democratic administrations, which is essential for our allies, and this is what Xi fears most. .

The Clean Network’s Trust Principles explicitly state that while no nation is forever excluded, countries that do not adhere to the Trust Principles will be excluded from membership until they reform practices and laws. problematic. These principles encourage countries to do what any truly free market demands most: fair play. By building a technology alliance based on these principles of trust, the Clean Network may turn out to be too large a market for the CCP to ignore. This gives China a choice: sacrifice the bigger market or play fair.

We must never forget that the only way for globalization to bring the peace and prosperity envisioned by Friedman in The world is flat is to have a level playing field for all.

Otherwise, when our grandchildren ask the same question, “If only we knew then what we know now, what would we have done differently?” The answer will always be “China”, but it may be in Chinese.

Keith Krach has been unanimously confirmed as US Under Secretary of State and is currently the Chairman of the Purdue Technology Diplomacy Center. He was President and CEO of DocuSign and Ariba and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Purdue. Crash was sanctioned by China.

Brigadier General David Stilwell is the former Assistant Secretary of State in the Office of East Asia and Pacific Affairs. He served in the Air Force for 35 years, starting as an enlisted Korean linguist in 1980 and retiring in 2015 as Asia Advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Stilwell was also sanctioned by China.

Image: Reuters.


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/playing-for-good-china-made-the-free-market-a-market-for-fools/feed/ 0
“Creepy” AI Weapons “Will” Make Deadly Decisions https://tcmechwars.com/creepy-ai-weapons-will-make-deadly-decisions/ https://tcmechwars.com/creepy-ai-weapons-will-make-deadly-decisions/#respond Fri, 15 Oct 2021 13:42:54 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/creepy-ai-weapons-will-make-deadly-decisions/ Pentagon software chief Nicolas Chaillan suddenly resigned last month over fears that the US military was “15 to 20 years” behind China on cyber warfare and artificial intelligence, he said. he told the Financial Times. The warning marks the latest sign of contention within the US military over how to prepare for what former Google […]]]>

Pentagon software chief Nicolas Chaillan suddenly resigned last month over fears that the US military was “15 to 20 years” behind China on cyber warfare and artificial intelligence, he said. he told the Financial Times.

The warning marks the latest sign of contention within the US military over how to prepare for what former Google executive Kai-Fu Lee calls the “third revolution” of the war, after gunfire cannon and nuclear weapons.

In a new interview, ex-General Stanley McChrystal – who led coalition forces in Afghanistan for two years and now runs a consulting firm called the McChrystal Group – said artificial intelligence will inevitably come to make deadly decisions on the battlefield. However, he recognized the “frightening” risks of potential malfunction or error.

“People say, ‘We will never give control of deadly strikes to artificial intelligence,'” says McChrystal, who recently co-authored a book called “Risk: A User’s Guide.” “That’s wrong. We absolutely will.”

“Because at some point you can’t respond quickly enough unless you do,” he adds. “A hyperspeed missile, a hypersonic missile hitting the US aircraft carrier, you don’t have time for individuals to follow up, you don’t have time for senior leaders to be in the decision loop , or you won’t be able to engage the missile.

A stand-alone weapons ban has received support from 30 countries, although an in-depth report commissioned by Congress advised the United States to oppose a ban because it could prevent the country from using weapons already in existence. its possession.

In 2015, prominent tech figures like Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla (TSLA), and Apple (AAPL) co-founder Steve Wozniak, along with thousands of AI researchers, signed an open letter calling for the ban on these weapons.

President Joe Biden, speaking at a summit of US and EU leaders in February, called for international collaboration to “shape the rules that will govern the advancement of technology and standards of behavior in cyberspace, the artificial intelligence, biotechnology so that they are used to lift people, not used to immobilize them.

The increasingly accelerated pace of war will force U.S. military officers to cede decision-making power to artificial intelligence, McChrystal said. But that comes with risks, he noted.

“You created technology, you put processes in place to make it work, but then, to run at the speed of war, you turn it on and trust it,” he says.

“It can be quite scary, especially if there is the potential for dysfunction or impersonation or any of those other things,” he adds.

Soldiers surround a Titan Strike unmanned ground vehicle. (Photo by Ben Birchall / PA Images via Getty Images)

McChrystal, who graduated from the US Military Academy at West Point in 1976, had a 34-year military career that included a stint as Commander of US Special Forces and ultimately a two-year term as Chief of the Forces of the coalition in Afghanistan which ended in 2010.

Then-President Barack Obama accepted McChrystal’s resignation days after a Rolling Stone article in which McChrystal and his aides criticized senior administration officials.

Speaking to Yahoo Finance, McChrystal generally cautioned against the power AI systems take when organizations do not fully understand their capabilities.

“It’s difficult to have a full understanding, in a modern organization today, of the decisions that are actually made algorithmically and those that are made by people,” he says.

“When you don’t have that, I would say you run the risk of not having a real understanding of how your organizations are in control,” he adds.

Read more:

Follow Yahoo Finance on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Flipboard, LinkedIn, Youtube, and reddit.



Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/creepy-ai-weapons-will-make-deadly-decisions/feed/ 0
Internal war threatens to tear the army apart https://tcmechwars.com/internal-war-threatens-to-tear-the-army-apart/ https://tcmechwars.com/internal-war-threatens-to-tear-the-army-apart/#respond Thu, 14 Oct 2021 05:00:00 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/internal-war-threatens-to-tear-the-army-apart/ Mourning the death of a esteemed colleague is not the best way to start your tenure as the new chief of the British armed forces. But Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, who will take over as Chief of the Defense Staff next month, is well aware of the many challenges he will face as the British […]]]>

Mourning the death of a esteemed colleague is not the best way to start your tenure as the new chief of the British armed forces. But Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, who will take over as Chief of the Defense Staff next month, is well aware of the many challenges he will face as the British military undergoes its most radical overhaul. since the end of the cold war.

The tragic death of Major General Matthew Holmes, the highly decorated Royal Navy officer whose funeral took place yesterday at Winchester Cathedral, certainly highlights the hardships Sir Tony is likely to face as he seeks to implement the comprehensive reform program of the military ensemble in the Integrated Government Review, which was published earlier this year.

The aim of this ambitious program is to enable the UK to defend itself against the rapidly changing environment of the modern battlefield, whether it is responding to cyber attacks or protecting satellites from threats posed by Hostile states.

To achieve this ambitious goal, traditional combat units, such as those employed in recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, are undergoing a major overhaul to make them better equipped to deal with future threats.

Sir Tony’s appointment therefore owes a great deal to his ability to grasp the challenges ahead, a quality that was very evident in the role he played in securing the controversial Aukus deal for the Great Britain and the United States equip Australia with a new fleet of nuclear reactors. motorized submarines.

Sir Tony’s willingness to exploit new opportunities certainly helped him secure the highest military post in the face of stiff opposition from other candidates, as it ultimately persuaded Defense Secretary Ben Wallace and the Prime Minister Boris Johnson he was the best man to establish, as Sir Tony himself put it, “a world force in the service of world Britain”.

Given the government’s emphasis on securing new global trade ties, it makes sense that a Royal Navy officer should take responsibility for protecting the country’s prosperity, with the vast majority of goods being shipped on the high seas. .

Mr Johnson, who is a strong supporter of the Navy’s two new 65,000-ton Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, spoke enthusiastically of restoring Britain’s position as the ‘premier naval power in the world. ‘Europe’, a role he considers essential with the opening of new trade routes, in particular with the ‘shift’ to the Indo-Pacific region envisaged by the Integrated Review.

Nonetheless, the new military leader’s obvious enthusiasm for change, which has earned him the nickname “Radical Radakin”, is not universally shared by his colleagues and is said to have been the source of the bitter falling out between the late Major. -General Holmes and his former Navy boss.

As part of the overall Senior Service reorganization that took place during Sir Tony’s tenure as First Sea Lord, the Navy sought to redefine its relationship with the Royal Marines.

Over the past two decades, the Marines have won numerous accolades for their heroism in the predominantly land conflicts of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, where they have suffered significant casualties, while the Navy Service was almost forgotten as his opportunities for frontline action were limited.

For future wars, however, the Navy plans to have a more integrated force, a force where it exerts tighter control over the Marines as it develops the concept of the Future Commando Force. But Sir Tony’s plans to make the post of Commanding General, the professional leader of the Royal Marines, a part-time role drew sharp criticism from several distinguished officers, including General Sir Gordon Messenger, who served as Vice Chief of the Defense Staff from 2016-19 and was one of many former high-ranking Marines who wrote to Sir Tony last January to outline their concerns.

Major General Holmes also fiercely resisted the change while in charge of the Marines, so he was removed from his post after two years, which was seen as a factor in his decision to take his own life. . Relations between the Navy and the Marines have not been helped by accusations from Navy sources that former Royal Marines – known as the “junta” in Navy circles – “are using this tragic event. for their own purposes ”.

This unfortunate situation is hardly the welcome Sir Tony needs as he prepares to assume his new responsibilities, and the uneasiness between the Navy and Marines must be resolved quickly in the interests of the military readiness of the nation.

With Chinese warplanes routinely violating Taiwanese airspace and Russian President Vladimir Putin holding Europe hostage over its energy supplies, the global threat environment is becoming increasingly threatening by the day.

To defend the interests of Great Britain, our armed forces must be at the top of their game, not eaten up by bitter joint rivalries.


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/internal-war-threatens-to-tear-the-army-apart/feed/ 0
Tech entrepreneurs who cover up cyber breaches could be forced to pay triple damages https://tcmechwars.com/tech-entrepreneurs-who-cover-up-cyber-breaches-could-be-forced-to-pay-triple-damages/ https://tcmechwars.com/tech-entrepreneurs-who-cover-up-cyber-breaches-could-be-forced-to-pay-triple-damages/#respond Mon, 11 Oct 2021 18:46:02 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/tech-entrepreneurs-who-cover-up-cyber-breaches-could-be-forced-to-pay-triple-damages/ Written by John Hewitt Jones Oct 11, 2021 | FEDSCOOP Tech contractors who do not disclose cybersecurity breaches could face hefty fines of up to three times the amount their failure is costing the government, in a lawsuit by the Ministry of Justice. Justice (DOJ). The DOJ last week announced a new cyber-civil fraud initiative, […]]]>

Written by John Hewitt Jones

Tech contractors who do not disclose cybersecurity breaches could face hefty fines of up to three times the amount their failure is costing the government, in a lawsuit by the Ministry of Justice. Justice (DOJ).

The DOJ last week announced a new cyber-civil fraud initiative, in which it intends to use the False Claims Act (FCA) to prosecute contractors working with federal government agencies – as well as Federal grant recipients – who do not report incidents in which their systems are compromised.

The FCA was first enacted in 1863 in response to fraud by defense contractors during the Civil War. It was amended in 1986 to further encourage whistleblowers to report allegations of fraud.

Under the FCA, anyone who submits false records to the government can be forced to pay triple the damages caused to the government by fraudulent contract submissions. The offending entity may also be subject to a civil fine of up to $ 10,000.

Tech companies working with some government departments are already subject to strict disclosure requirements regarding cybersecurity breaches. For example, Section 204.7302 of the Federal Defense Acquisition Supplement requires companies to “promptly report cyber incidents directly to the Department of Defense (DOD).” The DOD defines “quick report” as within 72 hours of discovery.

In a press release announcing the new initiative last week, the DOJ said it would seek to compel “contractors and beneficiaries to meet their commitments to protect government information and infrastructure.” The move comes as lawmakers consider new measures to step up pressure on private sector companies and government agencies to ensure timely disclosure of cyber breaches.

Legal sources speaking to FedScoop said it was not clear how aggressive the Justice Department’s new enforcement campaign would be and precisely how penalties for a company’s failure to notify would be assessed. .

The False Claims Act imposes a separate penalty for each violation of the law, which can add up to tens of thousands – or in some cases millions – of dollars.

In March of this year, a federal appeals court upheld a $ 111 million award to the government and a whistleblower in a case against BlueWave Healthcare Consultants. The complaint alleged that the defendants paid bribes to trick doctors into ordering medically unnecessary tests, which were ultimately paid for by Medicare and Tricare.

The Cyber-Civil Fraud Initiative is led by the Commercial Litigation Division of the Civil Division, Fraud Section, at DOJ. This is a direct result of the ministry’s ongoing comprehensive cyber review, which was ordered by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco in May.

Congress is currently reviewing the Cyber ​​Incident Reporting Act and the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2021.


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/tech-entrepreneurs-who-cover-up-cyber-breaches-could-be-forced-to-pay-triple-damages/feed/ 0
The proposal would turn part of the SRS into an industrial park, if the federal government returned the land | Colombia https://tcmechwars.com/the-proposal-would-turn-part-of-the-srs-into-an-industrial-park-if-the-federal-government-returned-the-land-colombia/ https://tcmechwars.com/the-proposal-would-turn-part-of-the-srs-into-an-industrial-park-if-the-federal-government-returned-the-land-colombia/#respond Sun, 10 Oct 2021 15:00:00 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/the-proposal-would-turn-part-of-the-srs-into-an-industrial-park-if-the-federal-government-returned-the-land-colombia/ COLUMBIA – Seventy years ago, the federal government dug nearly 200,000 acres in rural South Carolina to produce nuclear material for the national Cold War arsenal. The government moved families, farms and entire towns – even cemeteries had to disappear – as construction began in 1951 along the state’s southern border with Georgia. The site, […]]]>

COLUMBIA – Seventy years ago, the federal government dug nearly 200,000 acres in rural South Carolina to produce nuclear material for the national Cold War arsenal.

The government moved families, farms and entire towns – even cemeteries had to disappear – as construction began in 1951 along the state’s southern border with Georgia. The site, originally called the Savannah River Factory, or “Bomb Factory” for locals, occupied 310 square miles of Barnwell, Aiken and Allendale counties, a strip large enough to accommodate the city ​​of Charleston 2 and a half times.

More than three decades after the reactors closed, the local authorities want to recover a tiny part.

Their proposal would transform 5,000 acres on the outskirts of the Savannah River site into a mega industrial park, in a bid to replace thousands of high-paying jobs lost due to mission changes and broken federal promises. And with the land returning to the tax rolls, private employers there would simultaneously increase the county’s opportunities and coffers.






NEW POTENTIAL INDUSTRIAL PARK: A 5,000 acre piece the Savannah River site could become a regional industrial park if the US Department of Energy agrees to transfer federal lands to South Carolina. The proposed site is located along the borders of Barnwell and Aiken counties and the Savannah River.



“We are trying to find more industrial land that will never be developed for anything else and make it a win-win for the communities,” said Will Williams, president of the Aiken-based regional economic development partnership.

The three counties in which the SRS sits would share property tax revenue, which would help all three, he said. But he noted that this would mainly benefit Barnwell and Allendale, two of the state’s poorest counties which have lost population as SRS, textile and factory jobs dried up.

But the idea is far from reality.

This requires a transfer agreement from the US Department of Energy – a big hurdle. And local authorities are asking lawmakers $ 25 million to build the water and sewer systems that businesses need.

SC Senators demanded to spend most of $ 525 million on

Both have the backing of Governor Henry McMaster, who will include the request for the funding in his recommendations on how to spend the $ 525 million available in the state’s settlement of plutonium stored at the SRS, his spokesperson said. Brian Symmes.

And the GOP governor will do what he can to push for a transfer of land from the federal government, he said.

The local authorities tried for several years without success. But a concerted push from lawmakers – and the broad support that a $ 25 million investment would mean – would carry more weight, said Danny Black, chairman of SouthernCarolina Alliance, the Barnwell-based regional economic development group.

Its poor, rural counties lack the political power to make it happen, he said.

“It hasn’t been at the top of (the DOE’s) list to give us land, but I think it can gain momentum, especially if the state accepts that this is something that could happen and that ‘They are getting involved in the push on the state side, “Black mentioned. “It’s a gem setting there, and we’re not pushing it.”






srs-mox-construction-grace.jpg (copy)

Construction crews in 2007 were just beginning work on the MOX project at the Savannah River site, where the US government planned to process a huge stockpile of military-grade plutonium for disposal. Work on the plant was halted a little over a decade later. File / Grace Beahm Alford / Staff


The idea was presented during negotiations with the federal government over tons of military-grade plutonium left underground in Barnwell County, where most of the SRS is located, Attorney General Alan Wilson’s office confirmed. But this plan was not incorporated into the settlement announced by Wilson last year.

And, while a 5,000-acre industrial park is said to be one of the largest in the state, the Commerce Department is not involved in the effort, a spokeswoman said. The agency is generally involved in large economic development projects of this nature.

U.S. Representative Joe Wilson, whose district includes SRS, has seen plans proposed by local officials and is supporting investments in communities. But he wants to ensure that a sufficient barrier is maintained at the site to appropriately secure its national security-related operations.

His office is working with the Department of Energy to explore the possibility “without affecting the safety and security of missions at the site,” he said.

Columbia Law Firms May Hold State $ 75 Million Payment for Giant Nuclear Waste Settlement

Senatorial Minority Leader Brad Hutto, whose district includes all Barnwell Counties and part of Allendale Counties, noted that there is precedent for transfers to other federal nuclear complexes.

“You don’t need as much of a buffer as you used to,” Hutto, an Orangeburg Democrat, said of the unused land behind the fence that prevented public viewing of the site’s covert operations.

The Department of Energy has returned thousands of acres of nuclear sites in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Hanford, Wash., To their communities.

The agency’s potential opposition and environmental obstacles to doing so to the SRS are unclear. No one from the federal agency returned phone or email messages left by The Post and Courier in the past week.

“It might be the best thing in the world for us,” Black said of the proposed site along the Aiken and Barnwell counties border. “If that could happen, we could compete with anyone for expensive projects.”

SC Senators demanded to spend most of $ 525 million on

The corporate recruiting pitch would highlight the property’s rail lines, access to the Savannah River, a two-lane national highway that crosses it, and the workforce available in the wider Augusta area, in Georgia, he said.

Its fictitious industrial park layout has an automobile manufacturer on one side. Other possibilities include data center operations or the cybersecurity offshoots of the Georgia Cyber ​​Center and the US Army Cyber ​​Command at Fort Gordon in Augusta, Black said.

“The federal government should reward us,” he said, noting that the then Atomic Energy Commission had not just taken a third of the land in Barnwell County, “they took the best. . It’s the edge of the river. “

11 SC school districts consolidate, helped by state incentive money

When the location was chosen in 1950, approximately 6,000 people had 15 months to evacuate.

Representative Lonnie Hosey, D-Barnwell, was just 4 years old in January 1951, when his mother and uncle piled his family’s belongings in the back of a truck and left their home in Dunbarton for good. A year later, Dunbarton was among the small towns wiped off the map.






The past, the future of the Savannah River site

The Ellenton sign became a forum for residents’ feelings about the move for the future Savannah River plant in this photo from the Aiken County Historical Museum.


“The day we left was a cold, chilly day,” said Hosey, who represented Barnwell and Allendale counties in the House for 22 years.

He remembers his uncle putting the house’s “old pot-bellied stove,” with hot coals still inside, in the back of the truck. His uncle placed him next to him and his younger brother, bundled up in blankets, so they could stay warm on the journey to Elko. He doesn’t know how his uncle arranged their new home.

“We moved like the ‘Beverly Hillbillies’,” said Hosey, who joined the Marine Corps 15 years later and fought in Vietnam.

There are stories like this all over the region, Hutto said.

“Think about it. After WWII people are going home and looking for work. All of a sudden the federal government is saying, ‘We need a site to build bombs. We choose you. Move over. -you.’ It wasn’t “Do you want to move out?” It was “Move out,” Hutto told a Senate panel developing a spending plan for the settlement money.






The past, the future of the Savannah River site

Residents move an Ellenton home off the Savannah River factory site in this photo from the Aiken County Historical Museum.


“We didn’t ask for this, but we embraced it and in many ways we thrived,” he said. “We could be bitter, but we are not. But it has touched us and continues to impact us.”

When the Cold War officially ended in 1991, more than 25,000 people worked at the SRS. That fell to around 11,000 – mostly in research, cleaning and security jobs – with around half of the workers commuting from Aiken County, 590 from Barnwell County and just 47 from Allendale. More than a third of employees commute from Georgia, according to the Sept. 28 presentation to Senators.

Hosey plans to make a similar presentation to his colleagues in the House.

“Rural South Carolina is catching the heck. Does the Cold War continue to affect our region? Yes,” Hosey said. “People are leaving the area and going somewhere else and staying somewhere else because there is nothing to come back to. It keeps dying, dying, dying as the population shrinks.

“Help us,” he said as he previewed his case. “We need help to grow.”


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/the-proposal-would-turn-part-of-the-srs-into-an-industrial-park-if-the-federal-government-returned-the-land-colombia/feed/ 0
In Rodrigo Duterte’s war on press freedom, Maria Ressa defends the truth | Rachel Obordo https://tcmechwars.com/in-rodrigo-dutertes-war-on-press-freedom-maria-ressa-defends-the-truth-rachel-obordo/ https://tcmechwars.com/in-rodrigo-dutertes-war-on-press-freedom-maria-ressa-defends-the-truth-rachel-obordo/#respond Sat, 09 Oct 2021 09:00:00 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/in-rodrigo-dutertes-war-on-press-freedom-maria-ressa-defends-the-truth-rachel-obordo/ For the first time a Filipina, Maria Ressa, received the Nobel Peace Prize – “a victory for Filipinos, for journalists and for the global struggle to defend press freedom”, as her colleague Lian buan the dish. Ressa, co-founder and managing director of the Rappler news site, shares the award with Russian journalist Dmitry Muratov in […]]]>

For the first time a Filipina, Maria Ressa, received the Nobel Peace Prize – “a victory for Filipinos, for journalists and for the global struggle to defend press freedom”, as her colleague Lian buan the dish.

Ressa, co-founder and managing director of the Rappler news site, shares the award with Russian journalist Dmitry Muratov in recognition of their individual activism and their relentless fight for press freedom. It is a symbol of courage in light of the human rights situation in the Philippines. Since President Rodrigo Duterte took office in 2016, even residents unrelated to drugs have been affected by the thousands of extrajudicial killings that have taken place. According to Human Rights Watch, during the containment of Covid between April and July 2020, the country saw the number of murders increase by more than 50%.

Ressa and Rappler fought to keep the reality of Duerte’s “war on drugs” and its aftermath in the spotlight. It has also become the symbol of the struggle and struggles that many Filipinos experience on a daily basis. Almost any Filipino can tell you how someone was attacked, killed or kidnapped in front of them, often for mistaken identity. No family, including mine, has been spared the abuse of power and corruption inflicted on the public.

Official government figures indicate that since 2016, at least 6,117 suspected drug traffickers have been killed in police and security operations. However, the UN cites that as of June 2020, government figures have already recorded more than 8,600 deaths.

Drugs are not uncommon in poor urban areas of the Philippines, but the number of lives affected by Duterte’s bloody war is countless. Children of victims are left behind and often struggle to survive in an already difficult environment, live in cramped conditions and often struggle to access clean water and sanitation. Many, especially those from large families gathered under one roof, suffer from malnutrition. As Human Rights Watch said in a recent report, the death of a family member who earned money leaves the children of the victims in dire economic straits. Many of them suffered from psychological distress, sometimes leading them to drop out of school and take paid work from an early age. Others have been intimidated by their peers and have even been left on the streets. And with many people seeking justice and accountability, Ressa has been ruthless in her fight for the truth.

Faced with multiple threats, criminal charges and two arrests, Ressa continued to denounce Duterte and protect freedom of expression. She joins Filipino environmental activists, liberal politicians and LGBT groups and individuals who have been threatened and attacked for challenging the administration’s discrimination and promoting disinformation. According to the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, by the end of 2020, 19 journalists had been killed under Duterte’s administration, while there were at least 171 cases where journalists were threatened or assaulted between June 2016 and April. 2020. State officials are often the alleged perpetrators of these actions, while journalists frequently face harassment and threats of defamation or bans from coverage. The Philippines continues to be a dangerous place for those who work in the press.

In 2017, Rappler was accused of violating the Philippine constitution and declared by Duterte in his State of the Union address as “wholly American-owned.” He even went on to say, “Not only is Rappler’s news fake, but being Filipino is also fake.” The criticism was later found to be unfounded, but marked the beginning of retaliation against Ressa, his colleagues and his Mission for Truth. She and a former Rappler researcher, Reynaldo Santos Jr, are currently on bail after being convicted of cyber defamation in June 2020 and face up to six years in prison. They have filed an appeal and are awaiting its outcome.

Despite these continued attacks, Ressa has held firm in what can only be described as a heroic act of defiance and courage. Journalism and democracy in the Philippines may be on the edge of a cliff, but Ressa, who won the Nobel Peace Prize, is a shining light in a long dark tunnel.

A simple glance on social networks confirms this. The former spokesperson for the presidency Edwin Lacierda says: “You [sic] makes our country proud in the midst of impunity and shrinking democratic space ”, while human rights lawyer Leni Robredo said“tireless efforts … for truth and accountability”. For me, as a Filipino journalist, Ressa is an inspiration. For others around the world and especially in the Philippines, his work keeps the good fight going – or “holding the line” as Ressa calls it.

In a live conversation with Rappler, Ressa said, “When you don’t have facts you don’t have the truth, you don’t trust. Trust is what unites us to be able to solve the complex problems facing our world today. The award is the vindication of the work she and her colleagues at Rappler have done, not only for the Philippines, but for press freedom and democracy around the world. She goes on to say that she hopes the victory will be “the energy for all of us to continue the battle for the facts.” Let us join her and do not be silent.



Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/in-rodrigo-dutertes-war-on-press-freedom-maria-ressa-defends-the-truth-rachel-obordo/feed/ 0
During a cyber war, it can be useful to own CRWD shares https://tcmechwars.com/during-a-cyber-war-it-can-be-useful-to-own-crwd-shares/ https://tcmechwars.com/during-a-cyber-war-it-can-be-useful-to-own-crwd-shares/#respond Thu, 07 Oct 2021 10:05:50 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/during-a-cyber-war-it-can-be-useful-to-own-crwd-shares/ Latest drop in tech stocks prompts many investors to take a close look CrowdStrike Holdings (NASDAQ:CRWD) Stock. Source: VDB Photos / Shutterstock.com CrowdStrike is an IT security company founded almost ten years ago with a “cloud first” model. It has since grown into one of the leading providers of endpoint security. Revenue is expected to […]]]>

Latest drop in tech stocks prompts many investors to take a close look CrowdStrike Holdings (NASDAQ:CRWD) Stock.

Source: VDB Photos / Shutterstock.com

CrowdStrike is an IT security company founded almost ten years ago with a “cloud first” model. It has since grown into one of the leading providers of endpoint security. Revenue is expected to grow by more than 50% this year, to around $ 1.5 billion. There may even be profits, even if they are small.

Leadership in a popular niche has made CrowdStrike an extremely profitable investment. The market capitalization is $ 54.5 billion. But when the sell orders come in, stocks selling for 36 times income are often the first to be sold. Shares are down 12% since late August.

The question of the day is, buy the dip?

Leadership in question

Computer security is a tough business. Leadership can easily be overcome with new techniques. Growth can be great, but companies must invest before it grows. Losses are the norm. Stocks can be volatile. This is why it makes sense to wait for a correction, like the one currently underway, before jumping on it.

The question for CrowdStrike is whether it can maintain its leadership in the face of new competitors like SentinelOne (NYSE:S), which went public in June. SentinelOne’s approach is to use an artificial intelligence algorithm to get ahead of the bad guys. The stock has outperformed CrowdStrike’s since its IPO.

Goldman Sachs (NYSE:SG) recently downgraded CrowdStrike based on its price. Analyst Brian Essex has called SentinelOne his favorite game when it comes to endpoint security.

While tech stocks rolled in September, SentinelOne rolled more, down 23% since September 16. CrowdStrike has only fallen 4% since then.

Always being boosted

The CRWD stock still has its boosters. One is our Louis Navellier. Second quarter profits exceeded estimates, he wrote, with 1,660 new customers subscribed.

An executive order asking agencies to strengthen cybersecurity was followed by CrowdStrike listing its Falcon Forensics on the government govcloud. Falcon Forensics has also received FedRAMP clearance, making purchasing easier for bureaucrats. This means that more government revenue is on the way. Navellier called the title comfortably in his buying zone.

The Navellier article also cited Goldman Sachs’ rating as positive. Essex has maintained its price target of $ 305, which is 26% above its current trading level. The Navellier price target is cautious, lower than the average price target at Tips, which is $ 314.

What impresses our Mark Hake is CrowdStrike’s cash flow. The company had $ 256 million in cash flow from operations in the July quarter.

There is something more important to me than the graphics. This is if CrowdStrike can stay ahead of its competition.

Integration with UiPath (NYSE:PATH) gives Falcon new capabilities to take action against software “bots,” automated programs that are now the world’s greatest security threat.

The company’s recent Overwatch report says hackers are now acting on breaches three times faster than before, with bigger threats coming from China. This means more demand for systems like CrowdStrike.

The result on the CRWD stock

Few companies are worth 36 times their turnover. The best IT security stocks are an exception, given their rapid growth and the premium placed on leadership.

The recent fall of Nasdaq composite approach to the correctional territory. It is down about 6% from its September 8 high. It’s hard to call market lows, but we seem to be getting close.

If you are looking for capital gains, this might be a good time to buy CrowdStrike. If you are of sporting blood, you might be better off watching SentinelOne. Cyber ​​warfare shows no signs of slowing down and it helps to own an arms dealer in times of war.

At the time of publication, Dana Blankenhorn does not hold any positions with the companies mentioned in this article. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, submitted to InvestorPlace.com Publication guidelines.

Dana blankenhorn has been a financial and technology journalist since 1978. He is the author of Living with Moore’s Law: Past, Present and Future available in the Amazon Kindle store. Write to him at danablankenhorn@gmail.com or tweet it on @danablankenhorn. He writes a Substack newsletter, Facing the future, which covers technology, markets and politics.



Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/during-a-cyber-war-it-can-be-useful-to-own-crwd-shares/feed/ 0
Facebook: Glimpses of the next war | Opinion https://tcmechwars.com/facebook-glimpses-of-the-next-war-opinion/ https://tcmechwars.com/facebook-glimpses-of-the-next-war-opinion/#respond Thu, 07 Oct 2021 01:43:24 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/facebook-glimpses-of-the-next-war-opinion/ Nothing worries so much as the mental health of very young people, disturbed by addiction to social networks. Also the polarization and the use of private data for algorithmic manipulation of minds, especially in electoral campaigns, with the danger that this represents for our democracies. No doubt because of the monopolistic nature of big technologies, […]]]>

Nothing worries so much as the mental health of very young people, disturbed by addiction to social networks. Also the polarization and the use of private data for algorithmic manipulation of minds, especially in electoral campaigns, with the danger that this represents for our democracies. No doubt because of the monopolistic nature of big technologies, more powerful than many governments, and of their capacity to adapt to the pressures of authoritarian regimes like China or Russia.

The unrest reached the point in Washington of uniting Democratic and Republican senators, especially after hearing the devastating testimony of Frances Haugen about the greed of Facebook, the company she worked for and her desire to preserve her huge profits even in the detriment of citizens. “Health and democracy. There is no news in the strict sense if we take into account the role played by Mark Zuckerberg’s company in the election of Donald Trump in 2016, with the personal profiles he provided to Cambridge Analytica to be used in the election campaign without the permission of their owners.

Haugen appeared in the Senate in the aftermath of the blackout that interrupted the service of Facebook and its subsidiaries Instagram and WhatsApp, the first, third and fourth social network by number of users, leaving nearly a third of humanity in secret. There is little explanation for the origin of the failure. One of the characteristics of large technology companies is the duplicity of their behavior: they sell transparency but practice opacity, they evade the rules of the game but become secret judges of the decisions they make on the abuses of their users. , as happened with the suspension. . from Trump’s Twitter account.

If it was a cyber attack, we won’t know either. In cyberwarfare, the attacker has no interest in being identified. With Facebook attacked and burned for five hours, it’s a rare moment to find out how the new art of war will work, through battles without bombs and invasions that threaten to obscure, cripple and render entire societies defenseless. . In hyperconnected globalization, power will be given by the switch that can cut the services and communications of the country to be submitted. It responds to the ideal of war according to Sun Tzu, which is won without a fight, even if consequently we cannot exclude that there are riots and victims.

The march towards a hyper-communicated world continues to offer us the inevitable dark side of this double-sided god Janus who is all technology when no one dominates or leads it. We are facing the deadly collapse of a globalization hostile to regulation and unable to limit the power of monopolies. Without the rules of the game, we are heading for dictatorship.

Source of the article

Disclaimer: This article is generated from the feed and is not edited by our team.


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/facebook-glimpses-of-the-next-war-opinion/feed/ 0
Biden’s massive reset you probably don’t even know is happening https://tcmechwars.com/bidens-massive-reset-you-probably-dont-even-know-is-happening/ https://tcmechwars.com/bidens-massive-reset-you-probably-dont-even-know-is-happening/#respond Wed, 06 Oct 2021 13:37:00 +0000 https://tcmechwars.com/bidens-massive-reset-you-probably-dont-even-know-is-happening/ The United States is at the center of the most important strategic change in its foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Why is this a secret? It marks a generational shift in how the United States views its national interests in the world and its role in the world. The magnitude of […]]]>

The United States is at the center of the most important strategic change in its foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Why is this a secret?

It marks a generational shift in how the United States views its national interests in the world and its role in the world.

The magnitude of the change in the way the United States approaches its national interests in the world and its role in the world is so great that it affects virtually every aspect of American policy abroad and at home. Unlike the change that took place after September 11, it is not responsive or closely linked to developments in any one region of the world. It is truly strategic, based on the recognition of radical global changes and the anticipation of the consequences of the major trends which are reshaping the world.

Key elements of it have been in the works for years, but despite the great importance of the changes taking place, many people don’t even know this change is happening. The Biden administration has a compelling new vision for America’s place in the world, but so far it has encountered significant obstacles in sharing a compelling story about this vision that has been widely heard and understood by the people. American.

Many elements of this policy transformation have received coverage, but it has tended to be driven by breaking news, without the context to see the whole that the parts fit into. One example is that in the past six weeks, the United States not only emerged from the longest war in our history, but also ended the post-9/11 era of American foreign policy. The chapter in the history of US international affairs that included the global war on terror and its failures, abuses, opportunity costs, loss of life and damage to America’s reputation has finally been years closed. too late.

Also ended a period of centrality of the Middle East to US foreign policy priorities, a period that began long before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. No longer dependent on foreign oil as we once were, no longer competing with the Soviets for primacy in one of the world’s strategic resource centers, and no longer mistakenly presenting Islamist terror as the greatest threat for the United States, we could give our involvement in the more appropriate weight of the region. We could focus on bigger and bigger challenges, from China’s rise to the climate crisis, next-generation security threats like those associated with cyberconflict and automated warfare to figure out how to restore U.S. strength from there. interior, to restore and reinvent international institutions to do the same with our global network of alliances. Headlines from the past six weeks have told the story of individual elements of this change. But the stories of our withdrawal from Afghanistan have focused more on the challenges faced during the exit itself than on its historical context.

While the redefinition of the President’s strategic priorities was clearly illustrated by a first summit between Quad leaders, the United States, Japan, Australia and India, the central strategic partnership we have to counter the Growing Chinese influence in the Asia-Pacific region, the event received limited coverage. Instead, a parallel US effort to build capacity in Asia-Pacific – the launch of the AUKUS partnership between the US, UK, and Australia – received coverage primarily because a related sale of US nuclear submarines to Australia sparked a diplomatic conflict. kerfuffle with the French who hoped to sell their Down Under submarines. The fact that these events were programmed in part to act as a counterpoint to the exit from Afghanistan, a sign of our new priorities, was not mentioned anywhere.

Likewise, the President’s efforts to invest trillions in US infrastructure and in the vital engines of the US economy have been expressed in purely national terms. They were not contrasted, as they should have been, with efforts to prioritize the spending of trillions over the past two decades over the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or the creation of even greater wealth. for America’s richest people and businesses. They were not viewed as investments in US capability comparable to Eisenhower’s investment in the US highway system for national security reasons at the start of the Cold War. They were not presented as vital measures to ensure that infrastructure is resilient against next generation cyber attacks or the adverse effects of extreme weather and other consequences of the climate crisis.

And they have rarely been seen as measures to ensure that we are more competitive with the rising powers of tomorrow like China, even as the president has repeatedly emphasized this from his first speech in Congress until his remarks this week. . But of course, building a new American economy for the 21st century is the raison d’être for investing in research and development, education, and green technologies.

We don’t put the pieces together. Yes, it is noted that Biden overturned Trump’s policies like the withdrawal of international institutions from the WHO to the Paris climate accords to the Iran nuclear deal. But the re-engagement went further with work to advance new multilateral climate initiatives, a new effort to tackle the current pandemic and prepare for upcoming outbreaks, systematic talks with key allies to stem the spread of technology. that endanger us like the 5G technologies sold by the Chinese Huawei, as well as to forge and prioritize new alliances.

These developments are dealt with piecemeal when properly understood as part of something bigger: a plan, a vision for the next era of American world leadership. But we should not be surprised at these developments or their scale. Biden framed them on the campaign trail in speeches and articles such as “Why America Must Lead Again,” and as president starting with his first speech to a joint session of Congress, much of which was aimed at to refocus on the challenges posed by an emerging China. .

Secretary of State Antony Blinken covered these points as well as a shift towards an American foreign policy that avoided the arbitrariness of American exceptionalism and made the United States a better ally in the major speech he delivered in March. The changes in Asia-Pacific and as it relates to China were anticipated in a 2019 article written by Jake Sullivan, now Biden’s national security adviser, and Kurt Campbell, now Asia Tsar at the NSC, titled “Competition without catastrophe ”. Even the links between foreign policy and national priorities were highlighted in a study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace titled “Making US Foreign Policy Work Better for the Middle Class” – the product of a study group to which Sullivan participated.

Why is the message not getting through? There are several reasons. One is that the media continues to prioritize conflicts and disasters, making money through clicks and ratings. As a result, the food fight in Washington takes precedence in cases like the current budget battle over the strategy behind the Biden Plan or its longer-term consequences. Likewise, two weeks of chaos in Afghanistan was apparently a bigger story than the impact of ending 20 years of futile and reckless warfare.

However, part of the responsibility lies with the administration. Part of this is for very good reasons – they are focused on getting the job done and they have been very busy and very understaffed due to GOP obstructionism blocking confirmations from the majority of all appointments. you Biden’s superiors in national security. However, part of it has to do with what a former senior communications official in a Democratic administration described as a problem of “too many press secretaries and not enough communications strategists.” In other words, as good as administration spokespersons like Jen Psaki in the White House and Ned Price in the State Department are, they mostly focus on tackling the daily fires, not transmission. more important strategic messages. (Again, the press plays a big role in this.)

This is something that should be addressed by the Biden team. A big change is underway, a long-awaited and profoundly important change. The president and his team deserve it. This explains many of their actions. And by presenting developments as part of a larger plan, the administration is also likely to gain the reputation and influence that these skills and leadership bring.

For now, this great story is largely lost. The American people and the world deserve to hear it.


Source link

]]>
https://tcmechwars.com/bidens-massive-reset-you-probably-dont-even-know-is-happening/feed/ 0