Quotes of the Day:

"There are two rough but ready ways to distinguish regular from irregular warfare. The first is by the character of the combatants. Writing a century ago, Colonel Callwell of the British army employed the contemporary term of art, “small war.” He defined it thus: “Practically it may be said to include all campaigns other than those where both the opposing sides consist of regular troops.” In other words, a small war is waged between state and nonstate adversaries. The legal and political status of the belligerents defines the irregularity. The second approach, in contrast, focuses upon modes of operation. Irregular warfare is waged by such irregular methods as guerrilla warfare preponderantly, probably with precursor and then adjunct terrorism. Scholars of strategic arcana like to debate their conceptual choices. Sometimes these matter. Is our subject insurgency, or is it irregular warfare? The latter risks diverting us unduly into a military box canyon at the expense of shortchanging the implications of the eternal truth that there is more to war than warfare. Indeed, in some parts of this world even referring to war and warfare can mislead by suggesting the possibility of their opposites, peace and stabilization. A territory may be locked in a condition of permanent war and peace. That is conceptually—as well as politically, legally, and socially—confusing to tidy-minded academics and drafters of doctrine manuals."

- Colin Gray

Given Colin Gray's description above regarding IW and all the controversy surrounding the definition, I suggest this: 

“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”

- Friedrich Nietzsche

“If you kept the small rules, you could break the big ones.” 

- George Orwell, 1984

1. China is desperately trying to fill its military ranks

2. An American’s Detention in Afghanistan Tests U.S. Resolve to Negotiate With Taliban

3. Israeli forces raid Gaza's largest hospital, where hundreds of patients are stranded by fighting

4. Biden and Xi Jinping: what to expect from meeting in San Francisco

5. Myanmar rebels says dozens of junta forces surrender, captured

6. Army secretary fears mid-career officer exodus amid promotion holds

7. Sierra Nevada to supply US Army with intel-gathering jets in $554M deal

8. Talking to Biden, preparing for war — U.S. panel sees Xi bracing China for conflict to come

9. Information Resilience: Countering Disinformation and Its Threat to the U.S. Alliance System

10. The Urgent Call for a Bipartisan Disinformation Commission

11. ‘Brotherhood’ Review: The West Point Rugby Team Made Them

12. Taiwanese troops may be on their way to train on US soil

13. U.S. Needs to Be Ready for War

14. Military restraint isn’t working — peace through strength is the only option

15. The U.S. says Hamas operates within and beneath hospitals, endorsing Israel’s allegations.

16. Army Chief Says A General Retired Rather Than Wait Out Alabama Sen. Tuberville Holds

17. Army Special Forces medic sues parachute makers, sellers

18. Calls for more oversight, punishment after major military disasters

19. Cooke: Face It, Hamas’s Propaganda Works

20. Why Antisemitism, Anger and Intolerance Have Infected America’s Ivy League Colleges — Paet One and Part Two

1. China is desperately trying to fill its military ranks

I saw this flagged on social media with this comment and excerpt:

During the Vietnam conflict one often heard the rhetorical question: "What if they had a war, but nobody came?" Perhaps US and Chinese youth are answering that question.

------------------------------

"China's struggle to attract talent has been attributed to two factors: China's generations-long family-planning regime known as the one-child policy, although now scrapped, has left parents cautious about sending their only child to the military, where they could potentially experience war, according to a research report by Loro Horta for Singapore's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. Salaries were another factor—benefits offered by the private sector in China were far more attractive than the incentives to serve the state, Horta observed."

China is desperately trying to fill its military ranks

Newsweek · by Aadil Brar · November 13, 2023

China is struggling to fill the ranks with its military branches despite increased efforts to attract new recruits, job ads suggest.

On WeChat, a Chinese do-everything app, recruitment messages seek both young and middle-aged recruits for active duty officer and administrative roles within the People's Liberation Army, promising "better benefits" than those enjoyed by civil servants.

On the border with India, PLA soldiers were seen enjoying hot pot and playing video games while stationed in the inhospitable Himalayan environment, according to state media footage carried by military networks.

The propaganda videos sought to reassure parents that their sons and daughters would be taken care of when deployed in the field. China's PLA-linked state media accounts now curate daily content about the lives of serving military personnel in a quest to boost recruitment numbers and reassure single-child families.

China's struggle to attract talent has been attributed to two factors: China's generations-long family-planning regime known as the one-child policy, although now scrapped, has left parents cautious about sending their only child to the military, where they could potentially experience war, according to a research report by Loro Horta for Singapore's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

Salaries were another factor—benefits offered by the private sector in China were far more attractive than the incentives to serve the state, Horta observed.

The PLA is now offering lucrative contracts to boost the falling recruitment rate, with the view that sustaining a sizable force will have direct implications for Beijing's ongoing military modernization—as well as its designs on territories including Taiwan.

"We will offer 'five insurances and one fund,' which cover a pension, medical insurance, work injury, unemployment insurance, maternity pay and a housing fund," said an advertisement by the National University of Defense Technology, a public research institute.

The PLA Air Force offers about $1,500 per month for professional and technical roles filled by individuals with an undergraduate degree, and around $1,640 per month to those with a graduate degree, a WeChat post said.

In the Chinese air force, recruits with a positive annual service assessment stand to earn a 10 percent bonus on top of their salary, according to an online recruitment post, a sign of the military's steadily rising average salaries in recent years in order to match private sector wages.

However, the PLA's troubled recruitment of both active duty officers and civilians runs deep, according to available research. China's military is now conducting two recruitment drives per year, up from one, according to a BluePath Labs consultancy report prepared for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

China has adopted a "twice a year and two retirements" model to create a more balanced military service, which was earlier plagued by the departure of two-year conscripts, the report said. Half of the conscripts, roughly 35 percent of the total conscripted forces, previously experienced a turnover each year, impacting PLA's training in the past.

Members of the Peoples Liberation Army band are seated during the opening ceremony of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China at the Great Hall of People on October 16, 2022, in Beijing, China. The PLA is struggling to fill its military ranks, job ads suggest. Kevin Frayer/Getty Images News/WireImage

"Most significantly, in 2020, the PLA shifted from a single conscription cycle per year to two cycles per year, with the aim of eliminating uneven levels of unit combat-readiness at certain times of the year," BluePath Labs said.

The PLA ended an upskilling program after it failed to train officers at civil academic institutions, compounding the military's struggles in its search for educated talent, according to the report.

The Chinese military, meanwhile, remains heavily invested in filling civilian roles, which are sold to the public for their job security, with little chance of experiencing actual combat.

"Those who pass the exam will be admitted to the military establishment, with more than 30,000 positions to choose from," a military ad said this year.

At least one PLA officer believed Beijing needed to do more to improve the recruitment and retention of officers.

"We need to do a lot more work, including changes to the recruitment system and making sure that people can develop after serving," Maj. Gen. Tang Yongsheng of the PLA's National Defense University told The Economist in a recent interview.

Uncommon Knowledge

Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.

Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.

Newsweek · by Aadil Brar · November 13, 2023

2. An American’s Detention in Afghanistan Tests U.S. Resolve to Negotiate With Taliban

​There is no rest for Roger Carstens and his team.

An American’s Detention in Afghanistan Tests U.S. Resolve to Negotiate With Taliban

Ryan Corbett has spent 15 months in prison, and his family worries time is running out

https://www.wsj.com/world/an-american-held-in-afghanistan-tests-u-s-resolve-to-negotiate-with-taliban-c3ad2e16?mod=hp_listb_pos1

By Brett Forrest

Follow

Nov. 14, 2023 8:00 am ET

Ryan Corbett, standing in the back with his family, is being held in Afghanistan. PHOTO: BALLENGER PHOTOGRAPHY

In the summer of 2022, nearly a year after the Taliban reclaimed power in Afghanistan, American Ryan Corbett and a German colleague traveled to Sheberghan, a remote city 300 miles northwest of Kabul. The two men weren’t there long before a Taliban security force took them into custody.

The Taliban charged Corbett, 40 years old, and his colleague with proselytizing Christianity, which Corbett’s family and colleague have denied. In September, the State Department designated Corbett wrongfully detained, which unlocks diplomatic and intelligence resources across the highest levels of government to secure the release of U.S. citizens through swaps or other means. 

The administration’s hostage envoy has worked closely on the case, meeting with Taliban officials in search of a solution. Until now, Corbett’s plight hasn’t been made public.

Corbett’s case has become a test of Washington’s resolve to bring back its citizens from the most hostile corners of the world, even if it means engaging with governments it doesn’t recognize and keeping alive talks in the face of what U.S. officials consider unrealistic demands. A concern among analysts and officials is that the Taliban—eager to gain diplomatic recognition and a reduction in international sanctions—is collecting Western hostages as leverage to advance political goals.

“The risk for Washington is that the Taliban will use captive Americans as a pressure point, as a bargaining chip, to try to get more from the U.S. before being willing to play ball with the administration on helping address the most urgent U.S. goals,” said Michael Kugelman, the director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center, a Washington think tank.

A spokesman for the Taliban didn’t respond to several requests for comment.

In recent years, hostage diplomacy globally has caused mounting difficulties for the U.S. government. Several countries antagonistic to Washington—notably Iran, Russia and Venezuela—have detained U.S. citizens, ultimately extracting people, cash or other concessions in return for them.

Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich is being detained in Russia. PHOTO: EVGENIA NOVOZHENINA/REUTERS

Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich was designated as wrongfully detained after Russian authorities arrested him more than seven months ago while he was on a reporting trip. He is accused of espionage, a charge that he, the Journal and the U.S. government vehemently deny.

During the Biden administration, 37 Americans have gained their freedom from detention abroad, according to a senior U.S. official.

In exchange for Corbett, the Taliban has outlined goals that the U.S. considers unrealistic, a second senior U.S. administration official said, declining to provide specifics of the talks.

According to this senior U.S. official and other people who have knowledge of relevant discussions, Taliban officials are interested in Muhammad Rahim al-Afghani, an Afghan who has been held in extrajudicial detention at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay since 2008.

The Taliban asked U.S. officials for Rahim during the Trump administration and again during the talks preceding the release of an American from Taliban custody last fall. Rahim’s name “continues to come up,” the senior official said.

U.S. intelligence considers Rahim a continuing significant threat to national security, and his release would require approval from the prison’s periodic review board, which has denied him on numerous occasions. The Taliban leadership is aware of this dynamic, according to the senior U.S. official.

“It’s not a real demand because real demands are things that could conceivably be had,” the official said. “Asking for something unavailable smacks of purporting to negotiate in good faith while really prolonging a situation that’s inhumane and unacceptable.”

For 15 months, Corbett has been held for long periods in solitary confinement in Kabul prisons controlled by the Taliban’s General Directorate of Intelligence, his health in decline, according to interviews the Journal conducted with recently freed detainees.

In Afghanistan, Corbett isn’t alone. The Taliban holds several other Americans, according to recently released detainees and people who are familiar with relevant discussions. State Department officials declined to comment on the precise number of Americans they believe are held and—if any, other than Corbett—have been designated as wrongfully detained. 

Some Corbett supporters have expressed frustration at the progress of the talks over his release and have demanded a focused effort to reach a solution, suggesting that the administration has set aside his case in the pursuit of prioritized policies. 

Ryan Corbett and his wife Anna in September 2021. PHOTO: KATELYNN’S PHOTOGRAPHY

“Under no circumstances should Ryan and other American hostages have to compete for attention,” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Corbett moved to Afghanistan in 2010 with his wife, Anna, and their two daughters. 

Corbett learned Pashto and worked for Christian-affiliated nongovernment organizations, handling administrative duties and teaching English, according to his family. The couple’s son was born in Afghanistan, tying the family further to the country.

The Taliban’s sweep to power in 2021 drove Corbett from Afghanistan, and back to his western New York hometown.

Western sanctions on the Taliban complicated the delivery of international economic aid to the country, and hunger and poverty soared. The U.S. eased some sanctions and boosted humanitarian assistance as the two sides found common ground on counterterrorism. The Taliban had an enemy in Islamic State-Khorasan Province, an ISIS affiliate the U.S. feared could spread beyond the region.

Corbett had maintained a consulting company in Kabul with a small local staff and wanted to keep it going, according to his family. Despite the withdrawal of U.S. and Western forces and the uncertainty of living under Taliban rule, some NGOs have also continued operating in Afghanistan. 

Corbett made two trips to Afghanistan last year, gauging the wisdom of a permanent return.

He misjudged the risks. Corbett accompanied a German colleague, who worked for an NGO and wanted to expand its local contacts, on a trip to Sheberghan in August last year. Days into the pair’s visit, a Taliban security force arrived at the house where they stayed, demanding to know why they hadn’t registered their presence with local authorities.

Locked in a city jail, as guards tortured prisoners in neighboring cells, Corbett texted family and associates, the gravity of his predicament setting in, according to several fellow inmates who spoke to the Journal, and according to Corbett’s family.

Transferring Corbett to a Kabul prison, Taliban officials charged him with proselytizing and during interrogation demanded a list of Afghans that he had led astray from Islam. Interrogators threatened a 20-year sentence from a Sharia-law judge, according to a fellow inmate. 

While Corbett remained in prison through the end of last year, other Americans started getting out as the U.S. engaged the Taliban. 

Roger Carstens is the U.S. special presidential envoy for hostage affairs. PHOTO: KARIM JAAFAR/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

In September last year, Roger Carstens, the U.S. special presidential envoy for hostage affairs, helped secure the release of American Mark Frerichs, a civil engineer held by the Taliban for more than two years, exchanging Haji Bashir Noorzai, an Afghan who was serving a life sentence in U.S. federal prison for drug trafficking.

In December, the Taliban released two additional Americans, including Ivor Shearer, a filmmaker. That same month, the German government arranged for the release of Corbett’s colleague, according to people familiar with the discussions. A spokesman for the German government declined to comment, citing the sensitivity of detainee cases.

In March this year, Corbett was transferred to prison 69, a Kabul basement holding pen for foreign detainees. For months, he was held alone in a cell. 

Corbett sometimes refused the prison’s meager meals, waging hunger strikes to force phone calls with U.S. officials, according to former inmates. In May, on a six-minute call with his wife, the only such call he has had so far, he said he had been fainting and was taking pills his jailers were giving him, although he couldn’t be sure what they contained, according to his family.

Transferred to a cell with other Westerners, Corbett was gaunt, suffering circulatory problems that turned his feet purple, said a former inmate. 

Several cellmates gained their release earlier this year, and Corbett shared doubts over the U.S. commitment to his case, speaking of suicide as the prison’s only certain exit, a former inmate said.

Meanwhile, discussions about Corbett’s release with the Taliban appear to have stalled, according to people familiar with the U.S.-Taliban talks. “I don’t think we’re close, given their maximalist demands,” the second senior U.S. administration official said.

Write to Brett Forrest at brett.forrest@wsj.com

Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Appeared in the November 15, 2023, print edition as 'U.S. Resolve Tested in Talks With Taliban Over American'.

3. Israeli forces raid Gaza's largest hospital, where hundreds of patients are stranded by fighting

Israeli forces raid Gaza's largest hospital, where hundreds of patients are stranded by fighting

AP · November 15, 2023

KHAN YOUNIS, Gaza Strip (AP) — Israeli forces raided Gaza’s largest hospital early Wednesday, where hundreds of patients, including newborns, have been stranded with dwindling supplies and no electricity, as the army extended its control across Gaza City and the north.

Shifa Hospital has become a symbol of the widespread suffering of Palestinian civilians during the war between Israel and Hamas, which erupted after the militant group killed some 1,200 people and seized around 240 captives in a surprise Oct. 7 attack into southern Israel.

The hospital is also at the heart of clashing narratives over who is to blame for the thousands of deaths and widespread destruction in the besieged territory. Israel accuses Hamas of using Palestinians as human shields, while Palestinians and rights groups say Israel has recklessly endangered civilians as it seeks to eradicate the group.

‘A TERRIFYING SITUATION’

Mohammed Zaqout, the director of hospitals in Gaza, said Israeli tanks were inside the medical compound and that soldiers had entered buildings, including the emergency and surgery departments, which house intensive care units. It was not clear if he was speaking from inside the compound.

“The occupation forces stormed the buildings,” he said angrily over the phone. He said the patients, including children, are terrified. “They are screaming. It’s a very terrifying situation ... we can do nothing for the patients but pray.”

The Israeli military said it was carrying out a “precise and targeted operation against Hamas in a specified area in the Shifa Hospital.” It said the soldiers were accompanied by medical teams and had brought medical supplies and baby food as well as incubators and other equipment.

A Palestinian militant walks following an Israeli military raid on the town of Tulkarem, West Bank, Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2023. At least seven Palestinians were killed overnight during an Israeli raid, the Palestinian Health Ministry said Tuesday. The Israeli army said it killed a number of militants during an exchange of fire. AP Photo/Majdi Mohammed)

Israel says Hamas has a massive command center inside and beneath Shifa, but has not provided visual evidence, while Hamas and the hospital staff have repeatedly denied the allegations.

Hours before the raid, the United States said its own intelligence indicated militants have used Shifa and other hospitals — and tunnels beneath them — to support military operations and hold hostages.

The Israeli military said that the forces raiding Shifa are also searching for hostages. The plight of the captives, who include men, women and children, has galvanized Israeli support for the war, and families and supporters of the hostages are holding a protest march from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Two and a half weeks after sending tanks and ground troops into northern Gaza, Israeli forces also claimed control of several key buildings and a downtown neighborhood in Gaza City.

A TRICKLE OF FUEL FOR AID WORKERS

Most of the hundreds of thousands of people living in Gaza City and surrounding areas have fled after weeks of Israeli bombardments. Hardly any aid has been delivered to the the north, which has been without power or running water for weeks.

More than 11,200 people, two-thirds of them women and minors, have been killed in Gaza, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry in Ramallah, and two thirds of the territory’s 2.3 million people have fled their homes. About 2,700 people have been reported missing, with most believed to be buried under the rubble. The ministry’s count does not differentiate between civilian and militant deaths.

Palestinians mourn their relatives killed in the Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip, in the hospital in Khan Younis, Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2023. ( AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

Almost the entire population of Gaza has squeezed into the southern two-thirds of the tiny territory, where conditions have been deteriorating as bombardment there continues.

The U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees said Tuesday that its fuel depot in Gaza was empty and that it would soon cease relief operations, including bringing limited supplies of food and medicine in from Egypt for the more than 600,000 people sheltering in severely overcrowded U.N.-run schools and other facilities in the south.

Israeli defense officials changed course early Wednesday to allow some 24,000 liters (6,340 gallons) of fuel in for humanitarian efforts, officials said. Earlier, they repeatedly rejected allowing fuel into Gaza, saying Hamas would divert it for military use.

Palestinians inspect a damaged building following an Israeli military raid on the town of Tulkarem, West Bank, Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2023. AP Photo/Majdi Mohammed)

COGAT, the Israeli defense body responsible for Palestinian affairs, said it would allow U.N. trucks to refill at the Rafah crossing on the Egyptian border later Wednesday. It said the decision was made in response to a request from the U.S.

HOSPITALS OUT OF SERVICE

The raid into Shifa sparked condemnation from Jordan and the internationally recognized Palestinian Authority, which called it a violation of international law. U.N. aid chief Martin Griffiths said he was “appalled” by the raid, saying the protection of civilians “must override all other concerns.”

Hospitals can lose their protected status if combatants use them for military purposes, but civilians must be given ample time to flee, and any attack must be proportional to the military objective.

Thousands of displaced people who had been sheltering at Shifa, along with patients who were able to move, had fled the medical compound in Gaza City through a corridor established by Israeli forces in recent days as Israeli troops encircled the complex and battled Hamas militants outside its gates. Some Palestinians who made it out said Israeli forces had fired at evacuees.

Shifa had stopped operations over the weekend, as its supplies dwindled and a lack of electricity left it no way to run incubators and other lifesaving equipment. After days without refrigeration, morgue stuff dug a mass grave Tuesday for 120 bodies in a courtyard.

The Health Ministry said 40 patients, including three babies, have died since Shifa’s emergency generator ran out of fuel Saturday. Another 36 babies are at risk of dying because there is no power for incubators, according to the ministry.

Palestinians look for survivors after an Israeli strike on a building last night in Jebaliya refugee camp, Gaza Strip, Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2023. (AP Photo/Mahmoud Abo Salamah)

BATTLE IN GAZA CITY

Israeli troops have extended their control across northern Gaza, capturing the territory’s legislature building and police headquarters. But independent accounts of the fighting in Gaza City have been nearly impossible to gather, as communications with the north have largely collapsed.

Israeli military spokesman Daniel Hagari said Israeli forces have completed the takeover of Shati refugee camp, a densely built district, and are moving about freely in the city as a whole.

Inside some of the newly captured buildings, soldiers held up the Israeli flag and military flags in celebration. In a nationally televised news conference, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said Hamas had “lost control” of northern Gaza and that Israel made significant gains in Gaza City.

But asked about the time frame for the war, Gallant said: “We’re talking about long months, not a day or two.”

The military says its forces have found weapons and eliminated fighters in government buildings, schools and residential buildings.

Israel says it has killed several thousand fighters, including important mid-level commanders, while 46 of its own soldiers have been killed in Gaza.

___

Magdy reported from Cairo. Associated Press writer Amy Teibel in Jerusalem contributed to this report.

___

Full AP coverage at https://apnews.com/hub/israel-hamas-war.

AP · November 15, 2023

4. Biden and Xi Jinping: what to expect from meeting in San Francisco

A low bar for the meeting.

Biden and Xi Jinping: what to expect from meeting in San Francisco

Reuters · by Michael Martina

SAN FRANCISCO, Nov 14 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping will meet on Wednesday before a summit of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in San Francisco, seeking to reduce friction in what many see as the world's most dangerous rivalry.

The leaders of the world's two largest economies have known each other for over a decade and have shared hours of conversation in six interactions since Biden's January 2021 inauguration. But they have met only once in person since then, and Xi, who arrived in San Francisco on Tuesday evening, had not visited the United States since 2017 when Donald Trump was president.

WHAT ISSUES ARE THEY LIKELY TO DISCUSS?

The White House says the aim of the summit, to be held at an unannounced location in the San Francisco Bay Area, is to boost communication to prevent an intense rivalry from veering into conflict. The meeting is expected to cover global issues from the conflict in the Middle East to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, North Korea's ties with Russia, Taiwan, human rights, artificial intelligence, as well as "fair" trade and economic relations.

Biden is expected to tell Xi that the U.S. remains committed to standing with its allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific, in the face of Chinese pressure against democratically governed Taiwan, which China claims as its own, and in the South and East China Seas. He will also express a specific commitment to the security of the Philippines, U.S. officials said.

WHAT DEALS CAN WE EXPECT?

The White House says Washington is looking for specific outcomes and hopes to see progress in reestablishing military-to military ties with China and in combating trade in the potent synthetic opioid drug fentanyl, which has become a scourge in the United States. Any deal on fentanyl would likely mean Washington's having to lift human rights sanctions on China's police forensic institute in return.

Biden said on Tuesday his goal would be to resume normal communications with China, including military-to-military contacts.

With elections in Taiwan in early 2024, political analysts expect China to seek U.S. assurances that it will do nothing to encourage pro-independence elements, while Xi will also be hoping to persuade Biden to ease up on tariffs and the export controls that aim to keep the most advanced semiconductors from being sent to China. In a separate dinner with business leaders, the Chinese president will be looking to boost flagging investment by U.S. firms in China.

The leaders may highlight plans to increase commercial flights between the two countries, and policy experts said they could move to ease restrictions on journalist visas, which would be to the benefit of both sides.

Biden is also expected to urge China to use its influence with Iran to not broaden the conflict in the Middle East.

But no one is expecting a reset of the relationship or any grand bargain that will dramatically alter how the countries see each other. "We remain in an enduring period of competition and tension," said Richard Fontaine of Washington's Center for a New American Security. "There's not going to be any big breakthroughs, there won't be any real change in substance."

HOW WILL THE MEETING IMPACT MARKETS?

Market participants will keep a keen focus on the talks to gauge sentiment between the two governments.

The 21 APEC members and the world beyond hope for an easing of U.S.-China tensions, and progress on that score would be viewed positively, but political analysts said any improvement in the mood could be only temporary. Elections in Taiwan early next year and the November 2024 U.S. presidential vote that could bring a return of Trump to the White House promise a year fraught with uncertainty.

Reporting by David Brunnstrom and Michael Martina; Editing by Don Durfee, Grant McCool and Leslie Adler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Acquire Licensing Rights, opens new tab

Reuters · by Michael Martina

5. Myanmar rebels says dozens of junta forces surrender, captured

Is the tide shifting toward the rebels? Or at least away from the junta?

Here is a note I received from Dave Eubank of the Free Burma Rangers (via Signal Chat) when I queried him. He gave me permission to share these comments. Seems like Burma is a battlefield in strategic competition with the axis of authoritarians supporting the junta.

My query: Seems to be increasing international reporting. This is from the Telegraph today. What is the ground truth? Are these reports accurate? What must the international community, UN, ASEAN, US, civil society do to help?  

yes, the bad news is that the Burma military is coming with a speed and a force that I’ve never seen before supported by Russia, North Korea, China, and Iran. Other bad news is there is not-any single leader of the resistance, nor is there that much coordination. The good news is there’s never been a unity against the regime and for democracy and for ethnic rights in the entire history of Burma as is there now. This unity for, a federal democracy , cuts across all social, economic, religious, political, ideological, racial and ethnic lines. We see it in the field, where thousands a Burmans from the highest professionals down to tradesmen, have joined the resistance against the regime. Just two years ago the Burma military controlled 80 to 90% of the countries land mass. Now they control less than half. It is true they control all major cross border crossing areas and All major cities and towns -however, they’ve lost much of the control of the spaces in between. While there is not a lot of close coordination between the different ethnic armed groups, and PDFs, there is a growing cooperation, and this is increasing without outside help t-his may take longer and will certainly be bloodier, but I do believe the forces against the dictators will ultimately win. At least that’s my hope. I pray that the dictators hearts will change and there can be some other way, but if not that they will fall. In the end, I pray for freedom, justice, forgiveness, and reconciliation, and a new start.

Myanmar rebels says dozens of junta forces surrender, captured

Reuters

Nov 15 (Reuters) - Dozens of members of the Myanmar security forces have surrendered or been captured, a rebel group said on Wednesday, as a coordinated offensive by insurgent groups battling the junta gathers pace in several parts of the country.

At least 28 policemen gave up their weapons and surrendered to the Arakan Army (AA), while 10 soldiers were arrested, said the group which is fighting for autonomy in Rakhine State in western Myanmar.

Reuters could not independently verify the information from the AA, which is one of three ethnic minority insurgent groups that launched a coordinated offensive against junta forces in late October.

A curfew has been imposed in the Rakhine State capital Sittwe, where military tanks have been sighted, the administration there said.

The rebels have captured some towns and military posts, including on the border with China, presenting the junta with its biggest test since the military took power in a 2021 coup, ousting an elected government led by Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.

A junta spokesperson, Zaw Min Tun, on Tuesday accused the rebel groups of "destroying the whole country" and said reports of captured military posts were "propaganda".

"The enemies retreated after they lost soldiers. We are trying to combine small posts strategically," he said.

The spokesperson said fighting was going on in Shan, Rakhine and Kayah states. He did not comment on reports of junta forces surrendering.

Fighting has also been reported in Chin State in the northwest, where 43 Myanmar soldiers crossed into the Indian state of Mizoram after a rebel attack, a police official in Mizoram said.

Most of the Myanmar soldiers were flown by Indian forces to another point on the border and handed back to Myanmar authorities, said an Indian security official who declined to be identified.

Myanmar's military-appointed president last week said the country was at risk of breaking apart because of an ineffective response to the rebellion by fighters the generals denounce as "terrorists".

The military has for decades said it is the only institution capable of holding diverse Myanmar together. Critics of military rule dismiss that and call instead for a democratic, federal system.

Reporting by Reuters staff; Writing by Kanupriya Kapoor; Editing by Robert Birsel

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Acquire Licensing Rights, opens new tab

Reuters

6. Army secretary fears mid-career officer exodus amid promotion holds

The domino effect of the Senator's holds?

Army secretary fears mid-career officer exodus amid promotion holds

armytimes.com · by Davis Winkie · November 14, 2023

The Army’s top official is “worried” an Alabama senator’s long-running blockade on general officer promotions could induce talented field grade officers to leave the service, she said.

Army Secretary Christine Wormuth’s warning, delivered Tuesday at the POLITICO Defense Summit, surfaced a little-discussed potential consequence of Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s nine-month blanket hold on senior officer promotions.

Typically, military promotions quickly clear the Senate via fast-tracked voice votes, but the chamber’s rules allow a single senator to block that process. And Tuberville, R-Ala., has done so in protest of the Defense Department’s abortion access policy — which the more than 350 impacted officers do not control.

“In the long term, I really have deep concerns about what my majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels are thinking about this,” Wormuth said.

Officers in these ranks, also known as field grade officers, typically endure grueling staff assignments and battalion or brigade command tours. They also attain retirement eligibility during this period — and the Army secretary said she fears that the brightest among them may head for the exits now.

“They already see the increasing partisanship in our nation, [and] how that plays out in hearings up on Capitol Hill,” she remarked. “And now when we have a situation where the toothpaste is out of the tube, and general officers and flag officers can have their nominations put on hold [for partisan reasons], I think some of our officers are going to say, ‘I don’t know if this is what I want … I’m going to go work somewhere else and not have to worry about that.’”

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, are developing a workaround to Tuberville’s nine-month blockade. The plan advanced Tuesday from the chamber’s rules committee and could allow the stalled promotions to come to a single floor vote.

RELATED

Democrats advance plan to force quick vote on military nominations

The plan still needs support from Republican senators before the military leadership posts can be filled.

Wormuth described the effort as “promising,” and added, “I think we very much need to see the Senate resolve this.”

About Davis Winkie

Davis Winkie covers the Army for Military Times. He studied history at Vanderbilt and UNC-Chapel Hill, and served five years in the Army Guard. His investigations earned the Society of Professional Journalists' 2023 Sunshine Award and consecutive Military Reporters and Editors honors, among others. Davis was also a 2022 Livingston Awards finalist.

7. Sierra Nevada to supply US Army with intel-gathering jets in $554M deal

The Army and jets! :-) 

Sierra Nevada to supply US Army with intel-gathering jets in $554M deal

c4isrnet.com · by Colin Demarest · November 14, 2023

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army selected Sierra Nevada Corp. to provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft and related services for an ongoing overhaul of its aerial spying and targeting capabilities.

The company’s RAPCON-X, converted Bombardier business jets, won approval for the Army’s Theater Level High Altitude Expeditionary Next Airborne ISR-Signals Intelligence project, or ATHENA-S, according to a Nov. 14 announcement.

The multi-year contract, initially teased last month at the Association of the U.S. Army convention in Washington, is worth $554 million. Sierra Nevada spent millions of its own dollars refining its candidate, which is capable of cuing in on electronic transmissions and collecting target signatures on the ground.

“This award is the direct result of SNC’s commitment to putting ‘skin in the game’ and staying one step ahead by anticipating challenges and innovating solutions years in advance,” Tim Owings, executive vice president for mission solutions and technologies, said in a statement. “Our born-digital design process and engineering techniques place RAPCON-X among the most capable and rapidly configurable A-ISR platforms worldwide.”

RELATED

Lockheed seeks expanded roles for Q-53 radar including drone detection

“It’s legacy has been counter-fire,” said Lockheed Martin's David Kenneweg. “Now, we’ve got a multi-mission radar that does multiple things.”

The Army is in the midst of revamping its aerial reconnaissance and electronic warfare arsenals. It is moving away from Cold War-era planes and their limitations and toward a future where battlefield insights are gleaned from dramatic distance, with long-reaching firepower to match.

The ISR investments come as the U.S. Department of Defense prepares for potential large-scale conflict with Russia and China. The Army is paying particular attention to what’s known as deep sensing, or the capacity to find, monitor, target and kill from farther away and with finer precision.

Both ATHENA-S and its long-range-radar sister, ATHENA-R, will shape the service’s High Accuracy Detection and Exploitation System, or HADES, expected later this decade. L3Harris Technologies and MAG Aerospace were tapped for ATHENA-R earlier this year. The companies did not disclose the value of the contract at the time.

Sierra Nevada said it will conduct its ATHENA-S work at facilities in Hagerstown, Maryland. The company is the 57th largest defense contractor in the world when ranked by defense-related revenue, according to Defense News analysis.

About Colin Demarest

Colin Demarest is a reporter at C4ISRNET, where he covers military networks, cyber and IT. Colin previously covered the Department of Energy and its National Nuclear Security Administration — namely Cold War cleanup and nuclear weapons development — for a daily newspaper in South Carolina. Colin is also an award-winning photographer.

8. Talking to Biden, preparing for war — U.S. panel sees Xi bracing China for conflict to come

Excerpts:

Influence operations

A section of the report focuses on China’s aggressive efforts to shape public and elite opinion around the world in support of its policies.

“Under Xi’s rule, China’s overseas influence activities are now more prevalent, institutionalized, technologically sophisticated, and aggressive than under his predecessors,” the report said.

Talking to Biden, preparing for war — U.S. panel sees Xi bracing China for conflict to come

Congressional committee report sees Beijing preparing for conflict in region as it builds up forces

washingtontimes.com · by Bill Gertz

Military salute at the Chinese flag during the opening ceremony of the 19th Asian Games in Hangzhou, China, Saturday, Sept. 23, 2023. (AP Photo/Eugene Hoshiko) Military salute at the Chinese flag … more >

By - The Washington Times - Tuesday, November 14, 2023

Chinese President Xi Jinping is preparing his military forces for war and directing the rest of the country to prepare for economic hardships that conflict would bring, according to the latest annual report from a congressional commission on China.

The Chinese leader, who also heads the ruling Communist Party and is scheduled to have his first face-to-face meeting in a year with President Biden on Wednesday, has called on government officials and the population to prepare for “worst-case” and “extreme” scenarios as a result of heightened tensions with the United States and its allies in the region.

The 753-page report to Congress by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission includes an alarming list of indicators that Beijing is preparing for war with the United States.

“Throughout 2023, China accelerated its political, military, economic and information pressure against Taiwan, raising further concerns of potential military action,” Commission co-Chair Carolyn Bartholomew said in releasing the report from the influential advisory body.

On the eve of the meeting with Mr. Biden, the panel said Washington had little to show for a flurry of meetings between senior leaders in recent months trying to moderate Beijing’s policies.

“China now appears to view diplomacy with the United States primarily as a tool for forestalling and delaying US pressure over a period of years while China moves ever further down the path of developing its own economic, military and technological capabilities,” the report said.

‘Danger on all fronts’

Commanders of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command have warned Congress for several years that China could use military force against Taiwan in the coming years. Mr. Biden has vowed to defend the island militarily.

The Indo-Pacific Command intelligence chief, Rear Adm. Mike Studeman, has warned that a war with China could erupt from a separate regional confrontation. “It’s danger on all fronts,” Adm. Studeman said in a 2021 speech.

China’s maritime militia in recent weeks rammed a Philippine resupply ship and used water cannons against other ships that sought to resupply a grounded Philippine warship at a disputed outpost in the Spratly Islands that both countries claim as their territory. The United States has a defense treaty with Manila that the State Department has said would cover any attack on Philippine vessels, military or civilian.

Japan has been squaring off against China over the uninhabited Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea that both countries claim.

Commission Vice Chairman Alex Wong said the report was released at a critical time, given the high-profile Xi-Biden meeting after months of bilateral tensions and efforts to repair diplomatic and military communications.

“There is a broader realization not just in Washington, D.C., and not just in the capitals of our friends and allies, but across the peoples of the free world that the Chinese Communist Party represents a generational challenge to the international order,” he said.

According to the bipartisan commission report, the Chinese government is bracing for severe economic damage from international sanctions, foreign economic controls and sharpened strategic rivalry, “including the possibility of an open war over Taiwan.”

Last year, Mr. Xi ordered the nation to harden all aspects of the country for worst-case scenarios and uphold CCP control with a “fighting spirit.” The Chinese leader blamed the United States and its allies for recent economic and diplomatic problems resulting from “containment, encirclement and suppression.”

“The military must … focus on combat ability as the fundamental and only criterion, concentrate all energy on fighting a war, direct all work towards warfare and speed up to build the ability to win,” Mr. Xi said, in a quote cited in the congressional panel’s report.

The war preparations have been backed by legislative, budgetary and logistics moves. The report said those are clear signs that Chinese leaders are “taking preliminary but limited steps to enable effective war mobilization by the military.”

Among the steps are regulations that will enable the faster call-up of military reservists and the conscription of additional troops from retired People’s Liberation Army soldiers. PLA recruiters also are picking up students with science and engineering backgrounds for military cyberdefense and space warfare units.

New military recruitment centers have been opened since late last year, and air raid shelters are being upgraded.

In a sign that Beijing is preparing for casualties from a coming conflict, a “wartime emergency hospital has been set up in Fujian Province, across the 100-mile-wide Taiwan Strait from Taiwan,” the report said.

The Chinese government announced plans to increase grain production “in the event a war disrupts global supply chains,” the report said, and, to counter anticipated foreign sanctions in a war, new regulations call for countermeasures in the event China faces sanctions and export controls.

Moritz Rudolf, a specialist at the Yale Law School Paul Tsai China Center, told the commission that the regulation’s vague language “sends the signal that the necessity to prepare for ‘international struggle’ outweighs the other elements of the PRC’s foreign relations.”

Pressure on Taiwan

The report warns that the military situation in the Taiwan Strait remains tense as a result of China’s acceleration of a campaign of near-daily military pressure against the island, including large-scale war games, regular aircraft intrusions into Taiwan’s air defense zone, warship deployments encircling the island, missile firings over Taiwan and drills simulating attacks on the island.

Chinese military strategists are studying the war in Ukraine for lessons that the PLA can apply in a Taiwan conflict, such as the use of drones and commercial Starlink satellites for military communications, the report said.

Low-level conflict against Taiwan also included the use of two Chinese-flagged vessels, a fishing ship and a container ship, that “deliberately cut two undersea internet cables used by Taiwan’s outlying Matsu Island in February 2023,” the report said.

Better weapons

The report highlighted the development of advanced weapons systems designed to provide China with an edge over U.S. forces, including multiple types of advanced missiles capable of hitting ships at sea with either conventional or nuclear warheads. Cyberdefense and space weapons also advanced systems that could be used to cripple U.S. military forces.

One unique weapon system showcased in the report is China’s new space-based nuclear weapon, called a fractional orbital bombardment system, or FOBS.

The advancement “raises the possibility that China could permanently deploy nuclear weapons in space, effectively adding a fourth leg to its nascent nuclear triad,” the report said.

The current Chinese triad, like that of the U.S. military, comprises ground-based nuclear missiles, missile submarines and bombers.

“China’s deployment of such a [FOBS] system would deprive the United States of early warning” and increase the danger of a nuclear conflict, the report said.

As with past annual reports, the new China commission report includes developments in security and economic relations and makes recommendations for U.S. policymakers.

The sections on U.S.-China trade and economic matters included an examination of how China uses financing deals with foreign nations to promote its goals and the impact of the Biden administration’s “de-risking” policy to protect U.S. interests from Chinese actions on issues such as supply chain resilience and technology transfers.

The report includes a section on how China is using heavy-handed and aggressive measures against its regional neighbors while challenging international norms and exploiting the weaknesses of open societies.

Influence operations

A section of the report focuses on China’s aggressive efforts to shape public and elite opinion around the world in support of its policies.

“Under Xi’s rule, China’s overseas influence activities are now more prevalent, institutionalized, technologically sophisticated, and aggressive than under his predecessors,” the report said.

Chinese military basing facilities are growing, and espionage operations are “intensified,” showing increased sophistication against foreign spy targets, the report said. Chinese surveillance and military facilities deployed in Cuba could lead to electronic spying against people in the United States.

China could use the Cuban facilities to monitor and potentially disrupt U.S. military deployments and material shipments during a war, the report said. A naval base for Chinese military forces is being built in Cambodia.

According to the report, China is even seeking to control access to the moon for strategic purposes.

“Beijing is working to establish a long-term presence in space, which it seeks to accomplish by first dominating the cislunar domain, or the space between Earth and the moon,” the report said, noting plans by China to build a lunar base by 2030.

The report quotes Jeff Gossel, an analyst with the Air Force National Air and Space Intelligence Center, as saying a Chinese satellite orbiting the moon “could allow China to fly to the far side of the moon and attack U.S. satellites in geosynchronous orbits.”

• Bill Gertz can be reached at bgertz@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2023 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide

washingtontimes.com · by Bill Gertz

9. Information Resilience: Countering Disinformation and Its Threat to the U.S. Alliance System

Conclusion:

These solutions will require dedicated time and resources, and are vital to developing the information resiliency necessary to protect U.S. alliances. U.S. adversaries are adept at responding quickly, and at enormous scale, to messaging that portrays them in a negative light, bolstering their own legitimacy while undermining U.S. narratives. Through proper interagency coordination, training, and education, the United States can counter these efforts and bolster the rules-based international order that its adversaries seek to erode. The United States should proactively promote the rule of law, support allies and partners in doing the same, and rapidly respond to disinformation. When adversaries’ lies travel around the world, the United States can ensure the truth is waiting to counter them.

Information Resilience: Countering Disinformation and Its Threat to the U.S. Alliance System - War on the Rocks

JILL GOLDENZIEL AND DANIEL GRANT

warontherocks.com · by Jill Goldenziel · November 15, 2023

In August, Meta announced a takedown of the “largest known cross-platform covert influence operation in the world.” Information security officers removed 7700 accounts, 954 pages, and 15 groups linked to individuals employed by Chinese law enforcement. The scope of the operation was stunning. It targeted over 50 platforms and applications including YouTube, Reddit, X, TikTok, Pinterest, and Medium. The operation, part of what security professionals have named the “Spamouflage” network, focused on improving foreign perceptions of Chinese foreign policy, attacking critics of the Chinese Communist Party, and denigrating the United States and its allies. The operation is further proof of a concerning trend: the People’s Republic of China is embracing misinformation and disinformation in its influence operations, using methods and techniques traditionally employed by Russia.

These operations are now commonplace. U.S. allies and partners are under constant attack by adversary disinformation campaigns. While Russia remains the largest perpetrator of global disinformation, China executes disinformation campaigns against the United States and its Indo-Pacific allies with impunity. The Russian and Chinese governments seek to influence elections, exploit societal cleavages, and undermine trust in democratic and governmental institutions — threatening the rules-based international order itself.

The U.S. government has done little to properly frame and prioritize this threat. Misinformation and disinformation are mentioned only once in the entire 2022 National Defense Strategy. The oversight is glaring given the gravity of the threat and the intense focus given to integrated deterrence and related concepts such as “deterrence by resilience,” a loosely defined concept that emphasizes the hardening and protection of vital networks and critical infrastructure. To protect U.S. interests abroad and uphold a system of equitable global governance, the United States should be able to protect and withstand disruption at home and throughout its alliance networks within the information domain.

Become a Member

The United States should develop and champion the concept of information resilience. The United States should harden and protect its population, along with those of its allies and partners, against disinformation, adversary influence operations, and lawfare that harm democracy and the rule of law. The United States and its allies and partners should develop a shared understanding of international law and ensure that their militaries and civil servants are trained in what that law is and how to protect it from adversaries who wish to undermine it. The United States should also clear its own legal obstacles to interagency cooperation to enable it to adequately respond to disinformation attacks.

Building a Shared Commitment to International Law

America’s alliances and partnerships depend on a shared commitment to international laws and norms. Like-minded states have pre-committed to laws that reflect a shared understanding of how the world should be. These commitments provide a secure foundation for common defense and the promotion of common values. The United States relies upon law to justify its operations in support of international law. When discussing freedom of navigation operations and other actions in the South China Sea, U.S. officials famously repeat that the United States will fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows. U.S. allies need assurance that the United States is willing and able to protect a free and open international system, and the legal framework that supports it.

The United States often takes this “shared” understanding of international law and norms for granted. Lawyers in most U.S.-allied and partner nations receive only undergraduate training in law, not the extensive graduate-level training and demanding bar examination that American lawyers undergo. For military lawyers the training gap is often even more stark: U.S. military lawyers undergo months of rigorous service-level training, and many complete one or more Masters degrees on top of their law degrees. Law does not have the same cache or prestige in many partner and allied nations as it does in the United States, and lawyers are rarely as plentiful elsewhere as they are in the United States. As a result, in allied and partner nations, members of the public and legal professionals alike may not be trained or educated to understand legal issues that are crucial to their national survival and international security. As a result, individuals and states alike often cannot recognize when adversaries distort and undermine the international legal order. Without knowing their rights, people cannot assert them.

Disinformation Undermines the Rule of Law

Adversary disinformation undermines confidence in the international legal order, the rule of law, and democratic norms by confusing or eroding perceptions of U.S. commitment to law and legitimacy. China routinely spreads the message that the United States flouts its own laws as well as international law. For example, Huawei filed a lawsuit claiming that the United States violated its own constitution when the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act banned government use of Huawei technology. Most law professors found the arguments laughable, and a federal court dismissed the case. However, Huawei hired two public relations firms when it filed the lawsuit, suggesting that its true objective was winning in the court of international public opinion.

In order to degrade the U.S. alliance system, the Chinese Communist Party’s disinformation campaigns portray the United States as an instigator of conflict, perpetrator of human rights violations, and a hegemonic power that asserts its power over unsuspecting and aggrieved Indo-Pacific nations. Concurrently, the Chinese government justifies its own actions through lawfare and interpretations of international law that are incorrect or not agreed upon by other nations. Chinese diplomats and legal professionals are masters at injecting their own preferred language and legal constructs into international discourse, subtly undermining international law. They routinely engage in semantic lawfare by inserting words and phrases into international forums, negotiations, and outcome documents that serve to erode international human rights law. By using phrases like “international human rights cause” in place of “human rights law” in U.N. forums, China implies that human rights are an optional cause that a state can choose to adopt or reject, rather than a set of well-established obligations to which states are legally bound.

In instances where the Chinese government blatantly violates international law or infringes on the sovereignty of its neighbors, messaging networks amplify official Chinese government statements and dubious legal arguments that attempt to portray the Chinese government’s actions as operating within the confines of international law. For example, the U.S. Department of Defense released a video of a People’s Liberation Army warship moving within 150 yards of a U.S. destroyer during a joint U.S.-Canadian operation in the Taiwan Strait on June 3. The United States said that the Chinese naval vessel’s “unsafe interaction” violated international maritime law and raised military risk. China shot back that the maneuver was “lawful” and “justified” by U.S. provocation in the Taiwan Strait, which it considers under its jurisdiction. However, under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which China is a party, beyond a coastal state’s 12-nautical mile territorial sea lie international waters that do not fall under the sovereignty of any state. China’s so-called “jurisdiction” over the Taiwan Strait has no basis in international law. Yet the Chinese government challenges vessels and aircraft in the Taiwan Strait and much of the South China Sea by asserting that it has jurisdiction over those areas and demanding that others ask permission to enter.

To better combat disinformation, the United States and its allies should build stronger information resilience. The U.S. government and its allies should be able to rapidly identify and respond to adversary misinformation and disinformation, and build a shared understanding of both the rules-based international order and the international law that serves as its foundation.

Currently, poor interagency coordination stymies the U.S. government’s response to disinformation, and renders long-term, proactive information campaigns nearly impossible. Under the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center is tasked with directing the federal government’s efforts to identify and counter adversary disinformation, but it has struggled to fill that role. The center, staffed mostly by diplomats and data scientists, has defaulted to an analytics-heavy approach that does an admirable job at characterizing adversary disinformation, but provides little in terms of coordinating an interagency response. In 2022, the State Department inspector general concluded that the center’s “role in countering disinformation was limited to supporting various U.S. government efforts rather than leading and coordinating a whole-of-government approach.” A plethora of counter-disinformation agencies have sprung up across the federal government, including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s Foreign Malign Influence Center, the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and the Defense Department’s new Influence and Perception Management Office. The relationship between these entities and the level of coordination between them is hardly transparent, and should be reviewed by Congress. The Biden administration and Congress should also evaluate whether the State Department (given the Title 22 authorities under which it operates) is the best place from which to lead the fight against disinformation.

Similarly, the State Department’s organization often means that embassy public affairs sections are unequipped to combat adversary disinformation. Embassy country teams are designed to handle day-to-day embassy operations and host-nation relationships, not long-term adversary disinformation campaigns and acute disinformation crises. On that front, there is significant opportunity for increased collaboration between the Department of State and the Department of Defense.

Military information support operations professionals are trained to characterize adversary propaganda, and craft culturally relevant messaging designed to influence foreign audiences. Under specific programs, these messages must be approved by the U.S. embassy responsible for delivery and consumption by foreign audiences. Unfortunately, most military information planners and embassy public affairs personnel have either little or no experience working together. And while military information planners speak in terms of target audiences, effects, and desired behavior change, embassy personnel are more comfortable discussing audience engagement, reach, and two-way communication. A lack of standardized processes and objective alignment result in many country teams being reluctant to partner with the military on messaging.

The Departments of State and Defense should work through these issues in order to address the scope and scale of the disinformation problem. Both entities should work to streamline approvals for cross-border information operations to allow narrative competition to occur in real time. Shared understanding and interaction are key. The Global Engagement Center should expand its analytical exchanges with military information planners, and partnerships with representatives at geographic combatant commands to improve collaboration. The Department of Defense should work to expand military information support teams — groups of military planners who work side-by-side with their diplomatic counterparts at a U.S. embassy to expand government messaging.

Both the Departments of State and Defense should prioritize exchanges involving military information support operations, staff judge advocates, State Department lawyers, and other civilian agency experts in international law, and can host similar exchanges and training events to ensure that partners can identify and publicize violations of international law. Maritime law experts will be especially critical for the Department of Defense and Coast Guard’s increasing maritime domain awareness efforts with partners and allies. Violations of international law demand immediate messaging campaigns designed to inform regional and international audiences of adversary involvement. To that end, the United States and its allies and partners should develop a corps of military and diplomatic professionals who are versed in both law and information operations.

Once Department of State public diplomacy and Department of Defense military information support operations professionals have expanded their interaction and coordination mechanisms, they can create training programs that build ally information capabilities while reinforcing democratic governance and human rights. Subject matter exchanges and training events on law, lawfare, and disinformation will be critical to building a shared understanding of rights, laws, and norms. The State Department should make legal education a focus of educational events and conferences through embassies and bureaus. The Department of Defense should make law a critical part of its regular training and subject matter exchanges with partners and allies and include related topics such as countering propaganda, target audience analyses, and narrative development. These topics would create shared understanding with military and law enforcement partners across multiple subject areas.

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command’s Counter-Lawfare Program is an excellent resource to build awareness of Chinese legal violations. It includes dialogues and shared forums designed to develop shared memoranda of understanding on emerging international legal issues with allies and partners. The program is a strong start, but should be expanded and synchronized across combatant commands by the Joint Staff or Office of the Secretary of Defense, and integrated with the work of legal attachés in U.S. embassies. Leveraging and expanding similar programs with American allies would increase awareness within key audiences — political decision-makers and civil society leadership, who in turn can promote information resilience.

Conclusion

These solutions will require dedicated time and resources, and are vital to developing the information resiliency necessary to protect U.S. alliances. U.S. adversaries are adept at responding quickly, and at enormous scale, to messaging that portrays them in a negative light, bolstering their own legitimacy while undermining U.S. narratives. Through proper interagency coordination, training, and education, the United States can counter these efforts and bolster the rules-based international order that its adversaries seek to erode. The United States should proactively promote the rule of law, support allies and partners in doing the same, and rapidly respond to disinformation. When adversaries’ lies travel around the world, the United States can ensure the truth is waiting to counter them.

Become a Member

Dr. Jill Goldenziel is a professor at the College of Information and Cyberspace at the National Defense University, where she teaches classes on lawfare and information operations; law and governance of the information domain; and information warfare. She advises special operations forces on lawfare and helped develop and implement the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Counter-Lawfare Program. She is a non-resident fellow at the NATO ACO/SHAPE Office of Legal Affairs, which awarded her the 2022 Serge Lazareff Prize for her work as a scholar/practitioner of legal operations (lawfare).

Maj. Daniel Grant is a Marine Corps officer and advanced information operations planner. He has previously served as staff intelligence officer and Indo-Pacific Command support team lead for the Marine Corps Information Operations Center, information warfare officer for Marine Special Operations Company Lima, and as an intelligence planner for Marine Corps Forces Pacific. He is currently serving as commanding officer, India Company; Marine Cryptologic Support Battalion.

Commentary

warontherocks.com · by Jill Goldenziel · November 15, 2023

10. The Urgent Call for a Bipartisan Disinformation Commission

No mention of the Solarium Commission. Does this not fall under its purview?

Excerpts:

A 2022 report reveals a concerning trend: a majority of Americans, cutting across political lines, now view disinformation as a more critical issue than a range of threats, from infectious diseases to terrorism to climate change. This growing concern is reflected in statistics: 71 percent of respondents believe disinformation exacerbates political polarization, 63 percent see it as a violation of human rights, and over 50 percent report feelings of anxiety and stress upon encountering false information.

...

To effectively counteract the disinformation epidemic, senior leaders and policymakers must tackle its underlying causes, not just its symptoms. This requires a deep understanding of American perceptions of disinformation and the development of strategies to mitigate its harmful effects. Key to this effort is promoting media literacy, bolstering fact-checking initiatives, and enhancing transparency, thereby equipping citizens to discern truth from falsehood. Such measures are crucial in safeguarding democratic processes and public discourse from the corrosive impact of disinformation. A holistic approach, encompassing education, collaboration, regulatory measures, and technological innovation, is essential in this fight.

...

The United States has a history of establishing commissions to uncover truth and uphold justice, as seen in the Warren Commission and 9/11 Commission. These bodies have been instrumental in investigating significant national events and providing clarity. Inspired by these models and the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, policymakers could form a new bipartisan commission to thoroughly investigate the nuances of disinformation campaigns. The bipartisan nature of this commission is essential, as it ensures a balanced and fair investigation, free from partisan biases, reflecting a united front against the challenges posed by disinformation. This commission would delve into their origins, tactics, and societal impacts, adopting a rigorous and impartial approach similar to its predecessors.

As the Brookings Institution illustrates, addressing disinformation in the modern era demands a multifaceted strategy. Policymakers must serve a society that values critical thinking and media literacy, enabling Americans to adeptly navigate the flood of information. Collaborating with social media platforms, industry leaders, and civil society is essential for developing effective verification and moderation practices. This need becomes even more pressing with the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, a double-edged sword that could greatly enhance the influence of disinformation campaigns. The sophistication of these AI-driven operations, involving audience manipulation and realistic digital personas, underscores the need for action. A bipartisan commission is vital to developing comprehensive strategies that include education, policy, and technology to counter these threats, thereby protecting democratic integrity and public trust in an era when AI-fueled disinformation can decisively impact elections and democratic stability.

The Urgent Call for a Bipartisan Disinformation Commission - Modern War Institute

mwi.westpoint.edu · by Nicholas Dockery · November 15, 2023

As the digital age accelerates the spread of information across the globe, the scourge of disinformation has emerged as a dire threat to the fabric of democracy and the integrity of national security. High-profile incidents on the international stage, such as the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar and the anti-balaka violence in the Central African Republic, underscore the devastating impact of disinformation. These events, fueled by misleading narratives spread via social media and other channels, led to severe humanitarian crises and acts of violence. Similarly, in the United States, disinformation has significantly escalated protests and violence across the ideological spectrum, as evident in events like the Pizzagate conspiracy, the January 6 Capitol protest, and some Black Lives Matter and Portland protests.

A 2022 report reveals a concerning trend: a majority of Americans, cutting across political lines, now view disinformation as a more critical issue than a range of threats, from infectious diseases to terrorism to climate change. This growing concern is reflected in statistics: 71 percent of respondents believe disinformation exacerbates political polarization, 63 percent see it as a violation of human rights, and over 50 percent report feelings of anxiety and stress upon encountering false information.

Confronting the proliferation of disinformation presents a complex and multifaceted challenge for US policymakers and senior leaders. Their tasks include navigating a rapidly evolving communications landscape, countering global powers intent on rewriting international norms, and bridging the divides within the nation’s political arena. Striking a balance between safeguarding free speech and ensuring the dissemination of truthful information is an intricate endeavor demanding nuanced consideration. The collaborative effort between the executive branch and Congress in understanding and managing disinformation is a topic of ongoing debate and reflection. Recognizing the depth and breadth of disinformation is crucial in devising more effective defense mechanisms. Currently, there exists a significant gap in our comprehension of disinformation and our capability to mitigate its detrimental effects. The proposal for a bipartisan commission to bridge this gap is gaining traction. Such a body would be committed to an in-depth study of disinformation, crafting potent countermeasures, and formulating strategies to protect the United States and its global allies from the adverse consequences of these deceptive practices.

A declassified intelligence report shed light on the international dimensions of disinformation campaigns during the 2020 US elections. It revealed that Russia, under President Vladimir Putin’s direction, orchestrated operations aimed at undermining the candidacy of Joe Biden while bolstering support for then President Donald Trump. Concurrently, Iran, authorized by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, conducted covert cyber campaigns designed to impede Trump’s bid for reelection. Despite their support for opposing candidates, both nations shared a mutual goal: to diminish public trust in US institutions, erode confidence in the democratic process, and intensify political divisions within the United States.

The report highlights an environment of heightened international meddling as a major internal threat of political instability. A Quinnipiac University poll underscores this sentiment, revealing that 76 percent of Americans perceive domestic political instability as a more critical danger than the threat posed by foreign adversaries, which just 19 percent of respondents believed to be the bigger threat. This widespread concern transcends political divides, pointing to a collective anxiety. Such internal discord, if left unchecked, not only undermines the nation’s stability but also potentially aids foreign powers like Russia and Iran in their efforts to erode trust in US institutions and deepen societal divisions.

The national security implications are significant and deeply concerning. If the United States is susceptible to disinformation, its policy is at risk of being influenced or even manipulated, potentially leading to inaction or misguided decisions in crucial international engagements where its vital interests are at stake. Moreover, the spillover of societal division into the military sphere could jeopardize the unity and cohesion necessary for military readiness and effectiveness. This vulnerability opens the door for further external influences, potentially compromising the nation’s ability to respond effectively to global threats and undermining its strategic position internationally.

Amid these challenges, both the executive branch and Congress have strived to address the multifaceted issue of disinformation and misinformation. However, their efforts have often been fragmented and lacking a cohesive strategy. During the 117th congressional session, Congress introduced 199 bills targeting disinformation yet only enacted five, including two that were appropriations based on previous legislation. This reflects a significant gap in prioritization. These laws have predominantly focused on countering foreign disinformation from nations like Russia and China impacting regions such as Western Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Yet, they fall short in addressing the growing concern of domestic disinformation within the United States. The RENACER Act, for example, targets Russian misinformation in Nicaragua. But the bills that have been passed largely overlook similar issues within US borders.

The recognition across political lines of foreign actors exploiting political divisions, especially evident in the January 6 Capitol riots where domestic disinformation played a key role, further underscores the pressing need for a unified approach. The legislative response to this threat has been underwhelming. Important initiatives like the Promoting Public Health Information Act and the COVID-19 Disinformation Research and Reporting Act of 2021 failed to pass, underscoring the difficulties in building legislative consensus to combat disinformation effectively. Even the bipartisan Madeleine K. Albright Democracy in the 21st Century Act, aimed at defending democracy and countering misinformation globally, did not succeed.

These legislative shortcomings indicate the urgent need for a more robust and comprehensive strategy addressing the immediate effects of disinformation and its underlying causes. In this context, the ongoing debates around Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which is pivotal in governing online content, are particularly relevant. Lawmakers have yet to agree on how to modify this legislation effectively, with proposals ranging from its total repeal to amendments aimed at curbing political bias and censorship. Adding to this complexity, a recent federal court decision has clarified the parameters of the current administration’s engagement with social media companies in matters of content moderation. This ruling defines the extent to which the government can influence these companies’ practices in monitoring and managing content, emphasizing the legal boundaries in the context of free speech considerations.

This legal backdrop is particularly relevant when considering the ongoing challenges in combating misinformation online. For example, the case of the “disinformation dozen”—twelve social media influencers identified by the Center for Countering Digital Hate as spreading false information about COVID-19 and vaccines—exemplifies these challenges. Despite some account suspensions and bans, ten of these users remain active and influential on major platforms, collectively reaching an audience of over six million followers. Even with concerted efforts from platforms like Facebook to mitigate misinformation, these individuals persist in adapting their strategies, continuing to sow doubt about vaccines and COVID-19. This situation not only underscores the difficulties in moderating online content but also brings into question the potential impact of any changes to Section 230 on such efforts.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has faced significant challenges in addressing disinformation, despite its efforts such as the 2019 Strategic Framework for Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence and the 2020 Homeland Threat Assessment. In 2022, DHS established the Disinformation Governance Board, intended to tackle national security threats stemming from disinformation. The board, however, faced numerous challenges from its inception. Concerns were raised about its objectives and potential impact on First Amendment rights, leading to its suspension after just three weeks and the subsequent resignation of its leader. Ultimately, the board was discontinued following the Homeland Security Advisory Council’s recommendation.

The difficulties faced by DHS highlight the complexity of combating disinformation in a politically charged environment. Yet, public sentiment increasingly favors action to address the issue, as demonstrated by a recent Pew Research Center survey. The survey shows a significant shift in American attitudes toward online false information, with a growing call for both government and technology companies to play a role in addressing disinformation. Currently, 48 percent of Americans advocate for governmental action to restrict false information, a notable increase from 39 percent in 2018. Yet, the majority of survey respondents (59 percent) still lean toward expecting technology companies to address disinformation. This view is not without partisan divides: 70 percent of Republicans emphasize the importance of information freedom, even at the cost of false information circulating, while 65 percent of Democrats support governmental intervention in curbing misinformation.

To effectively counteract the disinformation epidemic, senior leaders and policymakers must tackle its underlying causes, not just its symptoms. This requires a deep understanding of American perceptions of disinformation and the development of strategies to mitigate its harmful effects. Key to this effort is promoting media literacy, bolstering fact-checking initiatives, and enhancing transparency, thereby equipping citizens to discern truth from falsehood. Such measures are crucial in safeguarding democratic processes and public discourse from the corrosive impact of disinformation. A holistic approach, encompassing education, collaboration, regulatory measures, and technological innovation, is essential in this fight.

The United States has a history of establishing commissions to uncover truth and uphold justice, as seen in the Warren Commission and 9/11 Commission. These bodies have been instrumental in investigating significant national events and providing clarity. Inspired by these models and the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, policymakers could form a new bipartisan commission to thoroughly investigate the nuances of disinformation campaigns. The bipartisan nature of this commission is essential, as it ensures a balanced and fair investigation, free from partisan biases, reflecting a united front against the challenges posed by disinformation. This commission would delve into their origins, tactics, and societal impacts, adopting a rigorous and impartial approach similar to its predecessors.

As the Brookings Institution illustrates, addressing disinformation in the modern era demands a multifaceted strategy. Policymakers must serve a society that values critical thinking and media literacy, enabling Americans to adeptly navigate the flood of information. Collaborating with social media platforms, industry leaders, and civil society is essential for developing effective verification and moderation practices. This need becomes even more pressing with the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, a double-edged sword that could greatly enhance the influence of disinformation campaigns. The sophistication of these AI-driven operations, involving audience manipulation and realistic digital personas, underscores the need for action. A bipartisan commission is vital to developing comprehensive strategies that include education, policy, and technology to counter these threats, thereby protecting democratic integrity and public trust in an era when AI-fueled disinformation can decisively impact elections and democratic stability.

Major Nicholas Dockery is a Special Forces officer, a fellow at the Modern Warfare Institute at West Point, a United States Military Academy alumnus, and a General Wayne Downing scholar. He holds a master in public policy from the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs.

The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.

Image credit: Tom Thai

mwi.westpoint.edu · by Nicholas Dockery · November 15, 2023

11. ‘Brotherhood’ Review: The West Point Rugby Team Made Them

Rugby is a great sport. I did not discover it until I was in the Army in Germany from 1983-1985. But of course their stories after West Point and Rugby are at once both heartwarming and heart wrenching.

‘Brotherhood’ Review: The West Point Rugby Team Made Them

Theses cadets found the demands of playing rugby knit their diverse group together—and helped prepare them for the real battles ahead.

https://www.wsj.com/arts-culture/books/brotherhood-review-the-team-that-made-them-5627f6bc?page=1

By Mark Yost

Nov. 10, 2023 11:29 am ET

On Sept. 12, 2001, we all woke up to a different world. This was especially true of our men and women in uniform. Many had joined the service during relative peace, and few could have imagined the decadeslong global war on terror that was about to unfold. The following spring, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point’s class of 2002 became the first cohort since the Vietnam era to graduate into an active war. More than 200 cadets would join the infantry and take on the bulk of the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

GRAB A COPY

Brotherhood: When West Point Rugby Went to War

By Martin Pengelly

David R. Godine, Publisher

300 pages

We may earn a commission when you buy products through the links on our site.

BUY BOOK

“Brotherhood” looks at the experience of the war through the eyes of the school’s small cadre of rugby players. The author, Martin Pengelly, is a British expatriate who works in the Guardian newspaper’s Washington bureau; he once played amateur rugby in England, including in a 2002 game against the Army rugby team that he would come to write about 20 years later. “It was a night out of the ordinary,” the author recalls of that matchup, “a hard game against hard men being groomed to fight hard wars.”

These men were exceptionally well-prepared for any conflict on the battlefield, Mr. Pengelly tells us, thanks to their experiences on the rugby pitch. Rugby is a lot like American football—moving a ball downfield, crashing violently into each other—but without the padding or helmets. “Faster than football and harder than soccer,” is how Kurt Vonnegut described it.

13 BOOKS WE READ THIS WEEK

A professor turned Civil War hero, rugby at West Point, Streisand on Streisand and more.

“The ‘brothers’ of West Point’s 2002 rugby team came from diverse backgrounds and grew into a team bound together by common purpose, mutual trust, and affection,” Gen. H.R. McMaster, West Point class of ’84 and a former rugby player himself, writes in the book’s introduction. “They cared not from whence their teammates came nor for any identity categories into which they might fit. They earned respect from one another based on their character and athletic prowess.”

Mr. Pengelly’s back-and-forth narrative—one page you’re in Iraq, the next you’re in high school with the future cadets—weaves together multiple in-depth biographies to form a highly readable account of who these men were, where they came from, how they played the game and how they fought the longest war in U.S. military history. “Their stories shed light on something that few Americans understand: an ethos grounded in honor, courage and loyalty that binds warriors to one another,” Gen. McMaster writes. They “internalized this ethos at West Point, exhibited it on the rugby pitch, and carried it with them onto battlefields abroad.”

All of the West Point cadets were among the most capable individuals their high schools had to offer, but the ones who gravitated toward rugby were just a little different. “In America, since the college game sprung up in the sixties and seventies,” Mr. Pengelly writes, “rugby has been a sport of the outsider, the eccentric, the nonconformist. The hardest of hard drinkers. A home for waifs and strays but also for type-As.”

Zac Miller, from Stoneboro, Penn., played flanker and would go on to win a Rhodes scholarship. He didn’t come from a military family but “loved the idea of the challenge,” his mother says. And he didn’t play rugby in high school—he played football. His father remembers that he had an acronym: “WIN. ‘What’s Important Now.’ If he was at football practice, that’s what was important. If he was at the college taking classes, that’s what was important.”

Mo Greene, another Pennsylvanian, played fly half before serving 10 combat tours with Army special forces. Mr. Greene had planned to play football at West Point, but the coach decided that, at 5 feet 10 inches and 160 pounds, Mr. Greene wasn’t what they were looking for. Then he found rugby. “An outsider would probably look at the cadets and say we’re all kind of cut from the same cloth. But when you’re in that world, you know, there’s obviously tribes of people. And I’d say the rugby team was definitely, like, my people.” Rugby gave Mr. Greene “an escape from the academy” for a few hours a day.

James Gurbisz’s story is compelling both for the hooker’s extraordinary bravery and his exemplary life of selfless dedication. Writing about Gurbisz’s Eatontown, N.J., upbringing, Mr. Pengelly observes: “The neighborhood is so sylvan, you expect to hear radios by raised windows, broadcasting Ike warning the nation about the military-industrial complex.” Gurbisz’s sister, Kathleen, recalls him as someone who was “super-disciplined, willing to push to the point of exhaustion” both academically and athletically. His high-school coach remembers him as “the heart of any team, owner of the dirtiest uniform, runner of the most punishment laps for answering back, instigator of parties after victories and extra training after defeats.”

By their fourth year at West Point, the players had grown from boys to men. More importantly, they had grown from followers to leaders. So much so that Mike Mahan, West Point’s rugby coach at the time, didn’t have to micromanage them anymore. “We got a tough game tomorrow,” is all he’d need to tell the team captain. “Make sure that these guys are doing the right thing.”

And while rugby may have been a game, it was preparing these men for the battlefield. “I thought we should be using this vehicle to give cadets an advanced experience in leadership before they went out into the army, where they had to be a good leader, a platoon leader,” said Col. Mahan. “I think Coach Mahan was particularly proud that we all went combat arms,” Pete Chacon, a winger, said. “We weren’t going into finance or something.”

The first of three members of the 2002 rugby squad to die was Miller, the Rhodes scholar. His parents recall that as late as his junior year of high school, he hadn’t even considered West Point. Yet by the time he graduated, Miller was so motivated that he wanted to complete Ranger School before going to Oxford. Ranger School is one of the toughest infantry schools in the Army, a must-have for advancement in the officer ranks. Miller also chose to go through the course during one of the hottest times of the year in rural Georgia, where most of the course is held. “They found Zac Miller’s body on the Tricolor Road Land Navigation Course at Fort Benning on Monday, July 1, 2002, at eight o’clock in the evening,” Mr. Pengelly writes. “He had been missing for six hours and twenty-one minutes.” The official cause of death was hyperthermia, or heat exhaustion.

Joe Emigh, who was from Fullerton, Calif., and played center, had gone on to artillery school at Fort Sill in Oklahoma after West Point. In early September 2002, he drowned in Lake Conroe in Texas. His old teammates were some of the first people Joe’s father called with the news.

Within a few months, the rugby team had lost both Miller and Emigh. It held a joint memorial service. Some of the players recall the advice of the Catholic priest: “You are going to see their parents. And I would encourage you not to feel awkward about it. Because they will want to hear stories about their boys. They will want to hear stories about their sons. Because these guys lived their lives here with you. And you have stories they will not know. They will want to know them, because they will want to know their kid was loved.”

Then there’s Gurbisz. His death in Iraq was especially tragic because he had overcome so much adversity early in his Army career. He’d wanted to be an infantry officer, but a bad knee kept him from completing the two-mile run. Instead, he was assigned to a transportation company, the guys who were targeted as much as anyone by improvised explosive devices in Iraq. Gurbisz ran his unit like an infantry company, making his soldiers train in marksmanship, small-unit tactics and map reading. The unit’s nickname was, appropriately, Top Flite.

On Nov. 4, 2005, Top Flite was assigned to escort a convoy along Route Irish, once described as “the most dangerous highway in Iraq, five miles of bomb-blasted road . . . a white-knuckle ride.” The insurgents knew that “truck commanders sat in passenger seats,” Mr. Pengelly writes. “They knew convoy commanders rode in the second Humvee.”

Gurbisz’s demise is heart-wrenching. But having learned who he was, most readers will agree that while he would have preferred to come home to his high-school sweetheart, Tori, he would have been proud that he died leading his men, trying to make a difference in a conflict that was thrust upon him at such a young age. All his rugby teammates felt that way, and we’re better off for having these men among us.

Mr. Yost writes about military history for the Journal.

Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Appeared in the November 11, 2023, print edition.

12. Taiwanese troops may be on their way to train on US soil

Taiwanese troops may be on their way to train on US soil

defensenews.com · by Bryant Harris

WASHINGTON ― A congressionally mandated commission is recommending the Pentagon train Taiwanese troops on U.S. soil to familiarize them with operating new weapons platforms the Asian nation purchased.

The bipartisan U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission made the suggestion to Congress as part of its annual report released Tuesday, but Taiwan may already have plans to send hundreds of troops to train in the United States.

Carolyn Bartholomew, the commission’s chair, told reporters the recommendation aims to ensure Taiwan is ready to use the weapons upon their receipt “so that there’s not a lag time between getting it and then taking another six months of training before it becomes operational and can be used in the field.”

“The lessons everybody is learning from what is happening in Ukraine has been that it’s really important for militaries to be trained on the advanced technology that they’re going to be getting before they actually get it, and before they need it in the field, because there’s been a terrible delay,” Bartholomew said.

The delay refers to an approximate $19 billion sales backlog of numerous weaponry that Taiwan has agreed to purchase from the U.S. but has yet to receive due to a confluence of supply chain issues, contracting and acquisition delays, and a medley of lengthy technological and security reviews within the Foreign Military Sales process.

“There’s currently training of Taiwan forces on certain weapons platforms to date,” the commission’s vice chair, Alex Wong, told Defense News, specifically citing F-16 fighter jets. “This is not unprecedented. However, there is not yet training again on the weapons systems that have yet to be delivered. Some of them would be new to the targeting forces.”

Wong said the commission’s proposal would “take the template that we already have with the F-16s, which we have delivered in the past,” and apply it to new weapons systems.

Taiwan’s estimated $8 billion purchase of 66 newer F-16 fighters comprises a significant portion of the overall arms sale backlog.

Military maneuvers

Taiwanese Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng told reporters in February that Taipei is sending an undisclosed number of troops to train in the U.S. on weapons systems and military operations, according to The Wall Street Journal. The U.S. also deploys a small number of troops on the island to train Taiwanese forces, something President Tsai Ing-wen confirmed in 2021.

Wang Ting-yu, a member of Taiwan’s legislature from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party who sits on a defense committee, told the BBC last week that Taiwan plans to send two battalions of ground troops to the United States. A battalion in Taiwan can consist of up to 600 troops, marking a significant increase in Taiwanese troops training in the U.S.

“The U.S. is emphasizing the desperate need to improve our military capacity. It is sending a clear message of strategic clarity to Beijing that we stand together,” Wang said.

Taiwan’s diplomatic office in Washington did not respond to Defense News’ request for comment, and the Pentagon would neither confirm nor deny plans to train Taiwanese troops on U.S. soil.

“We do not comment on specific operations, engagements or training, but I would highlight that our support for and defense relationship with Taiwan remains aligned against the current threat posed by the People’s Republic of China,” Pentagon spokesman John Supple told Defense News. “Our commitment to Taiwan is rock solid and contributes to the maintenance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and within the region.”

China considers Taiwan a rogue province and has threatened to retake it by force if necessary. President Xi Jinping has set 2027 as the year China’s military would be ready for a possible operation against Taiwan.

China frequently objects to U.S.-Taiwan military ties and is particularly sensitive to actions it construes as recognizing the island as an independent state.

“Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act, the United States makes available to Taiwan defense articles and services necessary to enable it to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability,” Supple said.

About Bryant Harris

Bryant Harris is the Congress reporter for Defense News. He has covered U.S. foreign policy, national security, international affairs and politics in Washington since 2014. He has also written for Foreign Policy, Al-Monitor, Al Jazeera English and IPS News.

13. U.S. Needs to Be Ready for War

Conclusion;

Had the domestically possible included a bit more stomach for risk taking by our leaders and electorate, World War II likely would have been avoided. If the Truman administration had been clearer in its own mind about its willingness to defend South Korea and communicated as much to Stalin, the Korean War likely wouldn’t have happened. Accepting the inhumane logic of conflict and of power realities is an uphill fight against the lure of risk avoidance and the illusion that our desire for peace is shared by others. The American record has often been one of recognizing this slower than it might have.

U.S. Needs to Be Ready for War

If Joe Biden wants peace, he should take a page from the script of ‘A Few Good Men.’

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-needs-to-be-ready-for-war-taiwan-ukraine-gaza-b57f6a84?mod=Searchresults_pos4&page=1

By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

Follow

Nov. 14, 2023 5:35 pm ET

Jack Nicholson in ‘A Few Good Men.’ PHOTO: ALAMY

Since Oct. 7 I keep thinking of Jack Nicholson, as a Marine colonel in “A Few Good Men,” bellowing “You can’t handle the truth.” I think of this line in respect to friends of Israel who are shocked by the bestiality of that day’s attack, as if history didn’t furnish examples and the assault wasn’t designed to achieve a desired effect.

I think of the Nicholson line in respect to students who cheer on Hamas from their campus safety, having no real conception of violence and expecting to be shielded from even having their feelings hurt. (If the draft makes a comeback, they will have some growing up to do.)

Another truth may soon have to be handled. The U.S. can be expected to serve its own interests, as filtered through the electoral interests of its president. The U.S. has moved a sizable force to the eastern Mediterranean. If sustained, it will allow Israel to complete the neutralization of Hamas and assure its timid Arab partners where the power still lies. That is, if U.S. politics can endure the gruesome necessities, blunders and inevitable allegations about war crimes that come in the wake of Israeli (or any) military action. The alternative, we will have to keep reminding ourselves, is unlikely to be prettier.

The Ukraine policy of Joe Biden has included whiffs of impatience with Ukraine for continuing to fight. An implicit shot clock was all but placed on its current offensive, as if to say, “Hurry up and reclaim whatever land you can so we can get to a cease-fire.” Weapons have been held back, it sometimes seemed, because of White House fear of what might happen from too much Ukrainian success.

Last week came a confession from Ukraine’s Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, using the word that Ukraine’s supporters in the West recently strived to make taboo: stalemate. Technology—surveillance drones—makes it difficult to concentrate forces for a decisive breakthrough, though this applies to both sides. Understandably, in Gen. Zaluzhnyi’s mind “defeat” is Ukraine not recovering all its territory. He doesn’t exactly blame the U.S. but . . . And yet the pessimism can be overdone.

If the U.S. isn’t committed to Ukraine regaining all its territory, it’s now fully committed to Ukraine’s independence and deterrence of Russia. President Volodymyr Zelensky should ask not just for F-16s but, by a date certain, F-35s. Mr. Biden should supply them. The Russians, for practical purposes, are at maximum effort. Unlike Stalin (with vast material help from the Roosevelt administration) Vladimir Putin isn’t building a massive army for the offensive. Further mobilization of his male population is low on his list of desirables—as the Biden administration undoubtedly calculates. Instability is growing on his southern periphery, along with the promise of Chinese mischief. Ukraine is a major new military power on his western border. With their formidable military capabilities, Sweden and Finland are becoming part of NATO. It likely means something that Mr. Putin’s subaltern Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus is also burbling about a “stalemate.”

Sixty years later, recommended reading in the Pentagon is again T.R. Fehrenbach’s 1963 history of the Korean War. The author explains the Truman tiptoe, the president’s willingness to settle for a tie rather than victory.

Like Mr. Biden, President Truman waited months to give a speech on the conflict. Then the U.S. wasn’t fighting a war, it was preventing one—World War III. Fresh in the mind of Truman and his advisers was America’s experience of total war in World War II. Also fresh was the recognition that the U.S. was losing its immunity to having its own cities burned to the ground.

A group of nuclear-capable states today assesses the U.S. to be a declining power. Russia and Iran have placed their bets. These bets would be stronger if China did the same. That’s why all eyes are on Taiwan. There are two sides to our truth-handling shortfall. Recall Truman’s distaste for Oppenheimer’s mooning over Hiroshima when Truman had many more deaths on his conscience. Recall Lincoln’s delight in Grant’s uncompromising approach to war. Americans have been blessed to find humane men who nevertheless recognize what must be done and are willing to do it. Too often, though, we find them in time to fight wars that might have been deterred.

Had the domestically possible included a bit more stomach for risk taking by our leaders and electorate, World War II likely would have been avoided. If the Truman administration had been clearer in its own mind about its willingness to defend South Korea and communicated as much to Stalin, the Korean War likely wouldn’t have happened. Accepting the inhumane logic of conflict and of power realities is an uphill fight against the lure of risk avoidance and the illusion that our desire for peace is shared by others. The American record has often been one of recognizing this slower than it might have.

1:04

0:06

/

7:10

TAP FOR SOUND

Journal Editorial Report: Pressure mounts on the Jewish state to 'pause.' Images: AP/Getty Images Composite: Mark Kelly

Copyright ©2023 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Appeared in the November 15, 2023, print edition as 'U.S. Needs to Be Ready for War'.

​14. Military restraint isn’t working — peace through strength is the only option

Excerpts:

Biden’s paralyzing fear of escalation was also demonstrated in his response to almost 50 attacks on U.S. forces in the Mideast by Iran’s proxies in Syria. A belated pinprick strike on a Hezbollah base in Syria last week did not prevent additional attacks.  

Xi, the primary Asian partner in the Russia-China replay of the Hitler-Tojo assault on the Western order, has studied the American and allied response to Putin’s initial move. He has surely concluded that during a Chinese attack on Taiwan, Washington will be inhibited by fear of escalation and by strict adherence to the just war doctrine of proportionality. 

In the event of a seizure of one or more Taiwanese islands, or imposition of a partial or total blockade of Taiwan, Biden and his national security team can be expected to oppose any retaliatory strikes on the source of aggression: military bases and ports in China. If Washington again accepts full responsibility to avoid escalation, Beijing will be free to work its will. Taiwan and America’s credibility will pay the price. 

Military restraint isn’t working — peace through strength is the only option 

BY JOSEPH BOSCO, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 11/14/23 10:00 AM ET

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/4308582-military-restraint-isnt-working-peace-through-strength-is-the-only-option/

In the late 1930s, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and imperial Japan expanded their aggressive activities in Europe and Asia, respectively, and began collaborating on their mutual designs to upend the existing world order.   

In September of 1940, the three Axis Powers signed a treaty recognizing their respective leadership in the two theaters: Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini in Europe and Hideki Tojo’s Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.  

There are certain parallels to the international situation today.  

Over the last decade, communist China, revanchist Russia, Islamist Iran and dynastic communist North Korea have expanded their communications, trade and, most ominously, their exchanges of weapons, munitions and military technology, including missile and nuclear resources. 

Like the original Axis Powers, the four revisionist regimes share a fundamental fear and hatred of the liberal international order once led by Great Britain and France and now by the United States. 

In February 2022, Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin formalized the collaborative China-Russia relationship with the declaration of a “no-limits strategic partnership” and announced the ideological basis for a new international order intended to supplant the Western system and its law- and values-based structures.   

With China’s seal of approval, Putin invaded Ukraine a few weeks later and launched the first major war in Europe since World War II, violating all the rules-based international norms established to keep the peace since 1945. 

The prospect that haunts President Joe Biden is a repetition of the last century’s devastation, with Russia’s criminal war on Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas fighting instigated by Iran becoming region-wide conflicts and escalating to World War III.      

It is a perfectly legitimate concern — indeed, a moral and mandatory one — for the leader of the most powerful nation on earth. But the burden of preventing that ultimate catastrophe rests on the shoulders of others as well, particularly on those who challenge the existing order and whose own survival would be at risk in a global conflict. The ultimate question for Western leaders is the perennial one: is accommodation or deterrence the surest way to restrain the ambitions of aggressive powers?  

The Free World must convince leaders in Moscow, Beijing, Pyongyang and Teheran that in a major war they will suffer the same fate as the last century’s aggressors: total destruction of their regimes. That is the outcome Hamas now faces after its criminal attack on Israel and its infliction of death and destruction on the Palestinian people. 

Today’s would-be imposers of a new world order probably do not doubt the West’s capabilities to inflict fatal damage to the prospects of their success and survival, though they may count on the diffusion of Western resources across several fronts.  

Even before the Israel-Hamas conflict erupted, many Americans — including some in Congress and the Biden administration — worried that military resources expended in Ukraine would not be available for the looming conflict with China over Taiwan.  

That concern has now been compounded and preempted by the Middle East fighting, as the West finds itself confronted with two simultaneous threats to the international order. When North Korea and/or China drop(s) another boot, the West’s long-under-funded militaries will be stretched to the breaking-point. 

In those desperate existential circumstances, the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Israel will be motivated to turn to their ultimate recourse: the use of nuclear weapons. Since China, Russia and North Korea — and soon Iran — possess their own nuclear arsenals, the stage will be set for Armageddon. 

It is that nightmare scenario that understandably stirs Biden’s fears. And it is those fears, shared by all rational leaders in the West, that encourage the authoritarians to believe they can challenge the international order with impunity. They respect the West’s capabilities but doubt its will to use them — and by that test, the Biden administration’s performance has been mixed.   

Left with a flawed plan by Donald Trump to end what both called the “forever war” in Afghanistan, Biden made the situation worse with his precipitous and chaotic withdrawal.  

During Russia’s well-telegraphed runup to its invasion of Ukraine, his administration failed to prepare the United States and the West for a successful Ukraine resistance and defeat of the aggression. It planned instead for acceptance of a new status quo, just as the Obama-Biden administration did after Russia’s first Ukraine invasion in 2014. 

Once its weak deterrent message of economic sanctions predictably failed in 2022, Biden flinched at each decision point from providing Ukraine with the weapons and munitions it needed to reverse the aggression in a timely manner. Now, Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, is under intense pressure to accept what Biden advocated from the start: a stalemate as the only strategic course for his partially occupied country, with 20 percent in Russian hands. That seems to be the best Ukraine will be allowed to hope for despite the Biden administration’s masterful rallying of NATO support for a very constrained objective. 

It means that, after his blitzkrieg invasion was stalled by the valor of Ukraine’s military, leadership and population, Putin’s fallback strategy of a protracted struggle wearing down Western will is meeting with more success. 

Biden’s paralyzing fear of escalation was also demonstrated in his response to almost 50 attacks on U.S. forces in the Mideast by Iran’s proxies in Syria. A belated pinprick strike on a Hezbollah base in Syria last week did not prevent additional attacks.  

Xi, the primary Asian partner in the Russia-China replay of the Hitler-Tojo assault on the Western order, has studied the American and allied response to Putin’s initial move. He has surely concluded that during a Chinese attack on Taiwan, Washington will be inhibited by fear of escalation and by strict adherence to the just war doctrine of proportionality. 

In the event of a seizure of one or more Taiwanese islands, or imposition of a partial or total blockade of Taiwan, Biden and his national security team can be expected to oppose any retaliatory strikes on the source of aggression: military bases and ports in China. If Washington again accepts full responsibility to avoid escalation, Beijing will be free to work its will. Taiwan and America’s credibility will pay the price. 

Joseph Bosco served as China country director for the secretary of Defense from 2005 to 2006 and as Asia-Pacific director of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief from 2009 to 2010. He served in the Pentagon when Vladimir Putin invaded Georgia and was involved in Department of Defense discussions about the U.S. response. Additionally, he was responsible for preparing the seminal Battle of Ideas brief in the office of the secretary of Defense in 2002. Follow him on Twitter @BoscoJosephA.  

15.The U.S. says Hamas operates within and beneath hospitals, endorsing Israel’s allegations.

Excerpts:

Palestinian officials and doctors at Al-Shifa have denied that the hospital has been used by Hamas. But Mr. Kirby said that the newly revealed U.S. intelligence supported Israel’s arguments as its military closed in on the hospital.

“We have information that confirms that Hamas is using that particular hospital for a command and control node and probably storage of equipment weapons up underneath,” he said. “That is a war crime.”

The U.S. says Hamas operates within and beneath hospitals, endorsing Israel’s allegations.

The New York Times · by Michael D. Shear · November 14, 2023

LIVE See more updates: Israel-Hamas War

Nov. 14, 2023, 4:03 p.m. ET

Displaced Palestinians living at Al Shifa hospital last week, amid the ongoing conflict.Credit...Reuters

The United States has intelligence that shows that Hamas has been using hospitals in Gaza, including Al-Shifa, as command centers and ammunitions depots, a spokesman for the National Security Council said on Tuesday.

John Kirby, the spokesman, said that the intelligence, gathered from American-generated sources, supported Israel’s allegation that Hamas has been operating out of hospitals, which Mr. Kirby said amounted to a war crime.

Mr. Kirby declined to provide details about the U.S. intelligence, but he made clear that it goes beyond the information collected by the Israeli intelligence service. “It comes from a variety of intelligence methods — of our own, of our own,” he said, adding that the classification of the intelligence had been downgraded so that it could be shared publicly.

“I can confirm for you that we have information that Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad use some hospitals in the Gaza Strip, including Al-Shifa, and tunnels underneath them, to conceal and to support their military operations and to hold hostages,” Mr. Kirby told reporters on Air Force One as President Biden headed to San Francisco for a summit with Asia-Pacific leaders.

“Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad — J.I.D. — members operate a command and control node from Al-Shifa in Gaza City,” he added. “They have stored weapons there, and they’re prepared to respond to an Israeli military operation against that facility.”

The revelation of the U.S. intelligence comes as Israel is under harsh international criticism for attacks on and around hospitals as it conducts a war against Hamas in the wake of the armed group’s terrorist attacks on Israel on Oct. 7. Israel says more than 1,200 people were killed in the attacks and that 239 others remain hostages.

During Israel’s ensuing military campaign to eradicate Hamas, it has repeatedly said that its military seeks to avoid casualties among civilians, including patients and doctors at hospitals. But they have insisted that Hamas uses such people as human shields.

Mr. Kirby said that the United States does not support attacks from the air on hospitals, despite what he said was the confirmed use of the facilities by Hamas.

“We do not support striking a hospital from the air,” he said. “And we do not want to see a firefight in a hospital where innocent people, helpless people, sick people are simply trying to get the medical care that they deserve, not to be caught in a crossfire. Hospitals and patients must be protected.”

He called that concern an “added burden” for Israel in its military campaign against Hamas.

Palestinian officials and doctors at Al-Shifa have denied that the hospital has been used by Hamas. But Mr. Kirby said that the newly revealed U.S. intelligence supported Israel’s arguments as its military closed in on the hospital.

“We have information that confirms that Hamas is using that particular hospital for a command and control node and probably storage of equipment weapons up underneath,” he said. “That is a war crime.”

Michael D. Shear is a White House correspondent for The New York Times, covering President Biden and his administration. He has reported on politics for more than 30 years. More about Michael D. Shear

The New York Times · by Michael D. Shear · November 14, 2023

16. Army Chief Says A General Retired Rather Than Wait Out Alabama Sen. Tuberville Holds

Yes, the military is supposed to have depth in the chain of command and all organizations and when the leader falls the next in the chain of command will take over. While that is true and does work, especially in combat, it is much more complicated today due to Congressional regulations and the complexity of the military. I am sure there will be more retirements (cynical people and military critics will think that is a good thing but we should be careful what we ask for.).

Army Chief Says A General Retired Rather Than Wait Out Alabama Sen. Tuberville Holds

tampafp.com · by Wire - DCNF · November 14, 2023

Republican Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville. By Micalea Burrow

A two-star general opted to retire instead of waiting out Republican Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s hold on his promotion, the Army’s chief said Tuesday.

The number of officers subject to Tuberville’s hold has grown to nearly 450 since the senator announced his tactic in March in a bid to force Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to rescind an abortion travel policy.

Army Secretary Christine Wormuth worried more senior officers would follow the two-star, whom she did not name, in leaving the Army if Tuberville’s one-man blockade on military promotions isn’t resolved by the end of the 2023 calendar year in remarks at Politico’s defense summit.

“I don’t have certainty and I think what’s best for me and for my family is to just go ahead and pull my papers,” Wormuth said, characterizing the general who recently submitted his retirement papers while awaiting Senate confirmation.

“I would expect that if we don’t see the Senate resolve this hold by Christmas there will be more of those,” she said.

Tuberville’s holds will soon affect another yearly round of military promotions, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall noted Monday as Pentagon alarm over the stymieing of top military officers grows. “Devastating. It’s horrific. I’d think of a stronger term if I could,” Kendall said.

Officers, even junior ones not directly affected by Tuberville’s hold, awaiting change of station orders and promotions required for advancing in their careers may grow weary of operating in limbo while their superiors are unable to promote, service secretaries have said. Families looking to create roots and find schools may also refuse to endure that uncertainty much longer.

But the problem could extend further even if an agreement is reached, Wormuth warned. “In the long term, I have deep concerns about what my majors, colonels and lieutenant colonels are thinking about this,” Wormuth said. “They already see the increasing partisanship in our nation … and now where we have a situation where the toothpaste is out of the tube, and general officers and flag officers can have their nominations put on hold I think we’re going to have some of our general officers and flag officers say, “I don’t know if this is what I want to continue to aspire to.’”

Other higher-ranking officials, including the director of army staff, are filling the duties of two people while the positions above or below remain empty, Wormuth said.

Wormuth said she didn’t think the potential exodus would amount to a “tsunami.”

“But I think that there will be more officers putting in their retirement papers if this isn’t resolved by the end of the year,” she said.

Wormuth praised Republican Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa, Dan Sullivan of Alaska and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina for highlighting Tuberville’s refusal to budge on the holds. Earlier in November, they forced Tuberville to shoot down attempts to call votes on individual Pentagon nominees.

Senate Democrats advanced a rule change that would allow the promotions to move forward in a single package with a simple majority vote on Tuesday, according to Politico.

Tuberville’s office did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

Android Users, Click To Download The Free Press App And Never Miss A Story. Follow Us On Facebook and Twitter. Signup for our free newsletter.

We can’t do this without your help; visit our GiveSendGo page and donate any dollar amount; every penny helps

Advertisement

Share This:

tampafp.com · by Wire - DCNF · November 14, 2023

17. Army Special Forces medic sues parachute makers, sellers

I wonder what would cause a parachute to open inside the aircraft. It seems it will be difficult to prove that it was a manufacturer's issue when most of these incidents are human error. I wonder if this was a result of the T-11 reserve and the placement of the ripcord handle versus the position of the old T-10 reserve's ripcord which did feel much safer and more protected. Seems like the SF medic was the jummaster and his reserve activated in the door.

Excerpt:

The suit alleges that the MC-6 and T-11R parachute systems used by Erdody “were inadequately and defectively designed, manufactured and assembled” and “cannot withstand the wind speeds to which jump masters are exposed.”

​I wonder how many other jumpasters have experienced a reserve activation while standing in the door conducting jumpmaster duties? I will have to search YouTube for evidence since there are so many videos out there (note sarcasm).

Army Special Forces medic sues parachute makers, sellers

armytimes.com · by Rachael Riley, The Fayetteville Observer · November 14, 2023

Editor’s Note: This article was published as part of a content-sharing agreement between Army Times and The Fayetteville Observer.

It could take more than a year before the case of a Special Forces medic suing a parachute manufacturer is resolved, according to court documents.

Staff Sgt. Brycen Erdody and his wife Cassidy Erdody filed the lawsuit in April in the Eastern District Court of North Carolina against parachute manufacturers and suppliers after Staff Sgt. Erdody suffered injuries when the parachutes he was wearing improperly opened and pulled him out of an aircraft in May 2022.

Defendants named in the suit are Airborne Systems North America of New Jersey Inc., South Dakota-based AeroStar International LLC, and Delaware-based BAE Systems Inc. — all of which supply parachutes to the Army, according to the lawsuit.

In a June 5 amended complaint, HDT Global LLC was dropped from the list of defendants and Delaware-based TransDigm Group Inc., of which Airborne Systems is a subsidiary, was added.

All defendants have denied the allegations or stated they did not have sufficient information about the allegations.

Lawsuit schedule

According to a scheduling order approved on Oct. 24, the Erdodys and defendants have until Oct. 20, 2024, to complete the discovery of evidence and witnesses in the case.

A trial date is set for March 25, 2024.

Parachute accident

In the lawsuit, Erdody, who was a Special Forces medical sergeant and a network communication systems specialist, stated he was participating in an exercise with his jumpmaster class on May 25, 2022, when his reserve parachute opened unexpectedly inside the aircraft, pulling him outside.

The complaint stated Erdody blacked out and landed in trees about 50 feet from the ground. When he regained consciousness, the lawsuit stated, he cut himself free and noticed a “gaping wound” on his arm, forcing him to press his artery to the bone to slow the bleeding.

The document stated Erdody sustained more than a dozen injuries including the loss of use in his arm and hand, a fractured rib, a dissected artery and traumatic brain injury. The suit states that Erdody’s injuries will require months and years of surgeries, treatment, rehabilitation and therapy, and have caused Erdody’s wife and children to suffer because he is no longer able to engage in the same activities as he did before the accident.

The lawsuit states that an Army investigation found that his injuries “were not caused by his negligence nor the negligence of others in the plane or on his team.”

The allegations

The suit alleges that the MC-6 and T-11R parachute systems used by Erdody “were inadequately and defectively designed, manufactured and assembled” and “cannot withstand the wind speeds to which jump masters are exposed.”

The suit alleges that the parachute’s handle creates a “sail shape” that causes the ripcord to release and the parachute to “inadvertently” activate and that testing of the parachutes was “flawed.”

The suit alleges that the parachute systems’ defects have previously been fatal and that the defendants failed to recall the product or provide “adequate warnings.”

Erdody is seeking $75,000 to cover the medical costs and is asking for a jury trial.

Special Forces medic sues parachute companies after accident

Defendants’ responses

In a July 25 response by Aerostar, the company denied designing the MC-6 parachute and T-11R reserve parachute but said it manufactured portions and assembled the chutes that have a specific number on them.

Attorneys said Aerostar does not have “sufficient information” to admit or deny whether it performed services for the chutes worn by Erdody on the day of his accident.

“Aerostar denies any defects in testing, as it performed tests in compliance with specifications provided by the U.S. Army … final inspection of products was performed by the U.S. Army,” the Aerostar response stated.

In an Aug. 15 response, Bae Systems said Erdody’s parachute “was never in its possession” and denied designing or redesigning the chutes.

“BAE Systems admits only that it uses reasonable care with respect to all of its products,” the response stated.

Additionally, BAE Systems noted it is not the proper defendant because it didn’t “design, manufacture, assemble, or sell the MC-6 Main Canopy and T-11R Reserve Parachute system at issue or any of their components.”

“Plaintiffs’ damages, if any, were proximately caused by the acts or omissions of others over whom BAE Systems had no control or right of control,” the response stated.

In a Sept. 5 response, TransDigm Group, Inc. said it didn’t have sufficient knowledge about the allegations in Erdody’s suit and also pointed to Erdody’s injuries possibly being caused by a third party it has no control over.

“TransDigm denies (Erdody’s) parachute system was ever in its possession,” the response stated.

In a Sept. 5 response, Airborne Systems North America of NJ, Inc. also either denied the allegations or said it didn’t have sufficient knowledge.

The response for Airborne Systems stated it sold MC-6 and T-11R parachutes to the Army but denied that it manufactured the parachute used by Erdody and stated that the Army was the design authority for the parachute used by Erdody.

What’s next

According to the scheduling order, the discovery period will include finding information about:

• The government’s design, approval, procurement, and specifications of the parachute and its components.

• The government’s knowledge of any risks associated with the design of the parachute and its components.

• The identity of the supplier(s) of the accident parachute and its component parts.

• Information about the cause of the parachute’s deployment and Erdody’s injuries.

18. Calls for more oversight, punishment after major military disasters

Calls for more oversight, punishment after major military disasters

militarytimes.com · by Leo Shane III · November 14, 2023

A senior Democratic senator is pushing Defense Department leaders to create new processes to investigate disasters within the military in an effort to better prevent other tragedies in the future.

In a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin Tuesday, Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said the current way such major mishaps are handled by service investigators does not provide enough oversight or instill public confidence in the response.

She wants a new, independent system to ensure “significant changes to address the underlying causes of the mishap and the culture that permitted them to occur.” That would include the firing of troops or civilians involved in the mistakes and possible punishment for service chiefs and secretaries.

Her complaints stem from the Navy’s handling of fuel spills at the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam in Hawaii. In late 2021, nearly 6,000 individuals were poisoned by water contaminated with petroleum leaking from tanks there, even after Navy officials insisted the water was safe to consume.

RELATED

Controversial Hawaii fuel facility to begin defueling ahead of closing

Tank tightness of the pumps at Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility was tested and approved

In response to mistakes related to that contamination, Navy officials ordered letters of censure for three retired admirals and non-judicial punishments for other personnel involved. Hirono called those moves “not sufficient to address the root causes of this catastrophe.”

She also pointed to the 2017 collisions of the USS McCain and USS Fitzgerald with civilian cargo ships — accidents that cost 17 sailors their lives — and the deaths of nine service members during the 2020 sinking of a Marine Corps amphibious assault vehicle in California as other examples of disasters without enough investigative rigor afterwards.

In all of those cases, investigations and punishments were handled by service officials who Hirono said could be more likely to lessen the severity of their findings to save embarrassment for their peers and leadership.

Under her plan, any accident that “surpasses $1 billion in damage or incurs a loss of five or more lives” would be elevated to reporting authorities outside the individual services. All criminal or administrative punishment for such events would be mandated to be issued within a year of the disaster.

Defense Department officials have not yet responded to the request.

About Leo Shane III

Leo covers Congress, Veterans Affairs and the White House for Military Times. He has covered Washington, D.C. since 2004, focusing on military personnel and veterans policies. His work has earned numerous honors, including a 2009 Polk award, a 2010 National Headliner Award, the IAVA Leadership in Journalism award and the VFW News Media award.

​19. Cooke: Face It, Hamas’s Propaganda Works

Podcast at the link.

Cooke: Face It, Hamas’s Propaganda Works

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/cooke-face-it-hamass-propaganda-works/

By SARAH SCHUTTE

November 14, 2023 3:20 PM

On today’s episode of The Editors, National Review senior editor Charles C. W. Cooke reflected on the sheer effectiveness of Hamas’s propaganda in Western media.

“They are aware,” he said, “of the internal political dynamics in the West, and they use them to great effect. They’re not alone in this. China is extremely good at using our internal politics against us.”

Cooke pointed to the recent censorship of an anti-Hamas cartoon at the Washington Post as an example of this in action: “The forces in Gaza are so good at it that when the Washington Post runs cartoons making fun of the means by which the propaganda is achieved . . . the people that they’re trying to manipulate go to the Washington Post editorial board and complain so loudly that the Washington Post takes it down.”

“The propaganda works,” he said. “I think it’s as simple as that. . . . Not only is the propaganda working, but literally a cartoon pointing out the propaganda is removed by the people who are susceptible to the propaganda. You just cannot get more on the nose than that. I cannot help but think of the famous phrase, ‘useful idiots.’”

Cooke drew distinctions between different camps of Israel’s critics, saying, “There’s a very big difference between thinking that Israel’s particular tactics ought to be changed and buying into some of the nonsense that we have seen over the last month.” But he added that “I’m afraid that far too many people who consider themselves to be smart and learned and switched-on have done that.”

The Editors podcast is recorded on Tuesdays and Fridays every week and is available wherever you listen to podcasts.

20. Why Antisemitism, Anger and Intolerance Have Infected America’s Ivy League Colleges — Paet One and Part Two

Both part 1 and Part 2 are pasted below.

This is so sad to read.  

These students are ill-informed, mis-informed, and "dis-informed"

The" original sin" is "privilege."

Excerpts:

It is not so difficult to explain why so many students — many of whom would proudly describe themselves as “anti-fascist” — are so intolerant toward Jews and Israel.

Wall Street Journal columnist Barton Swaim described the scenes on American campuses as a product of the Marxist theories that have been taught for decades in higher education establishments:

That’s why they particularly hate Israel—a wealthy nation among neighbors whose poverty is relieved only by oil revenue. Israel is the one country in the Middle East where ordinary people stand a good chance of creating prosperity for themselves and their families. For modern progressive academics, weaned on the Marxian concept that wealth is the result of exploitation, that is precisely the reason for Israel’s guilt. They can’t behold its prosperity without concluding that the Jews have stolen their wealth from their neighbors.”

And that is the crux of it: for American students, Israel and Jews are privileged, and privilege is the new original sin.

Israel-Hamas War Proves America's Ivy League Colleges Are Festering With Violent Antisemitism - Part One | Honest Reporting

honestreporting.com · by Rachel O'Donoghue · November 5, 2023

“Astonishing,” “astounding,” “awesome,” and “incredible” were some of the adjectives used by Columbia University tenured professor Joseph Massad to describe the rape and murder rampage by Hamas terrorists in southern Israel on October 7.

Massad, who has taught Modern Arab Politics at the New York institution since 1999, lavished praise on the barbaric attack in a piece published in the Electronic Intifada, which is edited by Ali Abunimah and infamous for promoting hateful rhetoric.

“What can motorized paragliders do in the face of one of the most formidable militaries in the world?” Asks Massad in his opening line, referring to the armed paragliders who swooped on the Supernova musical festival and slaughtered hundreds of revelers. “Apparently much in the hands of an innovative Palestinian resistance,” he crows in response to his question.

It’s truly sickening stuff; a shameless celebration of wanton violence against primarily unarmed men, women and children by a professor at one of the most prestigious colleges in the United States.

And yet, it is not surprising.

Something is rotten in America’s elite educational establishments; Ivy League schools are becoming breeding grounds for extremism and intolerance.

This has been no better exemplified than in the weeks since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, when students at nearly every Ivy League college have attended marches and protests where they have openly voiced their support for the Hamas attacks and called for the extermination of the world’s only Jewish state.

Eretz Nehederet or ‘A Wonderful Country’ takes pro-Hamas university students to task for ignoring what’s right in front of them. pic.twitter.com/3HS6vUY0h2

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 5, 2023

Columbia University

Massad’s support for Islamist terrorism and indiscriminate violence against Jews is disturbing. Even more disturbing, though, is the Columbia University leadership’s refusal to take any action against — even to condemn — the academic.

Shortly after Massad penned the article, Columbia student Maya Platek started a petition, which has now been signed by nearly 70,000 people, calling on Columbia University to hold him accountable.

“Massad’s decision to praise the abhorrent attack encourages violence and misinformation in and outside of campus, particularly putting many Jewish and Israeli students on campus at risk. Moreover, many students have expressed that they feel unsafe in the presence of a professor who supports the horrific murders of civilians,” states the petition.

While the university has completely ignored the petition and the concerns voiced by Jewish students, members of the faculty have come out in support of pro-terror students, including more than 100 academics who signed a letter demanding that such students not face consequences for praising the attacks.

“In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of Oct. 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years,” the academics wrote of the attack.

The academics’ letter was released after a leading law firm rescinded job offers to students at Columbia University and Harvard University who signed statements in support of the attacks.

While Columbia University President Minouche Shafik joined forces with other college heads to announce a vague plan to combat antisemitism on campus, it appears to be a superficial effort considering that Shafik also praised the “persistence” of Columbia students accused of antisemitism.

Jewish students at Columbia University in New York City release a statement saying they are being intimidated on campus and that the university is doing absolutely nothing about it pic.twitter.com/v6yXJ0lu8v

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) November 1, 2023

Harvard University

Among the worst behavior witnessed on college campuses since Hamas launched its attack on Israel last month has been at Harvard University, where students belonging to the recently-formed group Graduate Students 4 Palestine (GS4P) spearheaded numerous campus protests.

The most shocking scenes of anti-Israel and antisemitic hatred occurred at a so-called “Stop the genocide in Gaza” die-in demonstration at the Harvard Business School on October 18, when a pro-Israeli student attempting to film the protest was assaulted by a mob that had surrounded and taunted him with screams of “Shame, shame, shame.”

The mob of aggressive pro-Palestinian students reportedly included one of the founders of GS4P, Elon Tettey-Temalko, a graduate student at Harvard Divinity School, and Harvard Law Review editor Ibrahim Bharmal, whose name has since been scrubbed from the website page naming the board of the editors.

The pro-murder, pro-kidnapping mob is targeting and harassing Jewish students at @Harvard. pic.twitter.com/fKVewqj7wC

— Aviva Klompas (@AvivaKlompas) November 1, 2023

Antisemitism and hostility toward Israel and Israeli students are not new phenomena at Harvard — indeed it is a festering problem that has long been ignored by the university administration.

There have been numerous incidents at the elite college over the years, including the Cornel West tenure controversy, which HonestReporting has documented and is indicative of a culture of intolerance toward Israeli and Jewish students.

Just last month, Harvard refused to take action against Harvard Kennedy School Professor Marshall Ganz, who was found to have discriminated against Israeli students, subjecting them to “anti-Israel and antisemitic bias,” according to a third-party investigator.

Far from rebuking the academic, Ganz was praised for his civil rights work in the Harvard Gazette, which is the university’s official news website.

Cornell University

Classes had to be canceled at Cornell University and 21-year-old computer science student Patrick Dai was arrested after he posted several violent threats directed at Jewish classmates on a Cornell student forum.

Dai appeared in federal court earlier this month after he logged onto the forum using the screen name “Hamas” and threatened to slit the throats of Jewish people and described them as rats and pigs. In one post he warned he was “gonna shoot up 104 west,” in reference to a dining hall that mostly caters to Jewish students and is next to the Cornell Jewish Center.

While Cornell University’s president made the decision to cancel classes and condemned antisemitism on campus in a statement, it is clear that the problem of anti-Jewish hate at Cornell is more entrenched and widespread than one individual student.

Russell Rickford, a history professor at the college, issued an apology after he was filmed at an October 15 pro-Palestinian rally on the Ithaca, New York, campus praising the attack that had occurred one week previously. “Hamas has challenged the monopoly of violence” and “shifted the balance of power,” he told a crowd of young people. “It was exhilarating. It was energizing,” Rickford added of watching the attack unfold.

After initially standing by his statements, Rickford later rowed back on his remarks and apologized “for the horrible choice of words,” admitting they were “reprehensible.” He is currently on a leave of absence from the university and will not teach this semester.

Cornell president Martha Pollack and board of trustees chairman Kraig Kayser condemned Rickford and explained the college is “taking this incident seriously and is currently reviewing it, consistent with our procedures.” Whether that review will result in Rickford’s permanent dismissal remains to be seen.

Yale University

There have been accusations that Yale University ignores the problem of antisemitism on its campus — from inviting antisemitic speakers to visit campus and address students during Jewish holidays to anti-Jewish fliers being handed out on campus.

Yale also proved little had changed with regard to how it deals with antisemitism following the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war, including the university refusing to remove a professor who praised the Hamas attack.

Zareena Grewal, associate professor of American studies, ethnicity, race and migration, described the events of October 7 as “extraordinary,” adding in another post on X (formerly Twitter) that “Israel is a murderous, genocidal settler state and Palestinians have every right to resist through armed struggle, solidarity #FreePalestine.”

Despite a petition calling for her to be fired being signed by tens of thousands of people, Yale released a statement in support of Grewal’s right to “freedom of expression.”

Meanwhile, the Yale Daily News, which is the oldest college daily newspaper in the United States, published the most extraordinary apology after initial articles it published reporting on the Hamas attacks were later “corrected” to remove reference to terrorists raping and beheading people.

Explaining how the actions of murderous terrorists were sanitized in this way, the student newspaper’s editor Anika Seth explained they were “wrong to publish the corrections” and claimed they only did so because the “specific forms of violence” had not been independently confirmed by the source cited in the article.

“It was never the News’ intention to minimize the brutality of Hamas’ attack against Israel. We are sorry for any unintended consequences to our readership and will ensure that such erroneous and damaging material does not make it into our content, either as opinion or as news,” the apology added.

At the end of a column by @sahar_tartak, editors at @yaledailynews affixed a “correction,” saying claims that Hamas raped women and beheaded men are “unsubstantiated.” @Yale’s student newspaper is running cover for Hamas. https://t.co/NPIrIXcdqf pic.twitter.com/6YopEnG50X

— Zach Kessel (@zach_kessel) October 30, 2023

Found this article informative? Follow the HonestReporting page on Facebook to read more articles debunking news bias and smears, as well as others explaining Israel’s history, politics, and international affairs. Click here to learn more!

Photo credit: Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

Share

Share

honestreporting.com · by Rachel O'Donoghue · November 5, 2023

Why Antisemitism, Anger and Intolerance Have Infected America’s Ivy League Colleges — Part Two - Algemeiner.com

algemeiner.com · by The Algemeiner · November 14, 2023

University of Pennsylvania. Photo: Billy Wilson/Flickr

We recently examined the alarming escalation in antisemitism seen on US college campuses — specifically at the Ivy League universities of Harvard, Yale, Cornell, and Columbia — since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war on October 7.

In this second part, we will look at the remaining four Ivy Leagues, charting how America’s most elite educational establishments have become havens of intolerance, and why so many of their students harbor such hatred toward both Jews and the State of Israel.

University of Pennsylvania

Two weeks before Hamas’ barbaric rampage through southern Israeli communities resulted in the biggest loss of Jewish life in a day since the Holocaust, the University of Pennsylvania was embroiled in an antisemitism scandal when notorious Jew-hating musician Roger Waters was invited to speak on campus during an anti-Israel festival.

Waters, who is best known as a founding member of the rock band Pink Floyd and for goose-stepping on-stage while dressed as a Nazi, was asked to address attendees at the “Palestine Writes Literature Festival” before he was banned from campus following a backlash by critics who had noted that the event was scheduled to coincide with the Jewish High Holiday period, thus reducing the likelihood of Jewish students protesting antisemitic speakers.

In the lead-up to the festival, which went ahead as scheduled with Waters speaking remotely, numerous incidents of antisemitism were recorded on campus, including a swastika that was drawn inside the school’s Stuart Weitzman School of Design, and the arrest of a man who entered the Penn Hillel and screamed statements such as, “F—k the Jews” and “They killed JC,” a reference to the myth that Jews are responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus.

In light of the Waters controversy, UPenn President Liz Magill belatedly announced her personal commitment to addressing antisemitism at the college, adding: “The University of Pennsylvania has a long and proud history of being a place for people of all backgrounds and faiths, and acts of antisemitism have no place at Penn.”

How utterly hollow those words were.

In the days and weeks after Hamas terrorists murdered and kidnapped more than 1,200 Israeli civilians, UPenn has again allowed antisemitism to rear its head on campus.

The university administration’s first statement to condemn the Hamas atrocity was more than a week after the massacre took place. On Sunday, October 15, Magill sent an email to the university community. “I want to leave no doubt about where I stand,” it said. “I, and this university, are horrified by and condemn Hamas’s terrorist assault on Israel and their violent atrocities against civilians. There is no justification — none — for these heinous attacks…”

However, the email apparently only came after Jon Huntsman Jr., the former governor of Utah and former US ambassador to China, Russia, and Singapore, told Magill that his charitable organization, the Huntsman Foundation, would be pulling donations from the university over the issue of antisemitism.

For some UPenn students, though, the email’s failure to mention Palestinians was akin to not recognizing their “existence,” and they organized a mass walkout of classes in response.

Videos and photos taken of the protest show students chanting slogans such as, “Intifada, Intifada,” “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and “Israel, Israel, you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide.” A handful of students reportedly harassed a rabbi who was manning a tefillin stand on the route marchers took.

Other wealthy UPenn donors have since followed Huntsman’s lead and pulled funding from the college, including Marc Rowan, who contributed more than $50 million in 2018, and Steve Eisman, who demanded his name be removed from a university scholarship.

NEW Canary Mission profile. Tara Tarawneh, a student at @Penn & writer for Penn’s student newspaper, glorified the massacre of Jews at a pro-Hamas rally: “I remember feeling so empowered and happy…I want all of you to hold that feeling in your hearts.” https://t.co/38Lj7qBtQ5 pic.twitter.com/MxDrYMLGWx

— Canary Mission (@canarymission) November 5, 2023

Princeton University

In August of this year, Israeli Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli wrote a letter to Princeton University’s senior leadership about a book that was approved to go on the syllabus of the Near Eastern Studies Department’s “Decolonizing Trauma Studies from the Global South” course.

The book, “The Healing Humanities: The Right to Maim,” written by Jasbir Puar, falsely claims that Israel harvests the organs of Palestinians and that the country has a policy of trying to maim Palestinians.

Despite the text promoting a modern-day blood libel, Princeton’s President Christopher L. Eisgruber refused to remove the text from the syllabus on the grounds that it would be “censoring” the curriculum.

“Those who disagree with a book, or a syllabus, are free to criticize it but not to censor it,” he wrote. “Such arguments are the lifeblood of a great university, where controversies must be addressed through deliberation and debate, not administrative fiat.”

However, one must question the sincerity of Eisgruber’s view about fighting censorship, considering the fact that under his tenure, Princeton scrubbed the name of America’s 28th President, Woodrow Wilson, from its public policy school on the basis that Wilson’s “racist thinking and policies make him an inappropriate namesake for a school or college whose scholars, students and alumni must stand firmly against racism in all its forms.”

Incidentally, as Michael Goldstein pointed out in the Jewish Journal, the inclusion of Puar’s antisemitic tome in the curriculum actually marked the second time the “Israelis harvest Palestinian organs” blood libel had been legitimized on campus. Just months before the Puar controversy, professional Palestinian activist Mohammed El-Kurd, who has accused Israelis of eating Palestinian organs and lusting after their blood, was paid to give the Edward Said lecture at the university’s English Department.

Many in Princeton’s undergraduate student body have also been gunning to pass a resolution in support of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, which seeks to isolate and eventually dismantle the Jewish state.

What followed a March 2022 vote on BDS was reminiscent of something out of a banana republic. In total, 44 percent of students voted in favor, 40 percent voted against, and 16 percent abstained, which was supposed to mean the resolution immediately failed, because abstentions prevented a majority.

However, a dispute ensued about how abstentions would be counted, with Eric Periman, then-president of the Princeton Committee on Palestine (PCP), which sponsored the resolution, arguing the pro-BDS camp had won.

Around the same time that PCP was pushing for Princeton to support BDS, the group made crystal clear its real target when it held a protest outside the campus Center for Jewish Life (CJL), in which protestors held signs with phrases commonly used by Hamas such as, “from the river to the sea” and during which PCP President Periman suggested Princeton’s Jewish students were complicit in human rights violations.

Dartmouth College

Two pro-Palestinian students were arrested at Dartmouth last month after they allegedly trespassed on the grounds of the university’s Parkhurst Hall late at night and threatened to “escalate” and take “physical action” against college administrators in a document titled the “Dartmouth New Deal,” which demands the school divest from “Israeli apartheid.”

“You have until the first day of the winter term to publicly address our demands and outline a plan to meet them. If you fail to do so, we will escalate and take further action,” the document reportedly warned.

The arrests followed at least one pro-Palestinian rally in which attendees reportedly chanted, “Israel is a terror state.”

Breaking News:

Around 1AM today, Hanover Police arrested two pro-Palestinian protesters who were camped on Parkhurst Hall’s front lawn, charging them with a misdemeanor for criminal trespassing. The two students were released on bail later in the morning. pic.twitter.com/PSNBncJ0SC

— The Dartmouth Review (@DartmouthReview) October 28, 2023

However, while Dartmouth has grappled with more isolated incidents of anti-Jewish hatred on campus, including a swastika being carved on the college green and a public menorah being shot at with pellets, it should be noted that the general response by the university leadership to the Israel-Hamas war last month has been commendable.

Spearheaded by a group of Middle Eastern academics at the college, two public forums were set up on October 9 that featured professors from Israel, Lebanon, and Egypt discussing the conflict, which were attended by hundreds of students in-person and online.

Encouraging students to attend the forums, the university’s President Sian Leah said: “I watched with growing horror the Hamas attack on Israel this weekend, the escalating violence, and the devastating loss of life, especially among civilians… In every conflict, one of the most important roles a university can play is to help us understand it, and to make a space for dialogue and community.”

Leah’s dither-free response to the attacks, which was in stark contrast to the leaders of so many other colleges, was a welcome change from her predecessor Philip Hanlon, whose role in attempting to hire BDS-supporting Professor N. Bruce Duthu as Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences had been criticized as another “chapter in the school’s history of anti-Semitism.”

Brown University

Brown’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), an organization that has a well-documented history of disseminating vicious anti-Israel propaganda and vilifying Jewish students, was already organizing pro-Palestinian campus protests as Hamas terrorists were still cutting their bloodsoaked path through southern Israel.

In addition to organizing several student walkouts, the group posted on October 12 a statement to its Instagram account in which it claimed Israel was responsible for the Hamas massacre, and stated that it stands in “solidarity with the Palestinian resistance against Israeli occupation.”

At one such campus rally, an SJP member was captured on film telling the crowd: “Palestinians will die for justice and will die to return to our land. Glory to our martyrs from the river to the sea … Palestine is the hope of the world.”

Apparently, explicitly supporting a proscribed terrorist organization that is sworn to the destruction of both Jews and Israel is not enough to get the group banned from Brown’s campus.

Although Brown University’s President Christina H. Paxson has opposed calls for the college to adopt a pro-BDS stance, the school’s response to antisemitism among the Brown community has been criticized, particularly after several high-profile incidents at the college over the past two years, including swastikas drawn around campus and antisemitic threats directed toward Brown Hillel.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Brown SJP (@brown.sjp)

It is not so difficult to explain why so many students — many of whom would proudly describe themselves as “anti-fascist” — are so intolerant toward Jews and Israel.

Wall Street Journal columnist Barton Swaim described the scenes on American campuses as a product of the Marxist theories that have been taught for decades in higher education establishments:

That’s why they particularly hate Israel—a wealthy nation among neighbors whose poverty is relieved only by oil revenue. Israel is the one country in the Middle East where ordinary people stand a good chance of creating prosperity for themselves and their families. For modern progressive academics, weaned on the Marxian concept that wealth is the result of exploitation, that is precisely the reason for Israel’s guilt. They can’t behold its prosperity without concluding that the Jews have stolen their wealth from their neighbors.”

And that is the crux of it: for American students, Israel and Jews are privileged, and privilege is the new original sin.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

algemeiner.com · by The Algemeiner · November 14, 2023

21.

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com