Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"Those who lack the courage will always find a philosophy to justify it."

– Albert Camus

"Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag. Use your memory! Use your memory! It is those bitter seeds alone which might sprout and grow someday.

– Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

"It is very nearly impossible, after all, to become an educated person in a country so distrustful of the independent mind."

– James Baldwin

1. NATO and Countering Hybrid Warfare

2. The other shoe is falling — listen to Trump about terrorism and WWIII

3. The West finally allowed Ukraine to strike back at Russia — and it seems to be working

4. With Ukraine short on battle tanks like the Abrams, US-made Bradley fighting vehicles are proving their worth

5. Things Worth Remembering: How to Respond to an Almost-Assassination

6. Foreign Policy’s Summer Reading List

7. Agricultural planes are being converted into “fighters” by the United States and the first two planes have already arrived.

8. Canada Said to Have Mapped Out Secret Chinese Police Operations

9. China Isn't the Strongest Military in Asia

10. The Final Six Months of U.S. Aid for Ukraine

11. Japan removes navy chief as sweeping misconduct investigation roils military

12. Opinion | Special forces and presidential poisoning? US Supreme Court opinions read better than thrillers

13. Balancing Act: Indonesia’s Strategic Response To China’s Growing Influence In The Indian Ocean

14. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, July 13, 2024

15. Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, July 13, 2024

16. The Shooting of Donald Trump

1. NATO and Countering Hybrid Warfare

NATO and Countering Hybrid Warfare

https://www.csis.org/analysis/nato-and-countering-hybrid-warfare

Commentary by Daniel Byman

Published July 12, 2024

This series—featuring scholars from the Futures Lab, the International Security Program, and across CSIS—explores emerging challenges and opportunities that NATO is likely to confront after its 75th anniversary.

In the future, NATO countries must step up their efforts to protect against Russian-backed extremists as well as Russian hybrid warfare.

Countries in NATO have long-battled against terrorist and other violent extremist organizations. Ethnic terrorism plagued Northern Ireland and Spain for many years, and left-right violence troubled many European states. State-sponsored groups, Hezbollah, and various Palestinian organizations targeted Europe in the 1970s and 1980s. Well before 9/11, France saw a series of jihadist terrorist attacks that emerged out of the Algerian civil war in the 1990s. In the post-9/11 era, Al Qaeda prioritized attacks on Europe, launching devastating strikes in London, Madrid, and other areas, and after 2014 the Islamic State followed suit with strikes throughout much of Europe. Europe also sees regular anti-immigrant and other white supremacist violence.

NATO itself, however, has played only a limited role in fighting terrorism in Europe. Much of the struggle has involved intelligence cooperation, and that has usually been done bilaterally. In addition, domestic intelligence services have often played the leading role, and these are not integrated with NATO. The alliance did play important roles in fighting jihadist-linked violence in out-of-area operations, however. Wars in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda and in Syria against the Islamic State involved NATO forces.

Jihadist and right-wing violence will remain concerning, and intelligence agencies should rightly focus on these dangers. NATO similarly has an important role to play in combating the emerging threat of Russian hybrid warfare. Hybrid warfare involves a mix of conventional and unconventional security instruments, ranging from traditional conventional warfare to information warfare and support for terrorism. Before Moscow’s outright invasion of Ukraine in 2024, it was already employing a mix of methods—including assassinations, disinformation, subversion, and support for insurgents—to undermine its adversaries.

If and when the conventional war in Ukraine ends or the fighting dies down, the threat of Russian hybrid warfare may actually increase. Russia’s conventional forces have suffered heavy losses in the Ukraine war, while NATO countries bordering Russia have built up their capabilities. At the same time, Russia sees itself as locked in a long-term existential struggle with NATO and seeks revenge for European and U.S. support to Ukraine. This combination—Russia’s limited conventional power mixed with its desire to punish its enemies—is likely to lead the Kremlin to turn to hybrid war.

Indeed, Russia has long conducted limited hybrid war in Europe and seems to be stepping up its activities. Russia has ties to numerous far-right organizations, some of which are violent, and has provided them with money, limited training, encouragement, and other support. In addition, Russia has long flooded Europe with disinformation, trying to bolster pro-Russian far-right parties, worsen preexisting tensions around contentious issues such as immigration, and undermine institutions, particularly confidence in elections. Most menacingly, Russia has stepped up sabotage in Europe as payback for European support to Ukraine. The New York Times reports that Russia has conducted or attempted arson attacks on a warehouse in the United Kingdom, an Ikea store in Lithuania, and a paint factory in Poland, as well plotting attacks against a U.S. military base in Europe, among other targets.

NATO’s response to Russian hybrid warfare should involve several measures. First, it needs to integrate domestic intelligence services better into the alliance to ensure that their information is widely shared and that the services of member states are cooperating to protect NATO equities. Domestic services will often be the first to detect disinformation, support for extremism, and other Russian-linked activities.

NATO must also prepare for military operations and countering sabotage and terrorism in an environment rife with disinformation. Russia is likely to use a variety of outlets and methods to sow confusion and fear. This may include deepfakes to confuse command and control and to discredit leaders, or disinformation after a terrorist attack to whip up fears and undermine confidence in leadership. This will complicate decisionmaking and potentially generate public suspicion regarding military operations and public security measures.

Improving resilience across NATO is also vital. Some countries, such as Finland, have long invested in ensuring that domestic society is prepared for cyberattacks that lead to electricity outages, rocket strikes, sabotage, and other threats that span the conflict spectrum. Finland, for example, has 50,500 shelters spread out across the country and extensive plans for countering disinformation. Other NATO members, however, are less prepared for hybrid warfare, and their ability and willingness to fight may suffer as a result.

Finally, NATO must improve its options for coercive diplomacy. Currently, Russia’s use of sabotage, disinformation, and support for violent extremists meets with limited pushback from NATO countries. The alliance must develop a suite of options to put pressure on Russia, using its collective power to strengthen its overall influence.

Daniel Byman is a senior fellow with the Warfare, Irregular Threats, and Terrorism Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., and a professor in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.

Commentary is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).

The other shoe is falling — listen to Trump about terrorism and WWIII

BY DOUGLAS MACKINNON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 07/13/24 12:00 PM ET

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4768722-the-other-shoe-is-falling-listen-to-trump-about-terrorism-and-wwiii/

On Sept. 11, 2001, while driving to work in Washington, D.C., I witnessed the American Airlines plane that slammed into the Pentagon. Not only was that terrorist target a building I had worked in for three years, but I had a former coworker on the doomed aircraft.

Minutes later, a cousin of mine would be one of the first to rush into the burning building in an attempt to save lives.

The issues we now disagree about — or actively hate each other over — truly seem trivial in comparison to that day and the following weeks, when almost every car in the nation flew an American flag in both pride in our nation and in defiance of the attack.

Coming up on 23 years later, virtually no cars in the U.S. have American flags. Even worse, many on the left have come to view the flag as a symbol of hate and repression.

Partisan politics is an acid that corrodes all it touches — an acid made exponentially stronger by social media and those who hide in the shadows and behind masks while sowing division and hate.

But as they do, they would be wise to look up. For if they did, they would see another shoe about to drop in one of our cities: the return of the threat of a massive terrorist attack upon our shores.

The terrorists don’t care about our trivial disagreements and scream fests. But they do welcome them. Because they represent a distraction from the hell on earth they are planning. For an example of a nation distracted by partisan politics being attacked, look no further than Israel on Oct. 7.

On 9/11, someone from every single demographic in our nation was killed or wounded. Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, straight, gay, trans, black, white, brown. It did not matter. All were targets that day.

Earlier this week, while a guest on “Hannity” on Fox News, former President Donald Trump spoke about the growing threat of yet another terrorist attack upon America. Trump said he believed with “100 percent certainty” that we would be hit again.

His main reason for saying this was because of the thousands of presumed terrorists that have illegally crossed into our nation incognito during the Biden administration.

Suicidal partisan politics dictates that we are now not allowed to bring up that subject nor address it. Instead, are supposed to feign ignorance about this very real problem until the unthinkable happens as a result.

In a flash, we will lose untold Americans. Dead or dying by the thousands. But hey, at least we will not have offended anyone before the blast.

And speaking of blasts, Trump has consistently — and correctly, in my opinion — warned that the war between Ukraine and Russia is littered with tripwires that could trigger World War III. But we have to ignore the greatest threat in our lifetime for two amazingly stupid reasons. The first, again, is partisan politics, or perhaps more accurately hatred of Trump. The worlds of media, academia, entertainment, science and medicine insist that we not only ignore the warning but smear the messenger.

The second reason is that if you want an immediate cease-fire in Ukraine to prevent tactical nuclear strikes in the heart of London, then you must be a “Putin lover.”

Step back from the partisanship, anger and hate for just a moment to think about this. We are deliberately ignoring the two greatest threats to our nation and the world, either because we don’t like the person issuing the warnings, or we don’t like the views of the groups behind the warnings.

Hate on Trump all you want, but he is right about the looming threats of terrorism and global war. And while I understand many on the left also don’t like the word “pray” being used in public, we should all pray that Trump isn’t proven right.

Look up. Above the other falling shoe is another and another. They will land.

Douglas MacKinnon, a political and communications consultant, was a writer in the White House for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and former special assistant for policy and communications at the Pentagon during the last three years of the Bush administration.

3. The West finally allowed Ukraine to strike back at Russia — and it seems to be working

How much better off would Ukraine be if these restrictions had been lifted sooner or not imposed at all?

The West finally allowed Ukraine to strike back at Russia — and it seems to be working | CNN

CNN · by Ivana Kottasová · July 14, 2024

Ukrainian forces are striking Russia-occupied Crimea

00:34 - Source: CNN

CNN —

Bankir and his men have been trying to fight off Russian attacks along the Ukrainian front lines for more than two years. But it’s only now that they are finally able to strike where it hurts: Inside Russia’s own territory.

The newly granted permission by the United States and other allies to use Western weapons to strike inside Russia has had a huge impact, Bankir said. “We have destroyed targets inside Russia, which allowed for several successful counteroffensives. The Russian military can no longer feel impunity and security,” the senior officer in Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) told CNN. For security reasons, he asked to be identified by his call sign only.

After many months on the back foot because of ammunition and manpower shortages, Kyiv is finally able to take full advantage of Western military aid that started to flow into the country last month, after months of delays.

Soldiers on the front lines say the deliveries are beginning to make a difference – especially since they can now use the arsenal to strike across the border.

“We can see the impact of the aid every day. Artillery, longer-range multiple launch rocket systems with various types of ammunition and submunitions… it’s affecting the overall battlefield picture,” Ivan, an officer with the 148th artillery brigade, told CNN. He also asked for his full name not to be published for security reasons.

“We are deploying the most effective weapons systems in the areas where the Russians are trying to break through the defensive lines and there has been a significant slowdown in the Russian advance,” he added.

While Kyiv hasn’t managed to reclaim large swathes of territory, it has successfully averted what could have been a disaster: The occupation of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second city.

Ukrainian servicemen of the 148th Separate Artillery Brigade of the Ukrainian Air Assault Forces, prepare to fire a M777 howitzer near a front line in Donetsk region, Ukraine May 1, 2024.

Valentyn Ogirenko/Reuters

‘Tragic moment’

Part of the northern Kharkiv region, including the cities of Izium, Kupiansk, and Balakliia, fell into Russian hands soon after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The occupation was brutal. When the area was liberated in the fall of 2022, Ukrainian troops found evidence of what they say were war crimes committed by Russian forces, including multiple mass graves and torture chambers.

In May this year, Russia launched another cross-border attack on the region, trying to exploit Ukraine’s ammunition shortages before the expected arrival of the first Western weapons.

The consequences were deadly. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said that at least 174 civilians were killed and 690 were injured in Ukraine in May, the highest number of civilian casualties in a year.

In this pool photograph distributed by the Russian state agency Sputnik, Russia's President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hold an informal meeting at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence, outside Moscow, on July 8, 2024.

Gavrill Grigorov/Pool/AFP/Getty Images

More than half of the civilian casualties were in Kharkiv – even though the region encompasses a relatively small area compared to the whole country.

International security expert Oleksiy Melnyk, a former Ukrainian defense official and the co-director of foreign relations and international security programs at the Razumkov Center in Kyiv, told CNN that the re-occupation of previously liberated areas north of Kharkiv was a “tragic moment” for Ukraine.

But it also marked a major turning point.

“It triggered a change in the position of our Western partners, it encouraged them to, at least partially, remove the restrictions on the use of the Western weapons,” he said.

Fearing an escalation, the US and other Western allies had long prohibited Kyiv from using their weapons to strike inside Russia, restricting their use to Ukrainian areas under Russian occupation.

That has allowed Russia to use the border areas as safe staging grounds for offensives and missile attacks.

“(Russia) knew that Ukraine did not have the capacity to strike these targets on the Russian territory,” Melnyk said.

“If the decision (to provide aid) wasn’t made, if we lost American support and military assistance, that would have been a game changer.”

But the possibility of Russian re-occupation of parts of Kharkiv region convinced some of Ukraine’s key allies, including the US, to lift the restrictions. This allowed Kyiv to hit and destroy or severely damage key targets inside Russia.

President Joe Biden attends a Medal of Honor Ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on July 3.

Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

According to Ukrainian defense authorities, these included a regiment command post in Belgorod region, an ammunition depot in Voronezh, a drone facility and an airfield in Krasnodar, communication centers in Bryansk and several naval sites in occupied Crimea.

The arrival of long-range ATACMS missile systems was a particular game-changer, Melnyk said. While Ukraine was previously able to strike targets inside Russia using Ukraine-made drones, ATACMS make these strikes far more efficient.

“Speed matters,” Melnyk explained. “With drone strikes, Russians have hours to react, because they can detect Ukrainian drones early. Russian pilots can have a coffee and a cigarette before jumping into the cockpit and taking off to take it down. With the ATACMS, it’s a matter of minutes,” he said.

Konrad Muzyka, an independent defense analyst and the director of Rochan Consulting who has recently returned from eastern Ukraine, said Russia is also no longer able to target Kharkiv region with S-300 and S-400 missile systems.

“Ukraine started conducting HIMARS strikes on targets in the Belgorod region and forced the Russians to push their S-300 system with which they were striking Kharkiv much further away, so now Kharkiv is beyond their range of Russian S-300 systems,” he said.

While Russia switched to aerial glide bombs – guided munitions with pop-up wings dropped by fighter jets from a distance of some 60-70 kilometers – out of range of Ukraine’s air defenses, the elimination of the S-300 threat has provided at least some relief to Kharkiv.

People gather following the collapse of a section of a multi-story apartment block in the city of Belgorod, Russia, on May 12, 2024.

Reuters

Weapons without men, men without strategy?

But while the new weapons are making some difference, Ukraine is long way off being able to push Russian forces off its territory.

Another officer with the 148th separate artillery brigade who goes by call sign Senator told CNN that there is still a lot more that Ukraine needs.

“It isn’t enough to turn the tide at the front. Enough to hold the enemy back, yes, but not enough to change the situation dramatically,” he said.

“The enemy is now exhausted but not destroyed,” he said, pointing to the fact that Russia still has complete air superiority over Ukraine.

Kyiv is now pinning its hopes on the deliveries of F-16 fighter jets which should start soon – the first Ukrainian pilots were set to complete their training in the US this summer.

But Muzyka said it is far from certain the jets will bring a massive change to Ukraine’s fortunes.

The rising sun peaks over the top of the Jefferson Memorial on a hot summer day on June 18, 2024, in Washington, DC.

J. David Ake/Getty Images

“The F-16s are combat aircraft from 1980s and 1990s and their capabilities are worse than the most modern Russian combat aircraft,” he said, adding that the newest Russian jets would likely prevail in an air battle with the F-16.

However, Ukraine can still use the F-16 to deny Russia control over the skies – and push away Russian aircraft delivering bombs.

Yet the new weapons are just part of the puzzle.

“If it had not been for the supplemental package, Ukrainians would be in a much worse situation right now, but at the same time, the current situation is not only the result of a lack of actions by the US Congress, it’s also the result of the decisions that were made and were not made in Kyiv, especially when it comes to mobilization,” Muzyka said.

“The decision to introduce a wider mobilization was probably as important, if not more important, and it came too late,” he said. The new mobilization law, which requires all men between 18 and 60 to register with Ukraine’s military, came into effect in May.

He said that while Ukraine has managed to recruit a significant number of men over the past month and half, it will take time for these new soldiers to be trained up and ready for the front lines.

“Ukrainians are going to be in a very difficult position until August, September, when the first mobilized guys start to enter the front line. If they can get to that point, then there is a big likelihood that they will manage to stabilize the situation from August onwards, but until this happens, more Russian gains are highly likely.”

Muzyka said that with the new weapons arriving and battalions and brigades getting a boost soon from the new recruits, Ukraine will need to decide on its next steps.

“It is unclear what the plans are. What is the strategy for counteroffensives? The problem is that Ukraine is waiting to see what equipment the West can supply them with, and the West is waiting to see what plans Ukraine have for the future,” he said.

Time is of the essence here. Experts estimate that the $60 billion US aid package approved earlier this year will last for – at best – a year or 18 months.

Ukraine’s allies made fresh pledges on arms this week while at a NATO summit in Washington, DC, President Volodymyr Zelensky called for all restrictions on their usage to be lifted.

Given the possibility of former US President Donald Trump winning a second term in November – he has little time to spare.

Maria Kostenko and Daria Tarasova-Markina contributed reporting.

CNN · by Ivana Kottasová · July 14, 2024

4. With Ukraine short on battle tanks like the Abrams, US-made Bradley fighting vehicles are proving their worth

With Ukraine short on battle tanks like the Abrams, US-made Bradley fighting vehicles are proving their worth

Business Insider · by Jake Epstein, Chris Panella

Military & Defense

2024-07-13T11:37:02Z

Ukrainian soldiers of 47th Mechanized Brigade drive a Bradley infantry fighting vehicle in Ukraine's Donetsk region. Vitalii Nosach/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images

This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? .

US-made Bradley fighting vehicles have been a highly effective tool for Ukraine.
With lots of maneuverability and firepower, they have been used on the battlefield as light tanks.
For Kyiv, Bradleys are also more expendable than other Western armor like Abrams tanks.

NATO members have equipped Ukraine with plenty of highly capable armored vehicles to take into battle against Russia, giving Kyiv a firepower, survivability, and maneuverability upgrade over the aging Soviet-era systems with which it started its grueling fight.

Among the wartime additions to Ukraine's arsenal is the US-made Bradley fighting vehicle, a formidable asset that continues proving its worth on the battlefield several decades after it first saw combat.

This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.

There was tremendous hype around the arrival of the American-made M1 Abrams tank, but that's faded. However, the Bradley, despite suffering significantly more losses, has consistently been celebrated for its effectiveness, in some ways overshadowing the Abrams.

Kyiv didn't get very many Abrams, limiting their ability to make an impact on the battlefield and making the tanks more precious than the far more plentiful and more expendable Bradleys.

These vehicles don't deliver the same overall combat strength as the Abrams, as they're essentially armored troop carriers and fighting vehicles, but the Bradleys can serve in ways akin to a tank and aren't without their advantages.

The American-made Bradleys, in the hands of the Ukrainians, are "in effect being used as a light tank," Mark Cancian, a defense expert and retired US Marine Corps colonel, told Business Insider.

A 'very effective' infantry fighting vehicle

The Bradleys were built as a response to the Soviet infantry fighting vehicles and entered service in the 1980s. It is a combat-proven system, having deployed in the Gulf War in the early 1990s and then again to Iraq in the following decade, and has been praised for its maneuverability, survivability, and firepower — especially its ability to take out enemy armor on the move.

AP Photo/Sadayuki Mikami

With an operational range of around 300 miles and a crew of three, the Bradley can transport as many as six fully equipped soldiers to and from the battlefield at speeds of up to 40 mph. It is armed with tube-launched, optically tracked, wire-guided (TOW) missiles, a 25mm M242 Bushmaster chain gun, and a 7.62mm M240C machine gun.

The Bradley features a thermal vision system also found on Ukraine's Abrams tanks that is able to detect targets out to a distance of five miles. Its steel and aluminum armor, as well as a plate on the front of its belly, are durable enough to protect against some munitions and shield it against certain mine explosions.

The Bradley's armor can also be bolstered with explosive reactive armor, like a main battle tank, to further protect it.

A former US Army infantry officer told Business Insider "the capabilities that it brings in terms of speed, its ability to keep up with the tanks, your ability to move infantry squads in a protected manner across the battlefield very quickly, and its fairly robust armor package — along with the capabilities of the weapons systems on there — make it a very effective infantry fighting vehicle."

The US announced it would send dozens of Bradleys to Ukraine in early 2023 amid a push by other NATO countries to surge armored vehicles to the country ahead of a counteroffensive.

The Bradley isn't the only armor the US sent to Ukraine. Kyiv also has 31 Abrams tanks — a fraction of the more than 300 Bradleys it has received as of early July, according to Pentagon data.

Main battle tanks, like the Abrams, have not necessarily been a go-to armor choice for Ukraine and have been used more sparingly in combat. Part of that has to do with inventory, as Kyiv has many more Bradleys than Abrams to expend. Additionally, the battlefield conditions support the idea that a lighter vehicle could be better than something on the heavier side.

US Army National Guard photo by Spc. Hassani Ribera

The Bradley infantry fighting vehicle is lighter than an Abrams tank by roughly 40 tons. It handles off-road action well and doesn't usually get "bogged down in the mud" as easily, explained the former US infantry officer. They added that there's "a certain amount of mobility that comes into play there."

"The Bradley is perhaps a bit more maneuverable than a main battle tank," said the former officer, who had experience with the IFV during their service. "It's taller than one, which makes it a pretty good target, but it's more compact and can sort of maneuver through the terrain a little more agilely."

In Ukraine, the battlefield is different than what US weapons saw in the Middle East. The skies are contested, preventing air cover for armored operations, and unmanned aerial vehicles, along with anti-tank infantry equipped with anti-tank missiles and helicopters equipped with the same, are now threatening tanks like never before. Such an environment could favor lighter, faster, more maneuverable alternatives.

Additionally, while the powerful, heavily armored Abrams was built to kill other tanks, those battles are being seen fairly infrequently. This top tank was also built for armored breakthroughs, but massed armored assaults aren't really happening.

US Marine photo by Sgt. Tayler P. Schwamb

The Bradley can hold its own in a tank fight. Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said previously that the Bradley isn't a tank, but it is a "tank killer," as well as an effective tool against infantry. Ukraine has used these to target bunkers, exposed infantry, machine gun nets, and other targets beyond armor

Bradleys can be easier to recover, repair, and maintain, offer maneuverability and mobility, deliver sufficient combat capability and crew protection, and are not considered as high value as the Abrams from a targeting perspective. Some Abrams crews have said the tanks make them the "number one target."

Since the first Bradleys arrived on the battlefield more than a year ago, Ukrainian soldiers have praised the vehicle for its role in combat, applauding its firepower and survivability and commending it for being an upgrade over the Soviet-era systems they were using beforehand, such as the BMP.

In an interview last fall, a Bradley crew from the 47th Mechanized Brigade called the IFV a "very serious machine," noting that its thermal imager is "very high quality."

While the range may be lacking, "the shrapnel density is crazy, the firepower density is just insane," one soldier said. "Target acquisition takes seconds, just seconds. At night, this machine is absolutely priceless, simply invaluable. You capture targets much faster. Visibility is better than during the day."

Videos shared by Ukraine's military, as well as open-source intelligence (OSINT) accounts, have documented multiple instances of Bradleys going up against Russian armored vehicles — and even Russia's prized T-90M tanks — in head-to-head fights, with the Bradleys holding their own or overpowering enemies.

Other videos have shown the American-made armored vehicles engaging drones and unleashing withering chain-gun fire on Russian infantry positions. And on defense, these vehicles have taken direct hits or run over mines, and the crews have survived.

Although the footage captures just a fraction of what is happening on the battlefield, it builds a strong case for the fighting vehicle's impact in the war.

Ukraine is using it in a light tank role

Much of the Bradleys' success comes down to how the Ukrainians are using them. Cancian, a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, said that based on footage seen from the war, it is apparent that Ukraine is operating the Bradley as if it were a tank rather than an armored vehicle or transport.

"There's no question that the Ukrainians seem to be using it differently from the way the US Army would use it. They're using it much more in a scouting role, in a light tank role, than as an infantry fighting vehicle," he said, looking at open-source intel.

The US tends to operate its Bradleys in groups, with the vehicles working together with its Abrams. The armor is supported by infantry and air cover. Ukraine's limited arsenal of main battle tanks and insufficient airpower have led it to use its Bradleys differently. Drones and mines, too, have led to changes, with Ukraine usually sending only one or two out at a time.

The versatility of the Bradley fighting vehicle allows Ukraine to use it in whatever function is most useful in a given moment. They can transport troops, engage in battle on the front line, or scout out Russian positions miles away.

The Bradley was designed to be able to keep up with the Abrams across varying terrains. On the front lines in Ukraine, Cancian explained, the Bradley can scout, hide in the dense tree lines, and race across wide fields of mud and dirt.

Though it's using them differently than the US does, Ukraine has adapted quickly to the Bradleys and is using them well.

"What's impressed me is how quickly the crews have come up to speed on fighting the Bradley. The performance of the vehicle itself hasn't surprised me. It hasn't underwhelmed me either — it's what I would expect from well-trained crews," the former infantry officer said.

"You can't just jump into a Bradley and go into a battle and expect to be effective," they added.

This all adds weight to a narrative that has come to define Kyiv's side of the war for over two years now: the Ukrainians, often low on weapons or struggling to make ends meet, are scrappy fighters, fighting in ways Western armies like the US wouldn't. The Bradleys is one example of that, Cancian said, showing what Ukraine can do despite the odds.

Bradleys are good but not unbeatable

Though celebrated for their effectiveness, these battle-hardened vehicles are far from invincible, and many of them have fallen victim to Russian threats like artillery, mines, and drones.

So far, Ukraine has lost at least 90 of its Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, according to the open-source intelligence site Oryx, which uses visual confirmation to track war losses on both sides.

When the US employed the Bradleys in Afghanistan and Iraq, improvised explosive devices dealt damage to their vulnerable undercarriage.

That contributed to growing concerns about the future role of the vehicle, which is now set to be phased out with the Army's new XM30 Mechanized Infantry Fighting Vehicle replacing it in the coming years. A prototype of the vehicle is set to be delivered in late 2024. Cancian said it has likely been a surprise that the Bradley has done so well in Ukraine given the Army's concerns about its vulnerability.

There are advantages to using the Bradley over the Abrams or any other main battle tank for certain missions, but it remains unclear if Ukraine would be relying so heavily on Bradleys if it had received more Abrams tanks from the US, which would then allow them to employ the tanks more liberally on the battlefield.

Massed armor can be tremendously effective for offensive armored breakthroughs, but without certain force multipliers, such as airpower, Ukraine might be unable to leverage its armor to its full potential. It faced these challenges during last year's counteroffensive, which saw Ukraine's newly acquired Western main battle tanks stumble. F-16s are on their way, creating new possibilities, but their effectiveness remains to be seen.

For now, Ukraine's army is on defense, and the US hasn't offered any additional Abrams to supplement the ones already received. The Bradleys, though, remain in heavy use by the 47th Separate Mechanized Brigade, a group that's seen practically non-stop fighting for a year. A US aid package earlier this year included more Bradleys to the brigade.

Business Insider · by Jake Epstein, Chris Panella

5. Things Worth Remembering: How to Respond to an Almost-Assassination

Things Worth Remembering: How to Respond to an Almost-Assassination

Yesterday evening’s attack on Donald Trump is reminiscent of the shootings of Ronald Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt—and their pitch-perfect response.

https://www.thefp.com/p/things-worth-remembering-how-to-respond?utm

By Douglas Murray

July 14, 2024

Welcome to Douglas Murray’s Things Worth Remembering, in which he presents great speeches from famous orators we should commit to heart. This week, in light of yesterday’s news, we are bringing you two speeches from two former American presidents after attempts on their lives.

I was in Baltimore about to go onstage when I heard the news out of western Pennsylvania.

I felt sick to my stomach and uncharacteristically speechless.

This is a column that is meant to elevate words—the tools we use in a civilized society to air divergent views, to spar, and, ultimately, to resolve our political disputes. It is born of the hope that the things we say can deepen our democratic commitments and preempt bloodshed.

There have been times, of course, when that has not happened. American history is marred by the premature and violent deaths of presidents and presidential candidates. (I recently wrote about Robert F. Kennedy’s famous 1968 speech in Indianapolis.)

I am thinking about Kennedy in light of what happened yesterday. And I am also reminded of two famous, wonderful responses to almost-assassinations—those of President Ronald Reagan and former president Teddy Roosevelt.

Reagan, you may recall, was delivering a speech in West Berlin in 1987, when a nearby balloon unexpectedly popped. Without appearing in any way ruffled, the president—who had nearly been killed by gunman John Hinckley Jr., in 1981, outside the Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C.—quipped, “Missed me,” before proceeding with the rest of his speech. (The crowd loved that.)

T.R.’s story is even more unbelievable. In 1912, Roosevelt was in Milwaukee, where the Republican National Convention is slated to start tomorrow, and he was about to deliver a campaign speech. (Roosevelt was running, at the time, for a third term on the independent Progressive, or Bull Moose, ticket.)

After being shot by a former saloon owner and poet, John Schrank, Roosevelt correctly deduced that he had not been mortally wounded and delivered his ninety-minute speech.

The opening of his speech is simply remarkable:

“Friends, I shall ask you to be as quiet as possible,” Roosevelt began. “I don’t know whether you fully understand that I have just been shot; but it takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose.”

He added: “But fortunately I had my manuscript, so you see I was going to make a long speech, and there is a bullet—there is where the bullet went through—and it probably saved me from it going into my heart. The bullet is in me now, so that I cannot make a very long speech, but I will try my best.”

Only after wrapping up did Roosevelt check himself into a hospital—blood having spread across his shirt—where doctors determined that it would be safer to leave the bullet in his chest muscle than to try to remove it. (As it turned out, Schrank, who was committed to an insane asylum, outlived Roosevelt by 24 years.)

We still do not know why Thomas Matthew Crooks of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, tried to shoot the former president yesterday. In time we will surely find out. But words, once again, are going to matter.

Click below to listen to Ronald Reagan give his speech in West Berlin in 1987.

6. Foreign Policy’s Summer Reading List

Foreign Policy’s Summer Reading List

Our columnists and reporters’ top picks, from a history of China’s tattooed soldiers to an ambitious modern epic.

JULY 13, 2024, 7:00 AM

View Comments

(1)

By FP Staff and FP Contributors

Foreign Policy · by FP Staff, FP Contributors

Economics

How do you define “summer reading”? For Alexandra Sharp, writer of FP’s World Brief newsletter, a thrilling novel reminiscent of the TV show Succession fits the bill. For Cameron Abadi, co-host of the Ones and Tooze podcast, it’s a philosophical inquiry-cum-memoir into the concept of freedom. And for columnist Howard W. French, it looks like a comprehensive—but lively—economic history of the 20th century.

Below, you’ll find recommendations of all stripes from FP’s columnists and reporters for your next page-turner this summer.

Cloud Cuckoo Land: A Novel

Anthony Doerr (Scribner, 640 pp., $30, September 2021)

One of my favorite books that I’ve read this year is Anthony Doerr’s 2021 novel, Cloud Cuckoo Land, a gorgeously written and imaginative work of fiction that spans almost six centuries and is reminiscent of David Mitchell’s ambitious epic, Cloud Atlas. Doerr transports you from ancient Constantinople to Idaho to a futuristic interstellar ship, weaving together five seemingly independent storylines that are, ultimately, tied together by a reverence for books and the power of storytelling.

My one word of caution is that this is not a quick read; at 640 pages, Cloud Cuckoo Land is the kind of book that is best relished on a plush couch with hours of reading time. But it is, in my view, absolutely worth diving into.

—Christina Lu, FP’s reporter covering energy and the environment

Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century

J. Bradford DeLong (Basic Books, 624 pp., $35, September 2022)

I’ve been reading a lot about economics lately, from Zachary D. Carter’s terrific The Price of Peace: Money, Democracy, and the Life of John Maynard Keynes to Branko Milanovic’s eye-opening Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. These books pair very well with J. Bradford DeLong’s Slouching Towards Utopia. All of them share an impressive depth of knowledge of economics with the ability to render complex ideas in an approachable way for non-specialists. And they accomplish this, moreover, without dumbing things down in the least.

As someone who writes often about Africa, DeLong’s book impressed me for the way it clearly brings home the difficulties that countries face in seeking prosperity. One is tempted in light of his arguments to call them all but insuperable. As DeLong, an economic historian, makes clear, no countries have joined the club of rich nations in the postwar era save for European beneficiaries of the U.S. Marshall Plan, a small number of U.S. clients and allies in East Asia, and a handful of states that are enormously well endowed in oil and gas. In addition, DeLong’s writing is always crisp and lively.

—Howard W. French, FP columnist

Age of Vice: A Novel

Deepti Kapoor (Riverhead Books, 560 pp., $30, January 2023)

Fans of Succession, look no further than Deepti Kapoor’s dark, twisted saga Age of Vice. Instead of a ruthless media conglomerate, though, meet the Wadia family: a wealthy business empire steeped in corruption, drugs, politics, and—of course—murder. Set in modern New Delhi with flashbacks across India, Kapoor’s 2023 novel follows playboy heir Sunny, who must learn what true ruthlessness entails; his devoted servant Ajay, riddled with anger and guilt; and the inquisitive reporter Neda, forever enraptured by a world she never quite fits into.

Age of Vice begins with a devastating car crash—five dead and a servant behind the wheel—before spiraling into a storm of betrayal, loss, and passion. Lavish mansions mix with crowded slums, and children sold into labor find themselves trapped in the dazzling lights of exotic nightclubs. A thrilling read, Age of Vice reveals the warped underbelly of wealth and power.

—Alexandra Sharp, FP’s World Brief writer

Free: A Child and a Country at the End of History

Lea Ypi (W.W. Norton & Company, 288 pp., $27.95, January 2022)

There are plenty of novels that have philosophical themes, just as there are many works of philosophy with novelistic qualities. Political theorist Lea Ypi’s Free nevertheless seems to strike a new balance between these modes of humanism—namely, by giving equal weight to each. The result feels like an entirely new literary form.

Ypi’s philosophical inquiry into the concept of freedom is embedded in her biographical experience of growing up in Albania, first under communism and then the capitalist democracy that followed. The ubiquitous cliches of political life—under both systems—are thus undone in dual fashion: both by the analytical precision of the present-day philosopher and the inquisitive innocence of the child at the story’s center.

—Cameron Abadi, co-host of FP’s Ones and Tooze podcast

Our Enemies Will Vanish: The Russian Invasion and Ukraine’s War of Independence

Yaroslav Trofimov (Penguin Press, 400 pp., $32, January 2024)

Two years after the fact is probably too soon to write a full-fledged history of the most transformative conflict on the European continent in decades. But if you’re a native Ukrainian and Russian speaker and the best sourced reporter in Ukraine, it might not matter.

Yaroslav Trofimov, the Wall Street Journal’s chief foreign-affairs correspondent, has been the dominant reporter on the ground during the most important foreign-policy earthquakes of the past half-decade, including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. His latest book, Our Enemies Will Vanish, is part travelogue through the front lines in Ukraine, part fly on the wall in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inner sanctum. Whatever you want to call it, it is absolutely the best in class of the recent crop of reported books chronicling the first two years of Russia’s war.

—Jack Detsch, FP’s Pentagon and national security reporter

Brotherhood

Mohamed Mbougar Sarr, trans. Alexia Trigo (Europa Editions, 208 pp., $17, July 2021, paperback)

Three years after winning France’s prestigious Prix Goncourt, Senegalese novelist Mohamed Mbougar Sarr has been getting a lot of deserved accolades in the international press since his magical-realist literary mystery, The Most Secret Memory of Men, was translated into English last year. While his latest book is well worth reading, it’s Sarr’s first novel, translated by Alexia Trigo as Brotherhood, that deserves more attention—especially from the Foreign Policy crowd.

Written when Sarr was just 24 years old, Brotherhood is a short, intense character study of a family and a community torn apart by the fundamentalist conquest of their city. The novel is set in a town in the not-so-fictionalized country of Sumal, modeled on cities such as Gao and Timbuktu in northern Mali—a region that had been open and multiethnic before jihadis took over and imposed sharia, or Islamic law; burned ancient manuscripts; and banned the playing of music in a country that has produced many world-famous musicians.

At just over 200 pages, Brotherhood is tightly plotted and riveting. The atmosphere is tense, the characters are few, and the prose is spare. This book is not for the faint of heart; the first page features a public execution. Yet Sarr offers a profound meditation on the psychology of fundamentalists and those who resist them alongside astute observations about the collective behavior of communities under the yoke of authoritarian rule—the sorts of lucid passages that would make many a jargon-laden political theorist envious.

Ten years after Brotherhood was first published in French, as jihadi groups spread throughout West Africa to countries once deemed safe from extremists and as military regimes stage coups and shore up their power across the region, Sarr’s imagined country seems more real than ever.

—Sasha Polakow-Suransky, FP deputy editor

The Origins of European Integration: The Pre-History of Today’s European Union, 1937-1951

Mathieu Segers (Cambridge University Press, 255 pp., $29.99, November 2023, paperback)

Everyone interested in postwar Europe should read The Origins of European Integration by Mathieu Segers, one of the finest Europe scholars in the Netherlands. Segers—who recently died, much too young—was a historian at Maastricht University. This book, his last, is an academic but readable account of the intellectual debates that shaped Europe after World War II.

It is often said that European integration was a response to the war. But as Segers recounts in fascinating detail, grandiose, competing plans for the future of Europe were already being floated in the 1920s and ’30s. The United States and Britain supported a trans-Atlantic International Trade Organisation, while diverse European groups proposed social, political, and economic reconciliation in small steps. Segers, impressed by so much intellectual imagination (“quite a contrast with today’s intellectual poverty”), calls it a “battle of the blueprints.” The European tendency to match “liberalism with socialism, enlightenment with romanticism” was at odds with the “‘Atlantic imagination’ of a ‘better world,’” he writes.

The small-steps approach prevailed. First, Adolf Hitler’s war and the collapse of the European order tempered everyone’s plans. Instead of abstract projects, Europeans prioritized reconstruction and peace. Second, the emergence of a common enemy—totalitarian communism—led European planners to stop competing and make compromises instead. The United States, concerned about the looming Cold War, decided to support this practical, hands-on approach. A good choice: This, ultimately, is what gave Europe peace and prosperity.

—Caroline de Gruyter, FP columnist

Fire & Blood

George R.R. Martin (Bantam, 736 pp., $35, November 2018)

I promise I’m not just trying to sneak dragons into Foreign Policy’s pages. A prequel to George R.R. Martin’s immensely popular A Game of Thrones series (within the universe of A Song of Ice and Fire), Fire & Blood chronicles the fictional Targaryen dynasty and is written more like a history book than a novel. It has also now been turned into a hit HBO TV show, House of the Dragon.

But as someone steeped in geopolitics on a daily basis, I was struck by the many parallels to our contemporary and very real world—leaders weak and strong, constantly shifting alliances, the forceful annexation of territory presented as a rightful claim, and mutual assured destruction (which in the book, of course, is represented by dragons). It’s a good summer read for those looking for a literary escape—in a manner of speaking.

—Rishi Iyengar, FP’s reporter covering the intersection of geopolitics and technology

The Frontier Complex: Geopolitics and the Making of the India-China Border, 1846-1962

Kyle J. Gardner (Cambridge University Press, 302 pp., $41.99, January 2022, paperback)

In June 2020, a clash took place between Indian and Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley along the disputed Sino-Indian border. Twenty Indian soldiers were killed in the skirmish, as well as at least four of their Chinese counterparts. Despite periodic ongoing tensions, this was the first time that lives had been lost in a Sino-Indian Himalayan border clash since 1975.

For decades, journalists and academics have written extensively about the roots of the border dispute and the short but brutal 1962 Sino-Indian War. However, in recent years, a handful of scholars have turned to newly accessible archives to generate a more complex account of the sources of these tensions. The Frontier Complex by Kyle J. Gardner, a historian and nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center, is an exemplary contribution to this genre. In his deftly researched book, Gardner demonstrates how colonial cartographic processes reflecting geopolitical interests helped shape the fraught Himalayan frontier. This colonial legacy, he shows, set the stage for an enduring rivalry between two Asian giants.

—Sumit Ganguly, FP columnist

Inked: Tattooed Soldiers and the Song Empire’s Penal-Military Complex

Elad Alyagon (Harvard University Asia Center, 276 pp., $49.95, March 2023)

Chinese military history is badly underwritten. Today, China has more than 2 million men under arms, most of them from a few poverty-stricken rural provinces; we have almost as little written about them as we do their predecessors of a millennium ago. That’s what makes scholar Elad Alyagon’s Inked such an exceptional book. In this account of the way state control was written onto the bodies of the Song dynasty’s soldiers, Alyagon unearths a hidden history of not just Chinese military power but of crime, punishment, and the borderlands.

—James Palmer, FP’s China Brief writer

Crossing the Line: A Year in the Land of Apartheid

William Finnegan (Persea, 434 pp., $15.59, October 2006, paperback)

I remember exactly where I was on Feb. 11, 1990, the day Nelson Mandela was released from prison after 27 years. I was glued to a television with my housemates at Vassar College. Yet while the struggle for freedom in South Africa was taking place during my late teens and early 20s, my interests in Africa were 4,000 miles to the north in Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Morocco. Then, late last year, my wife and I picked South Africa for a family trip we had been talking about for a few years. In preparation, I handed my kids a couple of Nadine Gordimer novels that I’d read in college, my wife devoured the guidebooks, and I picked up Crossing the Line by William Finnegan, now a staff writer at the New Yorker.

Although it was first published in 1986, Crossing the Line remains relevant to understanding post-apartheid South Africa, where—in my brief experience—issues of identity, race, class, and religion are ever present if not always articulated. And, of course, although political apartheid may have ended three decades ago, economic apartheid lives on. Finnegan’s book, which is part coming-of-age story of a white American surfer dude teaching at a high school in a township outside Cape Town and part political commentary, was a joy to read and sparked my interest in South Africa’s history. Next up? Tom Lodge’s Mandela: A Critical Life.

—Steven A. Cook, FP columnist

The Women: A Novel

Kristin Hannah (St. Martin’s Press, 480 pp., $30, February 2024)

It’s hard to find a book with fresh insights on American experiences in the Vietnam War these days, but Kristin Hannah manages to do just that in The Women. Hannah, author of The Nightingale and The Four Winds, has mastered the art of the historical epic as told through the eyes of forgotten female protagonists, and her latest book is no exception.

In The Women, Hannah focuses on the woefully overlooked experiences of U.S. military nurses who risked life and limb to save U.S. troops in Vietnam, only to be marginalized when they returned home. The book follows Frances “Frankie” McGrath, who escapes her uppity high-society family in California to follow in her brother’s footsteps and go to Vietnam. It’s full of the tried-and-true tropes of any Vietnam War classic: the exploitation of patriotism and loss of American innocence, the cynicism and wrongheadedness of U.S. policy, the horrors of jungle warfare. But these are laced into a compelling—if occasionally soap-operatic—narrative about Frankie and other nurses’ wartime experiences.

—Robbie Gramer, FP’s diplomacy and national security reporter

Books are independently selected by FP editors. FP earns an affiliate commission on anything purchased through links to Amazon.com on this page.

Foreign Policy · by FP Staff, FP Contributors

7. Agricultural planes are being converted into “fighters” by the United States and the first two planes have already arrived.

Agricultural planes are being converted into “fighters” by the United States and the first two planes have already arrived.

https://www.mediarunsearch.co.uk/agricultural-planes-are-being-converted-into-fighters-by-the-united-states-and-the-first-two-planes-have-already-arrived/?utm

LUCAS MORENO JULY 13, 2024 LEAVE A COMMENT

The U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command received the first two T-802U trainers, at Hurlburt Field, Florida, on June 28, 2024, in preparation for military use of agricultural aircraft.

On Monday, July 8, these aircraft began being used to train test pilots, in preparation for the OA-1K Sky Warden to enter service.

The OA-1K is a low-cost, reliable, multi-role, small-to-medium aircraft system designed to support geographically isolated special operations personnel.

The project is being implemented by L3Harris, a defense company that has partnered with Air Tractor so that the AT-802 agricultural aircraft can be modified from the factory for military use with a launch point for missiles, bombs and shells as well as a wide range of sensors and cameras.

The aircraft will perform close air support, precision strikes, and armed intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance in austere and permissive environments. The multi-functional nature of the system allows SOCOM to conduct irregular warfare operations more cost-effectively, freeing up other resources and assets for the national defense strategy.

Training with the T-802U trainer aircraft began at Hurlburt Field the week of July 8, 2024. There is no date yet for achieving initial operational capability (IOC).

With information from the AFSOC Press Office

8. Canada Said to Have Mapped Out Secret Chinese Police Operations

Canada Said to Have Mapped Out Secret Chinese Police Operations

‘Stations’ allegedly monitor, intimidate Chinese diaspora
Ottawa is expected to seek G-7 response within weeks

By Alberto Nardelli, Alex Wickham, and Laura Dhillon Kane

July 13, 2024 at 8:00 AM EDT

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-13/canada-said-to-have-mapped-out-secret-chinese-police-operations?sref=hhjZtX76

Canada has done a detailed mapping of what it says are covert Chinese police operations within its borders and wants to explore a response with Group of Seven allies to a challenge faced by several nations.

The issue of Beijing allegedly setting up unofficial “police stations” in Western democracies — to monitor and intimidate members of the Chinese diaspora — has become a growing concern. Canada, the US, Italy, Germany and the UK have all grappled with the problem.

Ottawa is expected to share its findings with the G-7 in the coming weeks and wants to explore a coordinated response, two people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg News, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss matters not yet public.

A spokesperson for China’s embassy in Ottawa said in a statement that “there are no so-called overseas police stations.”

The UK is eager to coordinate along with Canada and other G-7 members, one of the officials said. But harmonizing a response could be complicated since many nations have confronted the issue at a law-enforcement level, and countries within the bloc have different legal systems, another official noted.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police has said it’s investigating allegations of clandestine Chinese police operations, including “credible” information in the second-largest province of Quebec. The Madrid-based human-rights group Safeguard Defenders said in a 2022 report that China operates at least 54 such stations across five continents.

“Foreign interference of any kind is plainly unacceptable,” Jean-Sebastien Comeau, a spokesperson for Canadian Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, said in a statement. “As there are ongoing investigations related to foreign interference in Canada, we will not provide further comment.”

China has said the centers — run by local volunteers, not police officers — help Chinese citizens renew documents and offer other services.

“China strictly follows the principle of non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs,” the Ottawa embassy spokesperson said. “China strictly abides by international law and respects all countries’ judicial sovereignty.”

The UK government reacted with alarm last year to reports of alleged Chinese police stations in the country, calling it “egregious.” In June 2023, it said China had closed the centers, and that an investigation hadn’t revealed illegal activity by the Chinese state at the sites — citing the “suppressive impact” of police and public scrutiny.

US authorities charged two people in New York last year on allegations of operating an illegal police operation in lower Manhattan for a branch of China’s Ministry of Public Security, with the goal to “monitor and intimidate dissidents and those critical” of the government in Beijing.

Italy began probing China’s alleged operations after Safeguard Defenders reported it was home to the largest number of the so-called stations. Germany’s government has said there are two such sites in the country.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has faced accusations of not responding swiftly enough to foreign interference, prompting his government to call an independent inquiry into overseas meddling in its recent federal elections. In an interim report in March, the inquiry concluded China attempted to interfere in the elections but didn’t affect the overall result.

— With assistance from Brian Platt

9. China Isn't the Strongest Military in Asia

A very interesting list.

Please go to the link to view the entire list. https://247wallst.com/military/2024/07/13/china-isnt-the-strongest-military-in-asia/

China Isn't the Strongest Military in Asia

Kevin Frayer / Getty Images

24/7 Wall St. Staff

Published: July 13, 2024 10:10 am

The four most influential countries in Asia are China, Russia, India, and Japan. With their economic power, global influence, and combined military might, these four countries are a force. While the United States may rank as the most powerful nation, militarily speaking, these countries can each hold their own with their impressive militaries. One common thread between the most powerful militaries on the Asian continent is their air power. Russia, India, and China each boast some of the strongest air forces in the world, exerting dominance over their respective territories.

According to the United Nations, there are 48 Asian countries in what is best known as the world’s biggest continent. These smaller nations on the continent do not fully exert military dominance on the world stage; instead, they fall into a hierarchy of power within different regions, each of these countries exhibiting different strengths and weaknesses.

To determine the countries with the strongest military might in Asia, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 2024 Military Strength Ranking from Global Firepower, an annually updated defense-related statistics website with information on 145 countries. Global Firepower ranked 145 countries based on their PowerIndex, a composite of over 60 measures in categories such as military might, financials, logistical capability, and geography. The smaller the PowerIndex value, the more powerful a nation’s theoretical conventional fighting capability is. We also included supplemental information regarding active military personnel, military aircraft, vehicles, and naval power.

Over recent decades, China has vastly improved its military capabilities on different levels. From developing new fifth-generation fighter aircraft to expanding its navy, the People’s Liberation Army has greatly improved China’s standing on the world stage as a global superpower.

Comparatively, Russia draws much of its military strength from the Cold War era, when it saw a massive expansion of its military to fit its global ambitions. Despite the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1980s, Russia has still maintained much of its military strength and is even exerting much of it now in Ukraine.

Why Does This Matter?

Source: Public Domain / Wikimedia Commons

According to Paul Bracken with Yale University’s Department of Political Science, Asian nations have built up their military might for decades now. Beginning with India testing nuclear weapons in 1998 and fast-forwarding to Russia’s press to take Ukraine today, the growth of Asia’s military might should not be discounted.

Here is a look at the strongest militaries in Asia.

Continue at this link: https://247wallst.com/military/2024/07/13/china-isnt-the-strongest-military-in-asia/

10. The Final Six Months of U.S. Aid for Ukraine

The Final Six Months of U.S. Aid for Ukraine

If Trump wins, Kyiv’s cause is in danger. Biden must prepare for that possibility.

By Phillips Payson O’Brien

The Atlantic · by Phillips Payson O’Brien · July 13, 2024

The Ukrainian people may be six months away from losing military aid from the United States—again. President Joe Biden, however, seems not to recognize any urgency. When ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked him how he’d feel if Donald Trump defeated him in November, Biden responded, “I’ll feel as long as I gave it my all and I did the good as job as I know I can do, that’s what this is about.” Biden’s personal feelings will be small consolation to the Ukrainian people, for whom Trump’s return could prove deadly.

Last year, the former president helped engineer what turned out to be an approximately four-month interruption in U.S. assistance to Ukraine, which Russia invaded in 2022. Trump has vowed to end the war quickly, which would likely mean letting Russia keep territory it seized in 2022 and giving Russian President Vladimir Putin an advantageous position for future invasions. Trump is leading in the polls. Biden’s administration—which has supported Ukraine steadfastly, albeit overcautiously in many respects—should be taking aggressive steps now to bolster that beleaguered country’s self-defense while it still can.

The administration could try to Trump-proof Ukraine specifically, and help Europe in general, in three different ways.

McKay Coppins: What Europe fears

The first thing the U.S. should do now is help Ukraine stockpile weaponry. Rather perversely, the administration has actually under-delivered on the aid that it was supposed to give Ukraine over the past year. A few billion dollars of congressionally authorized money went unspent at the end of 2023.

Now there can be no hesitation. This spring, Congress approved an additional $60 billion of assistance, and Biden’s team should make sure it is all in Ukrainian hands before the end of his current term. To some degree, European allies could help Ukraine make up for a loss of American aid, but sending U.S. assistance right away would maximize Kyiv’s ability to obtain items—such as 155-millimeter ammunition and Patriot air-defense systems—that Europe cannot provide in the same quantities.

Any hastily arranged stockpiles would, of course, be limited, but the larger they are, the longer they will last before Europe and other allies have to step in.

The second thing the administration should do is stop holding the Ukrainians back. For what seems to be an overblown fear of escalation with Putin, the U.S. has significantly limited which weapons systems it will give to Ukraine, and what Ukraine can do with the donated equipment. Long after Russia’s latest invasion, Ukraine will only now be getting F-16 aircraft (and certainly far from the most technologically capable of those fighters). Two and a half years after Russia started bombarding civilian targets all across Ukraine, Biden’s administration is still reluctant to allow Ukraine to use American weaponry against military targets inside Russia.

These limitations have given the Russians a major asymmetrical advantage: They can attack Ukraine safely from inside their own territory, while Ukraine needs to worry about being attacked anywhere at any time. Many allied European leaders, including Keir Starmer, Britain’s new prime minister, acknowledge this dynamic and have expressed their support for giving Ukraine more latitude to defend itself against attacks launched from Russian soil. The United States has still declined to support this.

Rather than constraining the Ukrainian war effort, Biden should provide the country with as many upgraded systems as possible, including more advanced F-16s and the air-to-surface cruise missiles known as JASSMs. The Ukrainians, knowing that Trump will almost certainly try to end their supply of U.S. weapons, would at least be able to make some gains for the time being.

From the January/February 2024 issue: Trump will abandon NATO

Finally, the U.S. could work with both Ukraine and European partners to ramp up the production of vital war matériel on Ukrainian soil or somewhere else in Europe. This doesn’t have to involve the most advanced American equipment—which the U.S. government would be reluctant to transfer. But Biden’s team could help Ukraine and Europe work together to build up reserves of essential components and establish new supply lines. There is no way that Ukraine or Europe could fully make up for the loss of U.S. aid, but Biden could help get them ready for that circumstance. Innovation cycles for weaponry have been very short in this war; when one side obtains more advanced fighting material, the other side tends to adjust its tactics within weeks. Ukraine needs access to nimble, adaptable suppliers whose work Trump has no capacity to interrupt.

All three of these steps are overdue and would help the Ukrainian war effort regardless of who is elected president of the United States in November. But the Biden administration should get moving now—both to improve Ukraine’s chances in the short term and to reassure European allies who are deeply uneasy about Trump’s return.

The Biden administration needs to face the reality that the current president might lose, and that Trump might be in a position to make Ukraine lose, and to disrupt America’s relationships with longtime allies in Europe for years to come. Eventually, Trumpist rule will end, and the United States will need friends and partners in Europe again. Biden can protect his country’s interests well into the future by leaving behind some reminders of America’s friendship and its willingness to work for a common good.

Biden claims to understand that Trump’s return would be a disaster for the United States and the world. If he helps Ukraine now, he has a chance to lessen that catastrophe. Anything else would be irresponsible.

The Atlantic · by Phillips Payson O’Brien · July 13, 2024

11. Japan removes navy chief as sweeping misconduct investigation roils military

Japan removes navy chief as sweeping misconduct investigation roils military

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/japan/japan-navy-chief-ryo-sakai-sacked-misconduct-probe-b2578738.html?utm

Government orders mass disciplinary action against over 200 officials who mishandled classified material on 38 destroyers and submarines

Arpan Rai

2 days ago

Comments

Admiral Ryo Sakai during a press conference in Tokyo (Getty)

Japan has sacked its navy chief and ordered a mass disciplinary action against over 200 military officials who mishandled classified materials and have been charged with misconduct, the defence ministry said on Friday.

Members of the defence ministry and the Self Defence Forces have been accused of violating the sensitive information protection law, falsely claiming allowances for special assignments and wrongfully taking free meals at base cafeterias. The ministerial staff has also been accused of abuse of power.

At least 218 people have been disciplined, with 11 senior officials dismissed, two demoted, 14 forced to take pay cuts, and dozens suspended.

Watch again: Liz Truss faces tough questions at PMQs amid 40-year-high inflation rise

The defence minister has admitted to lack of discipline and issued an apology. The problems are “significantly damaging to the public trust” for the ministry and the military, Minoru Kihara said.

Admiral Ryo Sakai, head of the Maritime Self Defence Force, has been asked to resign and will be replaced on 19 July by Akira Saito, commander-in-chief of the Self Defense Fleet.

An investigation conducted by the defence ministry found that classified information was mishandled on 38 destroyers and submarines, Mr Kihara said, but no sensitive information was leaked outside or caused harm.

People without appropriate clearances were routinely assigned to duties that involved sensitive information.

Mr Kihara said he is giving up a month’s salary but that his responsibility is to stay on and continue to reform the organisation instead of stepping down.

“It is my responsibility to do everything to rebuild the defence ministry and the Self Defense Force under my leadership as quickly as possible and regain the public trust,” he said.

He has pledged to quickly and thoroughly carry out preventive measures “so that we will not breach trust with other countries”.

The scandal has erupted at a time when Japan is seeking to establish itself as a trusted military ally of the Western nations, especially the US. Tokyo has accelerated its military cooperation with the United States, Australia, UK and other western countries in recent years.

12. Opinion | Special forces and presidential poisoning? US Supreme Court opinions read better than thrillers

A view from Toronto via China (Hong Kong).

Opinion | Special forces and presidential poisoning? US Supreme Court opinions read better than thrillers

Far-reaching judgment granting near total immunity to presidents draws imaginative dissenting views from justices citing Seal Team 6 and fatal poisoning of US attorney general

Listen to this article

Alex Lo

in Toronto

+ FOLLOWPublished: 9:00pm, 11 Jul 2024

South China Morning Post · July 11, 2024

By now, you have probably heard about Trump v. United States. Those scenarios are, however, from the dissenting justices in the liberal wing of the top court, proving, perhaps, that while the conservatives may be more extreme ideologically, they are much duller in writings.

The latest judgment by a supermajority of six conservative judges has granted near total immunity to the US president from criminal prosecution. Presidents are already free from any civil liability from a Supreme Court judgment in 1982.

To sum up, the president has absolute immunity from prosecution in his or her official conduct, that is in the performance of his or her duty. But Chief Justice John Roberts writes in the majority opinion that doesn’t mean the president is above the law. He or she is still subject to criminal charges in his or her “unofficial conduct”. However, the majority opinion offers little if any definition or standard of judgment on the latter.

Many mainstream legal scholars seem to agree with the dissenting opinion of Justice Sonia Sotomayor who has argued that the majority opinion makes it nearly impossible for any future judges to form any adequate criteria to determine what counts as “unofficial conduct”.

She writes: “In fact, the majority’s dividing line between ‘official’ and ‘unofficial’ conduct narrows the conduct considered ‘unofficial’ almost to a nullity. It says that whenever the president acts in a way that is ‘not manifestly or palpably beyond [his] authority,’ he is taking official action … It then goes a step further: ‘In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the president’s motives.’

“It is one thing to say that motive is irrelevant to questions regarding the scope of civil liability, but it is quite another to make it irrelevant to questions regarding criminal liability. Under that rule, any use of official power for any purpose, even the most corrupt purpose indicated by objective evidence of the most corrupt motives and intent, remains official and immune. Under the majority’s test, if it can be called a test, the category of presidential action that can be deemed ‘unofficial’ is destined to be vanishingly small.”

But what of the special forces? That’s also from the dissenting opinion of Justice Sotomayor who helpfully referenced the US Navy’s Seal Team 6 to bring home her objection. It’s the most elite of the elite special force units within the US Navy and a rival to the US Army’s Delta Force – in other words, aside from Hollywood glorification, the world’s best-trained death squad.

Can the US president, Justice Sotomayor asks, knowingly order Seal Team 6 to murder a political opponent and still claim full immunity under “official conduct”?

She then answers her own question: “When [the president] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organises a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.

“Let the president violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done.”

Besides assassinating his or her enemies, can the president “remove” by murder a cabinet member he doesn’t like, such as the US attorney general?

There is no question the president has unconditional power “to remove” a cabinet officer, but Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson now asks, does it mean the commander-in-chief can do so by “poisoning him to death” under the court’s majority judgment?

She writes: “To fully appreciate the oddity of making the criminal immunity determination turn on the character of the president’s responsibilities, consider what the majority says is one of the president’s ‘conclusive and preclusive’ prerogatives: ‘[t]he president’s power to remove … those who wield executive power on his behalf.’

“While the president may have the authority to decide to remove the attorney general, for example, the question here is whether the president has the option to remove the attorney general by, say, poisoning him to death. Put another way, the issue here is not whether the president has exclusive removal power, but whether a generally applicable criminal law prohibiting murder can restrict how the president exercises that authority.”

This Hollywood-like scenario was raised in a footnote. It reminds me of a scene from The Interview, the 2014 comedy starring Canadian funnyman Seth Rogen, about assassinating Korean dictator Kim Jong-un.

Well-endowed female CIA operative: The CIA would love it if you two could take him out.

Rogen: Humm, take him out? For drinks?

CIA: No, no, no. Take. Him. Out.

Rogen’s sidekick: Takeout, like to dinner?

CIA, now frustrated: TAKE HIM OUT.

Say what you will about the American justice system, at least those opinions and judgments are usually written in more or less understandable English, unlike the mumble jumble filed under British common law.

So you may think US Supreme Court opinions are boring! I think I will just start reading court opinions for fun and skipping Grisham and Tom Clancy’s thrillers.

South China Morning Post · July 11, 2024

13. Balancing Act: Indonesia’s Strategic Response To China’s Growing Influence In The Indian Ocean

Balancing Act: Indonesia’s Strategic Response To China’s Growing Influence In The Indian Ocean – OpEd

July 14, 2024 0 Comments

By Simon Hutagalung

eurasiareview.com · July 13, 2024

China’s increasing presence in the Indian Ocean and its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have significantly altered the geopolitical dynamics in the region. Indonesia, a key player in Southeast Asia, is presented with both opportunities and challenges due to China’s growing influence.

The thesis of this article is that the growing influence of China in the Indian Ocean poses a double-edged challenge for Indonesia. On one hand, it offers significant economic benefits through investments under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). On the other hand, it raises concerns about debt dependency, loss of sovereignty, and maritime security. Given this complex dynamic, Indonesia must adopt a strategic approach to maximize economic gains while safeguarding its national and regional interests. This analysis delves into the diverse effects of China’s impact on Indonesia, focusing on its economic advantages, potential drawbacks, and the strategic measures necessary to navigate this intricate relationship.

Economic Impact of Chinese Investments

China has significantly invested in the Indian Ocean region under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), particularly in countries like Indonesia. The investments mainly focus on infrastructure projects such as ports, railways, and industrial parks, aiming to boost trade connectivity. For Indonesia, which has faced challenges in infrastructure development, these Chinese investments bring much-needed capital and expertise.

Projects like the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway, funded by Chinese loans, exemplify the tangible benefits of this partnership. Improved infrastructure not only boosts economic growth but also positions Indonesia as a critical node in global trade networks. Additionally, Chinese investments have created jobs and stimulated local economies, contributing to poverty reduction and overall development.

The increasing number of Chinese investments in Indonesia comes with its own set of challenges, especially about finances. Indonesia’s heavy borrowing to support these projects raises concerns about the country’s mounting debt and the terms of these loans. Critics argue that the terms of Chinese loans are often unclear and may include unfavourable conditions for the borrower. There is a real risk that Indonesia could potentially lose control over strategic assets to China if it struggles with repayment, creating a worrying debt dependency scenario.

Maritime Security Concerns

China’s growing naval activities in the Indian Ocean pose a significant concern for Indonesia. The establishment of Chinese naval bases and heightened patrols in the region demonstrate Beijing’s determination to safeguard its maritime trade routes and extend its influence well beyond its borders.

The increasing military presence of Indonesia in the Indian Ocean is raising security concerns. This ocean corridor is critical for global trade, and any disruptions could have serious economic repercussions. China’s actions have the potential to shift the balance of power in the region, leading to increased fears of militarization and potential conflicts.

Indonesia’s favourable geographical position along crucial maritime routes requires a strong response to these developments. The country has already started improving its maritime capabilities by investing in naval modernization and bolstering coastal defences. Additionally, Indonesia has sought to deepen strategic partnerships with other major powers such as the United States, Japan, and Australia to counterbalance China’s influence and ensure regional stability.

Dynamics Strategic Regional and Responses

The increasing influence of China in the Indian Ocean has created a complex regional dynamic. While some countries have welcomed Chinese investments as a catalyst for economic growth, others are cautious of Beijing’s strategic ambitions and the potential threat to their sovereignty. Indonesia is currently at a crossroads, needing to find a balance between economic cooperation and national security interests.

Indonesia’s approach to China’s influence has been quite comprehensive. On one hand, it continues to welcome Chinese investments, acknowledging the potential for economic development and enhanced infrastructure. However, Indonesia has also taken steps to address the associated risks. These measures include renegotiating loan terms, increasing transparency in project financing, and ensuring the protection of local interests.

In addition, Indonesia has escalated its diplomatic efforts by strengthening its ties with other regional and global powers. By forging closer relationships with countries like India, Japan, and Australia, Indonesia aims to create a counterbalance to China’s influence in the region. These strategic partnerships not only amplify Indonesia’s influence but also contribute to a more stable and balanced Indian Ocean region.

Problem Analysis

The main challenge for Indonesia in this context is to balance the economic benefits of Chinese investments with the associated risks. Significant concerns like potential debt dependency and loss of sovereignty need to be carefully managed. Indonesia must ensure that its economic cooperation with China does not compromise its long-term strategic interests.

China’s increasing military presence in the Indian Ocean poses a security challenge for Indonesia. While Indonesia aims to avoid upsetting China, it also needs to safeguard its maritime interests and uphold regional stability. This necessitates a careful diplomatic approach that involves engaging with China while also maintaining strategic deterrence.

Conclusion

The role of China in the Indian Ocean has profound implications for Indonesia. While Chinese investments under the BRI offer substantial economic benefits, they also come with risks that must be carefully managed. Indonesia’s strategic response involves a combination of welcoming Chinese investments, enhancing maritime security, and fostering partnerships with other major powers.

To successfully navigate Indonesia’s complex relationship with China, it is crucial to prioritize transparency, safeguard local interests, and maintain a balanced approach to foreign investments. By doing so, Indonesia can maximize the economic benefits of its cooperation with China while mitigating risks and ensuring long-term national security and regional stability. The future of Indonesia’s engagement with China in the Indian Ocean will depend on its ability to strike this delicate balance and pursue a strategic, multi-faceted approach to its foreign policy.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own.

References

Brewster, David. India and China at Sea: Competition for Naval Dominance in the Indian Ocean. Oxford University Press, 2020.
Chhibber, Ajay. “Debt-trap diplomacy: How to assess China’s Belt and Road Initiative.” The Diplomat, 2019.
Connelly, Aaron L. “Southeast Asia’s Security Dilemma with China’s Indian Ocean Strategy.” Strategic Analysis, vol. 43, no. 3, 2019, pp. 221-233.
Kaplan, Robert D. Monsoon: The Indian Ocean and the Future of American Power. Random House, 2010.
Tonnesson, Stein. “China’s Maritime Ambitions and the Law of the Sea: UNCLOS III as an Unintended Framework for East Asian Conflicts.” Asian Journal of International Law, vol. 7, no. 2, 2017, pp. 265-289.
Wiryawan, I Nyoman S. “Indonesia’s Strategy to Balance China’s Maritime Influence in the Indian Ocean.” Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, vol. 3, no. 1, 2020, pp. 45-59.

eurasiareview.com · July 13, 2024

14. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, July 13, 2024

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, July 13, 2024

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-13-2024

Key Takeaways:

Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) reportedly conducted successful drone strikes against an oil depot near Tsimlyansk, Rostov Oblast on the morning of July 13.

Russia and Iran continue to signal their commitment to deepening bilateral relations and multilateral cooperation.

A detained Russian businessman and a Russian military official who were reportedly connected to detained former Deputy Defense Minister Timur Ivanov recently died on the same day.

Armenian border guards, cooperating with Russian authorities, reportedly detained a Russian citizen in Yerevan, likely as part of a continued Kremlin effort to assert political power over Armenia and challenge Armenia's sovereignty amid deteriorating Russian-Armenian relations.

Ukrainian forces recently regained lost positions near Kupyansk and Svatove, and Russian forces recently advanced near Kreminna, Toretsk and Avdiivka and in the Donetsk-Zaporizhia Oblast border area.

The Russian military continues efforts to improve training capacity.

15. Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, July 13, 2024

Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, July 13, 2024

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-july-13-2024

Key Takeaways:

Gaza Strip: The IDF conducted an airstrike in the al Mawasi humanitarian zone targeting Hamas’ top military commander, Mohammad Deif. The strike also targeted Hamas Khan Younis Brigade Commander Rafe Salamah. Israel is still assessing whether the strike killed Deif or Salamah.

West Bank: Israeli forces engaged Palestinian fighters six times in the West Bank since CTP-ISW's last data cut off on July 12. PIJ fired small arms at the Israeli town Gan Ner in retaliation for Israel targeting Mohammed Deif.

Southern Lebanon and Golan Heights: Iranian-backed militias, including Lebanese Hezbollah, conducted at least six attacks into northern Israel since CTP-ISW's last data cut-off on July 12.

Yemen: US CENTCOM destroyed three Houthi drones in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen on July 12.

16. The Shooting of Donald Trump

Ask yourself: Do I hate the "other?" Do I hate the opposition political party members? Can I believe in political compromise? Can we believe and accept that despite political party membership we are all Americans regardless of our different political views?

The answers to these questions determine whether you are part of the problem (or more specifically THE problem) or part of the solution. To keep America great we cannot hate our opposing political parties and their members.

The Shooting of Donald Trump

The near miss at the Pennsylvania rally is miraculous, and it could be a redemptive political moment.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-shooting-assassination-attempt-pennsylvania-rally-secret-service-2e4e5c7d?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

By The Editorial Board

July 13, 2024 11:41 pm ET

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump is helped off the stage at a campaign event in Butler, Pa., on Saturday. PHOTO: GENE J. PUSKAR/ASSOCIATED PRESS

The assassination attempt against Donald Trump on Saturday evening is a horrific moment for America that could have been much worse. But we can’t say it comes as a complete surprise. Political hostility and hateful rhetoric have been rising to a decibel level that far too often in the American past has led to violence and attempted murder. Some of us still remember 1968 all too well.

***

It’s nothing short of miraculous that Mr. Trump avoided death by a literal inch. The former President can’t help but think that Providence played some role in sparing him, as Ronald Reagan is said to have thought after he was shot and survived in 1981. The country was spared, too, from what could have been a furious cycle of retribution.

Yet a man was killed and two others seriously wounded at a rally that was supposed to celebrate their political allegiance and democratic participation. The Secret Service killed the alleged assassin, but the obvious question is how he could have gained the high ground atop a building near enough to be able to take those shots at the former President. Mr. Trump’s rallies are severe security tests, but the Secret Service has had years to know how to protect him at these events.

It isn’t enough to say the shooter was outside the security perimeter of metal detectors and bag searches. The identity of the shooter, his motivations, and whether he had accomplices may tell us more about how he was able to get in close shooting range.

But the leaders of the Secret Service have some explaining to do. Transparency in the investigation will be critical to avoid the spread of conspiracy theories on the right and left. On Saturday night social media was full of anti-Trump posters saying the shooting was staged to help his campaign.

President Biden spoke to the country from his weekend home in Delaware, as he should have done, and he properly denounced “political violence.” So did leaders of both political parties. But the statements will amount to little if they aren’t followed with a change in behavior and rhetoric.

The shooter alone is responsible for his actions. But leaders on both sides need to stop describing the stakes of the election in apocalyptic terms. Democracy won’t end if one or the other candidate is elected. Fascism is not aborning if Mr. Trump wins, unless you have little faith in American institutions.

We agree with former Attorney General Bill Barr’s statement Saturday night: “The Democrats have to stop their grossly irresponsible talk about Trump being an existential threat to democracy—he is not.”

One great risk is that the shooting in Butler, Pa., will cause some on the right to seek violent revenge. This is where Mr. Trump and the Republicans have an obligation—and a political opportunity—at their convention in Milwaukee and through November.

If they weren’t already, Americans after Saturday will be looking for stable, reassuring leadership. The photo of Mr. Trump raising his fist as he was led off stage by the Secret Service with a bloody face was a show of personal fortitude that will echo through the campaign. No one doubts his willingness to fight, and his initial statement Saturday night was a notable and encouraging show of restraint and gratitude.

His opportunity now is to present himself as someone who can rise above the attack on his life and unite the country. He will make a mistake if he blames Democrats for the assassination attempt.

He will win over more Americans if he tells his followers that they need to fight peacefully and within the system. If the Trump campaign is smart, and thinking about the country as well as the election, it will make the theme of Milwaukee a call to political unity and the better angels of American nature.

That leaves plenty of room for criticizing Democrats and their failed policies. But the country wants civil disagreement and discourse, not civil war.

***

The near assassination of Donald Trump could be a moment that catalyzes more hatred and an even worse cycle of violence. If that is how it goes, God help us.Or it could be a redemptive moment that leads to introspection and political debate that is fierce but not cast as Armageddon. The country was spared the worst on Saturday and this is a chance to pull out of a partisan death spiral. That is the leadership Americans are desperate to see.

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

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

If you do not read anything else in the 2017 National Security Strategy read this on page 14:

"A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation."

Access NSS HERE

Company Name | Website