Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"Intelligence isn’t about being right. It’s about being able to change your mind when you get better evidence."

– anonymous multi-source internet meme (but still worth reflecting on)

"Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does."

– Jean-Paul Sartre

“Let the welfare of the people be the supreme law.”

– Cicero

1. Kyiv’s Special Ops Execute Attack to Segment Russian Rail Routes

2. Boris Johnson calls for European troops on Ukrainian soil, tells Russia to 'bog off'

3. Russia's Shahed-type attack drones are bigger than you think

4. Strike on Qatar Leaves Rubio With Delicate Diplomatic Task in Israel

5. Romania becomes second Nato country to report Russian drone in its airspace

6. Thousands of 18-22-year-old Ukrainian men flock into Poland after Kyiv lifts travel restrictions

7. America risks global credibility from human rights, immigration policy inconsistencies

8. Should We Be Afraid? The Rise of Political Hatred in the United States

9. Political leaders confront security concerns — and fear — after Kirk's assassination

10. Drones Over Poland – “Social Resilience Key to Survival” Says Polish Ambassador in Kyiv

11. How America’s economy is dodging disaster

12. Pulling Back the Curtain on China’s Military-Civil Fusion

13. Video: Our National Fever

14. Terrorist financing since 9/11: How the threat and the response have evolved

15. The City Leading China’s Charge to Pull Ahead in AI

16. Treaty allies are developing fallback options in case the US disengages from the region, an analyst said

17. Finland planning attack on Russia, claims Dmitry Medvedev

18. Trump Military Attack on Venezuelan Boat Intends To Redefine War | Opinion

19. America’s choice after the assassination of Charlie Kirk

1. Kyiv’s Special Ops Execute Attack to Segment Russian Rail Routes

Yes, the OSS, Jedburghs, and railroads are anachronisms in modern warfare, right?

As an aside the Ukrainians in occupied areas seem to be making good use of the OSS Simple Sabotage Manual (which the OSS Society provided a translated version of in 2022).

For the Glorious Ukrainian Resistance

https://smallwarsjournal.com/2022/03/05/glorious-ukrainian-resistance/

Kyiv’s Special Ops Execute Attack to Segment Russian Rail Routes

Seeking to maximize the effectiveness of its hits, Ukraine’s HUR and Special Ops disrupted two separate railway routes to compound logistics problems for the Kremlin.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/60095

by UkrInform | Sept. 14, 2025, 4:27 pm

Photo from Telegram

Share Flip

Fighters from the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense and the Special Operations Forces carried out a series of operations, unique in terms of their complexity, to disrupt railway traffic on the Orel-Kursk and St. Petersburg-Pskov routes.

According to sources in the Main Intelligence Directorate (HUR), two Russian guards were killed and another had his legs blown off as a result of the attack.

According to the source, unknown mines were discovered by Russian Railways employees on the Maloarkhangelsk-Glazunovka railway section the day before. The occupiers called in an engineering team from the Russian National Guard special forces to the site. However, during the unsuccessful demining operation, an explosion occurred, killing two Russian guards and amputating the lower limbs of another.

As a result of the explosion, as of 22:00 on Sept. 13, federal rail service was suspended, with more than 15 trains delayed in both directions. The sabotage on the railway was confirmed by the so-called “governor” Andrey Klychkov, and residents are posting footage of the fire.

Another attack was carried out on the night of Sept. 13- 14: at around 2:30 a.m. ;ocal time (2330 UTC), the St. Petersburg-Pskov railway connection was blown up on the Stroganovo-Mshinsk section. As a result of the attack, a locomotive derailed, and 15 fuel tanks were destroyed along with their fuel.

Ukraine Troops Capture Dozens of Russian Prisoners in Pokrovsk Counterattack Battles

Ukrainian drone swarms is a common theme in unit-published interviews with Russian soldiers taken captive since mid-August by Kyiv’s forces.

According to a source in the HUR, the operations were carried out jointly with units of the Ukrainian Defense Forces.

“These railway lines are critically important logistical links in supplying the occupying forces in the Kharkiv and Sumy sectors. As a result of the destruction of the railway infrastructure in these areas, the Russians will experience significant logistical difficulties, which in turn will substantially affect their ability to take active action against the Ukrainian Defense Forces,” emphasizes the interlocutor in Ukrainian intelligence.

As reported by Ukrinform, an explosion occurred on the railway in the Oryol region of the Russian Federation, killing Russian Guard soldiers.

2. Boris Johnson calls for European troops on Ukrainian soil, tells Russia to 'bog off'

"Bog" - "Bugger" and more – you have to admire British vocabulary.

Boris Johnson calls for European troops on Ukrainian soil, tells Russia to 'bog off'

https://kyivindependent.com/just-get-on-with-it-boris-johnson-calls-for-european-troops-on-ukrainian-soil-tells-russia-to-bog-off/

September 13, 2025 8:00 pm

• 3 min read

by Chris York

Former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson in an interview with the Kyiv Independent in Kyiv on Sept. 12 (The Kyiv Independent)

Listen to this article3 min

This audio is created with AI assistance

Former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has no time for Russia's repeated objections to European troops being deployed on Ukrainian soil.

"If they don't want foreign troops on Ukrainian soil, I've got a brilliant idea — they bog off," he told the Kyiv Independent in Kyiv on Sept. 12. "There's only one country that's put foreign troops on Ukrainian soil, and that's Russia."

But it's not just the Kremlin that Johnson has lost patience with. Speaking on the sidelines of the annual Yalta European Strategy (YES) conference in Kyiv, he also voiced his frustrations with Ukraine's European allies.

European leaders have for months been discussing security guarantees for Ukraine, with the latest proposals envisioning a contingent of foreign troops deployed in Ukraine to prevent another possible Russian invasion — but only in the event of a ceasefire.

"We're in danger of a kind of ridiculous chicken and egg situation here, or a trap by (Russian President Vladimir) Putin, whereby all these so-called security guarantees and boots on the ground, none of that becomes relevant until such a time as there is a ceasefire or armistice.

"And the conditions for that deployment, if we insist on a ceasefire, may never be met."

Russia has no intention to stop fighting and Kremlin officials have made no secret of the fact.

The head of Russia's military on Aug. 30 said Moscow will continue both fighting on the front lines, and launching mass missile and drone attacks against Ukrainian cities.

Johnson's solution? European troops on the ground in Ukraine immediately without waiting for permission from Moscow, or an end to the fighting.

"Just get on with it," he said when asked if Europe just needs the courage to cross what is yet another of Russia's many red lines during its full-scale invasion of Ukraine which amounted to nothing.

"You need something that's going to flip a switch in the Kremlin's brain and make them realise that fundamentally, strategically, this is over," he said.

"And although it may be impossible to get Putin out of the bits he currently occupies, the cost of trying to get the rest is going to be too great… because the West has asserted its commitment.

"And the way for the West to assert its commitment would be to say, well, the Coalition of the Willing will start to arrive."

Johnson is keen to stress that European troops would be there to provide training and logistics rather than fighting, in part because "Ukrainians are much better than Western Europeans at fighting the war."

"But fundamentally, they're going to be there to make the point that Ukraine decides what military forces come to Ukraine, not Russia," he adds.

3. Russia's Shahed-type attack drones are bigger than you think

Graphics, maps, and photos at the link. https://kyivindependent.com/everything-we-know-about-russias-drones-including-the-ones-that-reached-poland-2/

Conclusion:

Because of this variability, military experts recommend measuring not just the price per drone, but Russia’s capacity to replace them. At current rates, Russia can reportedly produce up to 100 Shahed-type drones a day, enough to replace the losses from a large strike within a week, showing the cost is not the main limit.

Russia's Shahed-type attack drones are bigger than you think

kyivindependent.com · Tania Myronyshena · September 13, 2025

Russia's "unprecedented" violation of Poland's airspace earlier this week made one thing very clear — it's not just Ukraine that has to be concerned about Moscow's long-range attack drones anymore.

At least 19 Russian drones entered Polish airspace overnight on Sept. 10, prompting what was the first case of NATO directly engaging Russian military assets during the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

For most people outside of Ukraine, their frame of reference for a drone is a typical quadcopter, the size of which can usually be measured in tens of centimeters.

Thousands of these are used every day by both sides on the front lines in Ukraine for attacking enemy personnel and vehicles, and larger more powerful versions now play a crucial supply and logistics role.

But the long-range attack drones launched in their hundreds almost every night by Russia against Ukrainian cities are in a league of their own and are, in comparison to their quadcopter counterparts, absolutely massive.

How big is a Russian Shahed-type drone?

The first Shahed drones used in Russia’s full-scale invasion were the Iranian-made Shahed-131 and Shahed-136, first launched against Ukraine in 2022.

These relatively cheap, long-range drones, sometimes described as "kamikaze drones," are programmed to fly directly toward a target and detonate when they hit.

By 2023, Moscow had started producing its own versions under the names Geran-1 and Geran-2, based on Iranian designs but assembled at facilities inside Russia.

The Geran-1 based on the Shahed-131 is around 2.6 meters long with a wingspan of 2.2 meters, and a range of around 900 kilometers.

But even this is dwarfed by the Geran-2 based on the Shahed-136 which is 3.5 meters long with a wingspan of 2.5 meters. It is this type that is now mass-produced by Russia.

The size of Shahed-136/Geran-2 attack drones (The Kyiv Independent)

While visually similar to their Iranian counterparts, the Russian-made Geran-2s have undergone several modifications.

Their warheads have become more powerful, up to 90 kilograms, and their navigation systems more resilient to jamming, with newer units using advanced satellite arrays or even mobile network modules for improved precision. Geran-2s can reach speeds of 185 km/h and fly up to 2,500 kilometers.

Mass Russian drone strikes utilize more than one type of attack UAV, normally comprising a mix of Geran-2 attack drones, and decoy drones called Gerberas.

Designed as a decoy drone to overwhelm Ukraine's air defenses, the smaller Gerbera is made of foam and plywood, weighs under 20 kilograms, and has a range of up to 600 kilometers.

According to reports, it was Gerbera drones which violated Polish airspace on Sept. 10.

Russian-fired drone hits the side of a high rise residential apartment building in Kyiv early this morning. This was part of a large wave of overnight attacks by Russia.

Location: 50.41585, 30.62558. H/T @99Dominik_ for geolocation. pic.twitter.com/sUYhynOsVR

— Benjamin Strick (@BenDoBrown) June 17, 2025

What does a Russian Shahed-type drone look and sound like?

The Geran-2 has a distinct triangular shape and narrow, straight wings. At the back, there's a small propellor engine which gives off a shrill buzz, a sound often compared to a moped or chainsaw.

It's this sound that makes Russia's attack drones not only a weapon of destruction, but also one of psychological warfare.

During mass attacks, the night air over Ukrainian cities is often filled with the buzz of these drones. People are attuned to listening to the rise and fall in tone which indicates if they are speeding up or slowing down, or climbing into the air or descending lower.

On their final descent before they slam into their targets, the buzz increases dramatically in both volume and pitch, reminiscent of German Stuka dive bombers during World War 2.

Russian drone strikes just as people ran to the shelter. And yes, it was a direct hit—right on the people.

Kyiv pic.twitter.com/BxZa4Pg100

— Victoria (@victoriaslog) May 25, 2025

What is the range of Russia's Shahed-type drones?

The original Shahed-136 is believed to have a range of up to 2,500 kilometers. Russia’s domestically produced version, the Geran-2, maintains this same range in its standard configuration, according to Ukraine’s military intelligence.

This range is sufficient to reach nearly every NATO country in Europe from launch points inside Russia or occupied territories like Crimea. For example, Bryansk, a key launch site near Ukraine’s northern border, lies under 600 kilometers from Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia.

RU drones on Europe take 5c-02.jpg

Further south, drones launched from Crimea can easily reach targets in southern and central Ukraine, Moldova, and Romania.

However, not all Geran drones are the same. Ukraine's intelligence reported in early 2024 that Russia has introduced heavier versions of the Geran-2 with larger warheads — up to 90 kilograms — which reduces their range to approximately 650 kilometers.

Then there are the Gerbera drones, which differ not only in purpose but also in performance. These drones have a much shorter range — up to 600 kilometers — but still long enough to cross into NATO territory.

Their entry into Polish airspace confirmed that even these lighter drones pose a direct threat beyond Ukraine’s borders.

Where are Russian Shahed-type drones made?

Russia’s Shahed-type drones are primarily manufactured at the Alabuga Special Economic Zone in Yelabuga, Tatarstan, about 1,000 kilometers east of Moscow.

Launched in 2023, the Yelabuga drone plant has become one of the key centers of Russia’s drone production, reportedly capable of manufacturing over 5,000 drones per month as of mid-2025.

Russian state media has described the facility as "the largest and most secret drone plant in the world." The factory features metal foundries, blacksmith shops, and fully in-house assembly lines, allowing Russia to run production independently.

Russians show one of the workshops for the production of Iranian Shahed UAVs at a factory in Yelabuga (Tatarstan)

A commentator in the background actively talks about the involvement of women and school-age children in production. pic.twitter.com/RdQq6vTTYs

— MilitaryNewsUA (@front_ukrainian) July 20, 2025

According to defense officials, output in May 2025 was nearly nine times higher than originally planned.

According to Ukrainian and Western estimates, Russia plans to produce up to 30,000 long-range drones and 2 million FPV drones in 2025 alone that would allow Moscow to launch hundreds or even thousands of drones per day.

An exhibition of downed Russian UAVs containing imported components is displayed at the National Museum of the History of Ukraine in Kyiv, Ukraine, on June 27, 2025. (Kyrylo Chubotin/Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

How much does a Shahed-type drone cost?

The cost of a drone is difficult to pin down. Prices vary significantly depending on where and when the drone was acquired, how it was produced, and what components were used.

Estimates for Russian-produced Geran-2 drones range from $50,000 to as low as $20,000 per unit, especially as mass production has expanded at domestic facilities like the Alabuga plant.

In contrast, leaked documents show that Iranian-made Shaheds, bought earlier in the war, may have cost Russia between $193,000 and $290,000 each, including logistics and bulk-order pricing.

But even these numbers don’t account for hidden costs: modifications in the field, transport, crew operations, or launch infrastructure. Some drones are upgraded with satellite navigation systems or modems, raising their actual value.

One by one, Shaheds are heading in to attack #Ukraine — for nearly the first time, a swarm of strike drones was caught on video somewhere in our skies pic.twitter.com/zUcCphTUGi

— Aurora Borealis (@aborealis940) August 4, 2025

The price of decoy drones like the Gerbera complicates the picture further. These are estimated to cost only a few thousand dollars per unit. Ukrainian intelligence suggests their most expensive component — the engine — costs just $350–500, with the rest made of lightweight, low-cost materials.

Because of this variability, military experts recommend measuring not just the price per drone, but Russia’s capacity to replace them. At current rates, Russia can reportedly produce up to 100 Shahed-type drones a day, enough to replace the losses from a large strike within a week, showing the cost is not the main limit.

kyivindependent.com · Tania Myronyshena · September 13, 2025

4. Strike on Qatar Leaves Rubio With Delicate Diplomatic Task in Israel

Secretary Rubio must be the hardest working member of the administration: SECSTATE, NSA, Director USAID, and more.

Strike on Qatar Leaves Rubio With Delicate Diplomatic Task in Israel

The visit comes as the U.S. hopes to break the logjam in cease-fire talks to end the war in Gaza

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/strike-on-qatar-leaves-rubio-with-delicate-diplomatic-task-in-israel-8ee0fd08

By Robbie Gramer

Sept. 14, 2025 5:48 am ET

Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke to the press Saturday before departing for Israel. Photo: Nathan Howard/Press Pool

Quick Summary

Secretary Rubio visits Israel despite U.S. unhappiness over an Israeli strike on Hamas in Qatar.View more

JERUSALEM—Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. wasn’t happy about the Israeli strike on Hamas in Qatar, but moved ahead with a visit to Israel that will include meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Rubio said the U.S. wouldn’t reassess its support for Israel, but stressed that President Trump was unhappy about the strike.

“We’re going to talk about what the future holds, and I’m going to get a much better understanding of what their plans are moving forward,” Rubio told reporters before boarding his flight to Tel Aviv. “Obviously we’re not happy about it. The president was not happy about it. Now we need to move forward and figure out what comes next.”

The visit comes as the U.S. scrambles to react to the fallout from the Israeli strike and as Arab officials question America’s willingness to protect them from growing Israeli power in the region.

Rubio is slated to visit the Western Wall in Jerusalem with Netanyahu on Sunday and will meet privately with him on Monday.

The trip also comes as the U.S. is struggling to break the logjam in negotiations to end the Israel-Hamas war. The latest diplomatic crisis sparked by Israel’s strike on Qatar could pose a potential stumbling block to further negotiations, senior U.S. officials said.

Still, Rubio’s visit underscores how the U.S. is working to balance its steadfast support for Israel with containing the fallout from the strike.

Rubio signaled that Trump is growing impatient with the lack of progress on talks to end the war. Israel is moving ahead with an offensive to take Gaza City, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are sheltering and hostages are believed to be held. Netanyahu has characterized the Gazan city as the last Hamas stronghold.

The U.S. president “wants Hamas defeated, he wants the war to end, he wants all 48 hostages home, including those that are deceased, and he wants it all at once,” Rubio said. “We’ll have to discuss how the events last week had an impact on the ability to achieve that in short order.”

Qatar is a key U.S. partner in the region who has played a leading role in mediating cease-fire talks and has long hosted senior Hamas officials, including those involved in the negotiations.

Trump and his top aides engaged in a flurry of diplomatic activity following the strikes. Rubio and Vice President JD Vance met with Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani for an hour on Friday. Later that day, Trump hosted the prime minister for a dinner in New York. On Saturday, the Qatari prime minister met with the head of U.S. Central Command, Adm. Brad Cooper.

During Rubio’s trip to Israel, he is expected to visit a historically sensitive archaeological tunnel under East Jerusalem in a meeting arranged by an Israeli settler group.

The visit comes after Netanyahu backed a controversial plan to expand a settlement bloc known as E1 that many people believe would make it nearly impossible to create an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank. “There will never be a Palestinian state. This place is ours,” Netanyahu said during a visit to the settlement.

The U.A.E. has warned the U.S. and Israel that any Israeli efforts to annex the West Bank would undermine the historic Abraham Accords that normalized Israeli relations with some Arab nations.

Write to Robbie Gramer at robbie.gramer@wsj.com

5. Romania becomes second Nato country to report Russian drone in its airspace

Testing and probing. Designed to divert resources away from support to Ukraine? Creating dilemmas for NATO? How far can Russia push?

What will NATO do?

Romania becomes second Nato country to report Russian drone in its airspace

11 minutes ago

Ian Casey

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c80g7g5rmlno?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

Romania says a Russian drone has breached its airspace - the second Nato country to report such an incursion.

Romanian fighter jets were in the air monitoring a Russian attack in Ukraine on Saturday and were able to track the drone near Ukraine's southern border, the defence ministry said in a statement.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said the incursion could not be a mistake - it was "an obvious expansion of the war by Russia". Moscow has not commented on the Romanian claims.

On Wednesday, Poland said it had shot down at least three Russian drones which had entered its airspace.

In its statement, Romania's defence ministry said it detected the Russian drone when two F-16 jets were monitoring they country's border with Ukraine, after "Russian air attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure on the Danube".

The drone was detected 20km (12.4 miles) south-west of the village of Chilia Veche, before disappearing from the radar.

But it did not fly over populated areas or pose imminent danger, the ministry said.

The EU's foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, called the incident "yet another unacceptable breach of an EU member state's sovereignty".

Poland also responded to concerns over Russian drones on Saturday.

"Preventative operations of aviation - Polish and allied - have begun in our airspace," Prime Minister Donald Tusk said in a post on X.

"Ground-based air defence systems have reached the highest state of readiness."

Earlier this week Russia's defence ministry said there had been "no plans" to target facilities on Polish soil.

Belarus, a close Russian ally, said the drones which entered Polish airspace on Wednesday were an accident, after their navigation systems were jammed.

On Sunday, the Czech Republic announced it had sent a special operations helicopter unit to Poland.

The unit consists of three Mi-171S helicopters, each one capable of transporting up to 24 personnel and featuring full combat equipment.

The move is in response to Russian's incursion into Nato's eastern flank, the Czech Defence Minister Jana Cernochova said.

In response to the latest drone incursion, President Zelensky said the Russian military "knows exactly where their drones are headed and how long they can operate in the air".

He has consistently asked Western countries to tighten sanctions on Moscow.

US President Donald Trump also weighed in on airspace breach earlier this week, saying he was "ready" to impose tougher sanctions on Russia, but only if Nato countries met certain conditions, such as stopping buying Russian oil.

Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and has been making slow progress in the battlefield.

Trump has been leading efforts to end the war, but Russia has intensified attacks on Ukraine since President Vladimir Putin returned from a summit with Trump in Alaska last month.

6. Thousands of 18-22-year-old Ukrainian men flock into Poland after Kyiv lifts travel restrictions

Wow. Not a good sign. Voting with their feet. WIll this embolden Putin? Will this give NATO and Ukrainian supporters pause? This will certainly not help any negotiations if they take place.

Is the end near?

Thousands of 18-22-year-old Ukrainian men flock into Poland after Kyiv lifts travel restrictions

https://tvpworld.com/88883284/poland-sees-border-spike-as-ukraine-eases-travel-ban-for-men-1822?sfnsn=mo

Franciszek Beszłej/ew

12.09.2025, 04:17

Crossings in one Polish region rose twelvefold among men aged 18–22. Photo by Pavlo Palamarchuk/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Image

FACEBOOK

E-MAIL

COPY LINK

Poland has reported a sharp increase in border crossings by Ukrainian men aged 18 to 22 after Kyiv relaxed wartime travel restrictions for the first time since Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Easing the law

On August 26, Ukrainian authorities introduced the new rules, framing them as an opportunity for young men to pursue education or work abroad.

Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko announced the move on August 26 in a government decree, writing on Telegram: “This applies to all citizens in this age group.

“The decision also concerns citizens who, for various reasons, are located outside Ukraine. We want Ukrainians to maintain a maximum of links with Ukraine.

“The changes take effect the day after official publication.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had earlier signaled that his government was weighing an easing of the travel ban, saying it would “help many young Ukrainians maintain ties with Ukraine and realize their potential.”

Why now?

Analysts suggest the decision may also have political roots. Krzysztof Nieczypor, an expert at Poland’s state-funded Centre for Eastern Studies, told Polish daily Rzeczpospolita that Ukrainians aged 18 to 30 formed the backbone of Zelenskyy’s electoral base in 2019, when he won the presidency.

Allowing them greater freedom of movement now, Nieczypor said, could strengthen his position in any future election.

7. America risks global credibility from human rights, immigration policy inconsistencies

Sadly these scholars fail to mention north Korean human rights (I assume it is because north Korea does not pose an illegal immigration problem).

But I do concur with their conclusion:

Historically a powerful tool in American policymaking, the Human Rights Reports have traditionally provided an objective source to inform foreign and domestic policy, reflect American values, and project American democratic global leadership. Immigration enforcement, including removals, is a necessary component of immigration policy. But it should not undermine American values and foreign policy objectives.

Any distance between American human rights standards and our handling of migration policy undermines American values and the United States’ position in the world. It also damages America’s credibility and ability to secure its interests globally at a time where these interests are threatened by global competitors.

America risks global credibility from human rights, immigration policy inconsistencies

by Nicole Bibbins Sedaca and Laura Collins, opinion contributors - 09/13/25 2:00 PM ET

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/5500101-us-human-rights-report-bias/

The recently released U.S. Department of State Human Rights Reports have stirred significant controversy about notable cuts in length and issue coverage, delayed release, and perceived bias, particularly on countries like Hungary, Brazil and South Africa.

Equally concerning is the disconnect between migration policy and the reports’ coverage of countries like Haiti, Ukraine and Afghanistan and the unduly rosy reporting of countries like El Salvador. Each case highlights this troubling inconsistency, as well as the willingness to deport people to dangerous situations, and — more broadly — a significant divergence from American foreign policy.

The State Department should seriously review the concerns voiced by journalists and democracy defenders about the mischaracterization of human rights situations in countries aligned with the U.S. and those with which tensions exist.

The Department of Homeland Security should carefully review those past or pending deportation cases to highly insecure countries. Given its important oversight responsibility, Congress should investigate whether deported migrants face life-threatening situations due to U.S. deportation, since that would be both inhumane and counter to America’s democratic values.

The inconsistency between U.S. human rights reporting and immigration policy is most clearly seen in efforts to lift protective designations such as temporary protected status for certain foreign nationals in the United States. This provisional legal classification is granted when a home country is considered temporarily unsafe or unable to “adequately” handle the return of its nationals.

Haitians initially received temporary protected status due to a 2010 natural disaster, followed by extensions triggered by extreme security conditions which make return unsafe. The Human Rights Report found that the human rights situation there “worsened significantly” because of “the lack of state capacity to protect civilians from expanding gang violence and individuals’ decreasing rights in areas such as freedom of expression.”

Nevertheless, the administration recently sought to lift temporary protected status for Haitians and has terminated the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela Parole Program that allowed some nationals from those four countries to legally enter and work in the United States temporarily. The courts blocked the effort to remove Haitians’ temporary protected status, but the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela Parole Program termination was allowed to proceed. The administration’s position on these programs illustrates a troubling gap between the reports and humanitarian immigration policy.

Similarly, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced in May that the United States would rescind temporary protected status for Afghan nationals, many of whom supported U.S. objectives in Afghanistan.

“Afghanistan has had an improved security situation, and its stabilizing economy no longer prevent them from returning to their home country,” Noem argued in determining that the conditions “no longer meet the statutory requirements” for temporary protected status.

But the Human Rights Report stated that there was “significant deterioration in respect for women’s rights during the year” and that Taliban members “reportedly killed persons in retaliation for their association with the pre-August 2021 government.”

This is particularly concerning for those Afghans who served U.S. interests and face a heightened threat of retaliation upon return. Leaving aside the moral argument against sending back Afghans who helped the U.S., the State Department’s report makes the case that deporting them would place them in grave danger.

Similarly, Ukrainians who have fled the brutal Russian war were granted a temporary humanitarian status due to the war. The administration withdrew this status which means over 120,000 Ukrainians will be forced to return to their homeland during an active war if they lack an existing asylum request.

Of additional concern is the U.S. deportation of migrants to third countries that have deeply problematic human rights records as clearly delineated in the Human Rights Reports, such as South Sudan, Rwanda and Eswatini.

In the case of El Salvador, whose president is a close partner in the administration’s deportation efforts, the State Department assessments diverged from widespread evidence by respected sources that there are major human rights violations, including against children. The country report states that there are “no credible reports of significant human rights abuses,” raising questions about its credibility.

While deporting people from the United States is within the purview of any American administration and removing people with criminal records is standard policy, sending these individuals to countries where they may face significant abuse and danger is a troubling divergence from traditional U.S. standards and simple decency. So is cutting deals and providing U.S. financial and/or political support to problematic regimes and leaders who host deportees but are also sanctioned by the United States, as is the case with South Sudanese leader Benjamin Bol Mel.

Historically a powerful tool in American policymaking, the Human Rights Reports have traditionally provided an objective source to inform foreign and domestic policy, reflect American values, and project American democratic global leadership. Immigration enforcement, including removals, is a necessary component of immigration policy. But it should not undermine American values and foreign policy objectives.

Any distance between American human rights standards and our handling of migration policy undermines American values and the United States’ position in the world. It also damages America’s credibility and ability to secure its interests globally at a time where these interests are threatened by global competitors.

Nicole Bibbins Sedaca is the Kelly and David Pfeil Fellow at the George W. Bush Institute. Laura Collins is Director of the George W. Bush Institute-SMU Economic Growth Initiative at the George W. Bush Institute.

8. Should We Be Afraid? The Rise of Political Hatred in the United States

Excerpts:

The US Constitution begins with these three words: “We the people.” Those critically important words tend to define us. We have common goals as a people. We therefore share a common future. We will either rise or fall together. The more we work in concert toward the objective of defeating the menacing spread of political hatred, the better for the country as a whole.

Few Republicans are actual Fascists, and a distinct minority of Democrats are genuine Socialists. The on-going demonization of one by the other is not only ultimately self-defeating but simply wrong.

The armed forces of our nation can serve as an example to be emulated. The US military is composed of citizens representing all political beliefs: working together as one to defeat external threats to the country. We must guard against becoming a people who are small-minded and mean-spirited. Respect for differing opinions results in civil discourse without violence. Our Constitution demands this from us. Few know this better than those serving in uniform.

Charles Dickens begins his classic “A Tale of Two Cities” with the enigmatic phrase, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…” Hard times often require a determined focus on that which is best within us. Some may consider the here and now the worst of times.

But, this moment is also an opportunity to seek common cause as a people to continue the attempt to make manifest the lofty goals of our Founders. We need to take a reasoned step back from the yawning precipice of politically motivated violence. If not…

Pogo famously suggests a cautionary tale when the cartoon character observed, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” If true, I have reason to be afraid. So do you.

Should We Be Afraid? The Rise of Political Hatred in the United States

sofrep.com · Robert Bruce Adolph · September 13, 2025

7 hours ago

Political leaders confront security concerns — and fear — after Kirk's assassination

AP · STEVE PEOPLES · September 14, 2025

MORRISTOWN, N.J. (AP) — Even before the killing of Charlie Kirk, Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania was struggling with the emotional toll of political violence.

In the middle of the night just five months ago, someone broke into his home and set it on fire. Shapiro, who is also a likely 2028 Democratic presidential contender, was asleep with his wife and children.

And in the weeks since his family fled the blaze, Shapiro has been forced to confront the vexing questions now consuming elected officials in both parties as they face the impact of Kirk’s assassination on their own public lives.

“The emotional challenge for me that’s been the hardest to work through is that, as a father, the career I chose, that I find great purpose and meaning in, ended up putting my children’s lives at risk,” Shapiro, a father of four, told The Associated Press. “Make no mistake, the emotional burden of being a father through this has been something that continues to be a challenge for me to this day.”

Across the nation, it is much the same for Republican and Democratic officials after another stunning act of political violence. Politicians in both parties and at virtually every level of public service are suddenly being forced to deal with acute security concerns — and feelings of grief, anger and fear — as they move deeper into a fraught election season.

Some political leaders are canceling public appearances. Others are relying on a large police presence to keep them safe. And still others insist that the fallout from Kirk’s death won’t have any impact on their duties.

Indeed, even as Shapiro offered prayers for Kirk’s widow and children, the Democratic governor said he is undeterred in his duties as a leading figure in his national party and his state.

“I’m not slowing down,” he said.

On that, he and President Donald Trump appear to agree.

The Republican president was asked during a Friday appearance on Fox News if he would cancel any public appearances of his own.

“You have to go forward,” he said.

Violent rhetoric surges

Bellicose rhetoric and even death threats have surged in the days since Kirk was killed.

“The left is the party of murder,” Elon Musk, the tech titan and CEO of the social media platform X, wrote. “If they won’t leave us in peace, then our choice is to fight or die.”

To that, Fox News host Jesse Waters said during a broadcast, “They are at war with us. Whether we want to accept it or not, they are at war with us. What are we going to do about it?”

On Friday, a right-wing activist posted online a video outside Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s home, calling on followers to “take action.”

The charged environment prompted a number of public officials, largely Democrats, to postpone public appearances.

Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., canceled a Saturday town hall in Las Vegas “out of an abundance of caution for town hall participants, attendees, and members of the media.” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., also postponed a weekend event in North Carolina due to security concerns.

Former Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, president of Young America’s Foundation, which works to attract young people to the GOP, said his group canceled a Thursday night event in California featuring conservative commentator Ben Shapiro out of respect for Kirk and his family.

And while officials in both parties acknowledged that new security precautions would be in place — for the short term, at least — cancelations have been rare.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, another potential Democratic presidential prospect who recently announced his 2026 reelection campaign, said he would not change his public schedule because of the increased threat even as political violence will be on his mind.

“It’s never something that completely leaves you, but I don’t think it can be something that debilitates you,” Moore told The Associated Press.

When asked if he expects a retaliatory attack against Democrats, the former Army captain insisted, “We are not at war with one another.”

“As someone who has seen war, as someone who knows what war looks like, as someone who will live with the realities of war for the rest of my life, I refuse to ever believe that we in the country are at war with one another,” he said. “And I refuse to believe that that we as a country are devolving into some just kind of type of retaliatory tit for tat.”

“Resorting to violence is a remarkable sign of weakness,” Moore added. “It means you can’t win a political argument.”

And yet political violence is becoming more frequent in the United States.

Former Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords was shot in the head as she met with constituents in 2011. Republican Rep. Steve Scalise was shot at a congressional team baseball practice in 2017. Trump was grazed by a bullet last summer on the stump in Pennsylvania. And barely three months ago, the top Democrat in the Minnesota state house and her husband were gunned down at home.

What it looks like on the campaign trail

Several uniformed police officers stood side by side along the entrance of a public park where the Democratic candidate for New Jersey governor, Mikie Sherrill, met voters Friday to discuss measures designed to bring transparency to the state budget process.

The significant security presence was a sharp shift from Sherrill’s recent events.

In Illinois, Republican candidate for lieutenant governor, Aaron Del Mar, said he and other GOP candidates are discussing new security precautions, such as bringing events indoors, enhanced use of metal detectors and background checks on those who attend their events.

“There’s a lot of concern right now,” he said.

Back in New Jersey, 35-year-old Democrat Maira Barbosa attended Sherrill’s event with her 16-month-old son. She said she’s never been more resolved to show up to a political event in person, even as she admitted she had second thoughts.

“We’re seeing so much hate speech and we’re seeing people advocate for violence, so of course it makes me concerned, especially to the point of bringing my son,” she said. “If we don’t participate, if we don’t get involved, who is going to represent us?”

Top Democratic governors speak out

In interviews, governors Shapiro and Moore largely avoided casting blame for the current era of political violence, although they were critical of Trump’s immediate response to Kirk’s shooting.

The Republican president highlighted only attacks against Republicans during his Oval Office address on Thursday and blamed “the radical left” for Kirk’s shooting, even before the suspect was arrested.

Shapiro said Trump “misused the power of an Oval Office address.”

“To be clear, the political violence has impacted Democrats and Republicans, and the rhetoric of vengeance and the language that has created division has come from both sides of the political divide,” Shapiro said. “No one party has clean hands, and no one party is immune from the threat of political violence.”

Moore called for everyone to tone down the rhetoric.

“I just think it’s important for the president and anyone else to understand that your words matter, and leadership is how you lift us up in darkness, not how you use it as a moment for opportunism and to introduce more darkness and finger pointing into into an already horrific situation,” he said.

“I’m praying for our country,” Moore continued. “I’m praying that the legacy of this moment is we got better — not that we got worse.”

___

Associated Press writers Sejal Govindarao in Phoenix; Laura Bargfeld in Chicago; Chris Megerian in Washington; and Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, contributed.

AP · STEVE PEOPLES · September 14, 2025

10. Drones Over Poland – “Social Resilience Key to Survival” Says Polish Ambassador in Kyiv

Drones Over Poland – “Social Resilience Key to Survival” Says Polish Ambassador in Kyiv

Russian drones in Polish airspace and Ukraine’s societal strength show that the war is also fought in the resilience of people, says Ambassador Piotr Łukasiewicz in an interview with Kyiv Post.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/60045

by Michał Kujawski | Sept. 13, 2025, 11:56 am

Overnight between Tuesday and Wednesday, we witnessed an escalation. A large number of drones entered Polish airspace. Can we speak of an attack?

PŁ: The drone incursion was unprecedented. For the first time, NATO forces shot down foreign unmanned aerial vehicles. Violations of third countries’ airspace have happened before, but what made this incident unique was both the scale of the breach and the decisive response – defending Polish airspace and shooting the drones down. Importantly, allied forces also took part in the operation.

Many are asking whether NATO is actually functioning.

PŁ: It clearly is! Both militarily – in the most direct sense – and diplomatically. A meeting under Article 4 of the Treaty was convened. Fortunately, no one was injured in the attack, apart from infrastructure damage. What we are clearly dealing with here are hostile Russian intentions. That same day, Russia attacked Ukraine with hundreds of drones and missiles. The fact that some of those drones also crossed into Poland shows what intentions Russia holds toward Ukraine’s allies.

What could stop Russia from continuing such actions?

PŁ: The situation surrounding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is so dynamic that it’s difficult to anticipate specific events. The response undertaken by Poland’s air forces, alongside our allies, was adapted to the threat level posed by the drones – and it was resolute. I’d like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to allied forces for their support.

Drones over Poland: How Should NATO React?

What European media have said about Russia’s serious provocation against Poland and NATO.

Considering the large number of drones and the hours-long operation, it’s hard to see this as accidental. What was Russia’s goal?

PŁ: The motives will be analyzed by the Polish services and armed forces, as well as by our allies. Our diplomatic mission in Kyiv is also involved in this process. What matters most is that disaster was averted, the response was strong, and a clear signal has been sent to Russia – one that needs no further explanation.

What specific lessons from Ukraine can Poland draw on and learn from?

PŁ: Poland is already learning from Ukraine. We’re witnessing a kind of war that’s very different from those we’ve known – it differs in duration, scale, and intensity. It’s unlike the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq, in which I myself took part. We must also recognize lessons beyond the military – namely, social resilience. Ukrainian society, subjected to brutal aggression – not since 2022, but since 2014 – is managing remarkably well under enormous societal stress. The role of civil society organizations, veterans, and the military within society is crucial.

PŁ: A good example is the initiative “Women’s Watch,” which operates nationwide and teaches women how to cope – to put it plainly – without their husbands. They publish handbooks and guides on how to survive this difficult time of war. What we’re seeing is a state that acts decisively. Ukraine has always been a decentralized country, but war has led to greater centralization. We often hear that Ukraine receives aid and that questions arise about its gratitude. I experience that gratitude every day. But I also want to stress: Ukraine is a source of knowledge.

Diplomatic efforts to end the war are ongoing. Yet at the same time, we’re seeing an escalation by Moscow. Is there any sign of peace or a ceasefire on the horizon?

PŁ: The escalation is evident in grim statistics. Just a few months ago, Russia was launching several dozen drones – now it’s hundreds. Russia has committed enormous resources to this war. In doing so, it is destroying the future of its own citizens. And I must say with a heavy sense of satisfaction: Ukrainian defenders are eliminating Russian invaders on a large scale. Russia will not win this war – in fact, it strategically lost it in the first weeks of the invasion. Even tactically, it has failed to achieve its goals. The Russian economy is also struggling. Russia must finally come to terms with the fact that it will not achieve its objectives.

Should we expect the war to end or be paused before the end of this year?

PŁ: I am a firm believer that the fate of this war will be decided on the battlefield. Politically, neither side can be forced into major concessions. Pressure could perhaps lead to a freezing of the conflict to make negotiations possible – but Russia is not interested in that. Ukrainians also know very well what kinds of atrocities and torture take place in the occupied territories. That is yet another powerful reason to continue defending their country and pursuing the path toward the EU and NATO.

The conversation took place on Sept. 10, 2025. Following the interview, France, the Czech Republic, Sweden, and the UK decided to reinforce their military presence in Poland and along NATO’s eastern flank.

Michał Kujawski

Michał Kujawski, a Warsaw-based journalist focusing on the CEE region, and former Head of Current Affairs at TVP World, is a Special Correspondent for Kyiv Post.

11. How America’s economy is dodging disaster

Graphics at the link.

Excerpt:

All the same, a more significant slowdown does not necessarily mean a recession. Tariffs are colliding with an American economy that is, by any historical or international standard, extraordinarily dynamic. It has been growing at a consistent 2-3% a year since 2022. As a consequence, America is one of the few rich countries that might be able to shoulder even a sizeable hit to its growth without falling into recession. The additional stimulus in Mr Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” is also front-loaded, meaning that it will provide a boost this year and next, which could help obscure the impact of tariffs (even if it also creates an inflationary mess for the Fed to handle). All this suggests a future in which economists endlessly debate the actual impact of the tariffs, while the American public barely notices them, despite having been left poorer. Not a triumph for Mr Trump—but not a disaster either.

How America’s economy is dodging disaster

It is astonishingly dynamic, even under the weight of tariffs

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/07/06/how-americas-economy-is-dodging-disaster

Still burningPhotograph: Getty Images

Jul 6th 2025

Washington, DC

4 min read

Listen to this story

conomic doom beckoned after President Donald Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs on April 2nd. Stocks crashed; forecasters predicted a recession within the year. Three months on, the mood is more relaxed. Prices in shops are not noticeably higher, unemployment is flat and the S&P 500 index of big American firms is resurgent, back at all-time highs. Although Mr Trump has sent letters threatening a whole host of countries with swingeing tariffs if they do not reach an agreement on trade with America by August 1st, nobody is too worried.

What gives? Was the president right in thinking that tariffs were a smart way to squeeze money from foreigners? Were the doom-mongers overdoing it?

Chart: The Economist

For the moment, businesses, households and financial markets are locked in an elaborate game of wait-and-see. Companies stocked up heavily early in the year in anticipation of tariffs. Indeed, they did so by enough to drag measured GDP growth into the red in the first quarter, as a surge of imports distorted the numbers.

These stockpiles will be run down. In many cases, they have already been depleted, meaning that businesses are turning once again to imports. Last month customs duties were more than three times as high as the average in recent years (see chart 1). Companies that bring in goods from abroad now face an unpalatable choice: either they can eat the tariffs and accept lower profits, or they can pass on the additional costs to their customers.

Chart: The Economist

So far, they have mostly chosen the first option. Bosses are attempting to wait out the president. Why alienate customers with higher prices if Mr Trump may change his mind and render the exercise pointless? Even in the latest consumer-price data, which still shows inflation a little above the Federal Reserve’s target of 2%, it is difficult to spot a tariff impact.

In fact, doing so requires something of an economic microscope. Zooming in on the prices of affected categories at a handful of large retailers, Alberto Cavallo of Harvard Business School and co-authors do discern some slight price rises in both imported goods and their domestically produced competitors (see chart 2). However, such prices have risen by only a percent or two—a far smaller increase than that seen in tariffs. America’s effective tariff rate was at 10% in June, its highest in eight decades. Mr Trump’s threats, as are due to come into effect on August 1st, would mean a significant step up.

Chart: The Economist

Oddly, though, tariffs may be pushing down prices via another mechanism—by taking a toll on the economy. The Liberation Day drama crushed consumer confidence, possibly softening demand. Until recently, this has been evident only in “soft” data (surveys and the like). Now signs of it are starting to appear in “hard” data, too. A recent release showed that household spending fell month-on-month in May. Employment figures for June were strong, but bolstered by government hiring, especially of teachers. Those for the private sector were lower than expected.

A running estimate of GDP, produced by the Fed’s Atlanta branch, suggests that its core components (private investment and consumption) have fallen from an annualised growth rate of 2-3% at the start of the second quarter to 1% now (see chart 3). Goldman Sachs, a bank, has compared the latest data to previous “event driven” shocks that led to recessions, and found that today’s slowdown is roughly in line with the historical norm.

Brexit redux

Whether this is the start of something more serious depends, in large part, on quite how punchy the president feels on August 1st. Without another deadline extension or similar, a further slowdown seems likely. Moreover, as Britain discovered after leaving the European Union—the most recent case of a rich country imposing large trade barriers on itself—elevated uncertainty can by itself be sufficient to suppress business investment for quite some time. And America is now an extremely uncertain country (see chart 4).

Chart: The Economist

All the same, a more significant slowdown does not necessarily mean a recession. Tariffs are colliding with an American economy that is, by any historical or international standard, extraordinarily dynamic. It has been growing at a consistent 2-3% a year since 2022. As a consequence, America is one of the few rich countries that might be able to shoulder even a sizeable hit to its growth without falling into recession. The additional stimulus in Mr Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” is also front-loaded, meaning that it will provide a boost this year and next, which could help obscure the impact of tariffs (even if it also creates an inflationary mess for the Fed to handle). All this suggests a future in which economists endlessly debate the actual impact of the tariffs, while the American public barely notices them, despite having been left poorer. Not a triumph for Mr Trump—but not a disaster either. ■

Editor’s note (July 7th 2025): This story has been updated.

For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.

12. Pulling Back the Curtain on China’s Military-Civil Fusion

The 56 page report can be downloaded here: https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-Pulling-Back-the-Curtain-on-Chinas-Military-Civil-Fusion.pdf

The EXSUM is below.

Pulling Back the Curtain on China’s Military-Civil Fusion

How the PLA Mobilizes Civilian AI for Strategic Advantage

https://cset.georgetown.edu/publication/pulling-back-the-curtain-on-chinas-military-civil-fusion/

Cole McFaul, Sam Bresnick, and Daniel Chou

September 2025

China’s efforts to develop AI-related military capabilities have garnered significant interest in the United States. Drawing on 2,857 AI-related defense contract award notices published between January 2023 and December 2024, this report finds that while China’s legacy defense sector players lead AI-related military procurement, an emerging set of nontraditional vendors and research institutions appears to play a consequential role as well.

Executive Summary

Over the past several years, China has worked to transform the People’s Liberation Army into a sophisticated, highly capable force that can compete with the U.S. military. In so doing, Beijing has reformed the PLA and rolled out various policies to fast-track military modernization. Key to the Chinese government’s aims is the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and related technologies to boost the Chinese military’s development and adoption of advanced capabilities to outmatch rivals in future conflicts. To accelerate military modernization, Beijing has encouraged the PLA and state-owned defense conglomerates to work more closely with the civilian sector under its militarycivil fusion (MCF) strategy. By fostering closer coordination between the defense and civilian sectors, China’s top leaders believe that the PLA can match and eventually surpass U.S. military capabilities.

This report leverages a novel dataset of 2,857 AI-related contract award notices published by the PLA between January 2023 and December 2024. From these documents, we identified 1,560 different organizations that won at least one such AIrelated contract. We focus our analysis on the 338 entities awarded at least two AIrelated contracts, collecting open-source information on each to shed light on China’s AI-related defense industrial base. Furthermore, we assign each entity to one of three categories: state-owned enterprises (SOEs), research institutions, and nontraditional vendors.

Our analysis shows that SOEs and research institutions with longstanding ties to the PLA continue to lead AI-related military procurement. Of the fifteen top awarded entities in the dataset, eleven were either SOEs or defense-affiliated research institutions. The SOEs that won the most contracts were China Electronics Technology Group Corporation (CETC), China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), and China North Industries Group Corporation (NORINCO). The Seven Sons of National Defense—a group of universities closely affiliated with China’s defense sector—and various affiliates of the Chinese Academy of Sciences were also among the top awarded entities in the dataset, reflecting their importance in supporting China’s military modernization efforts. In short, many of the same organizations that have historically driven Chinese defense technology advancements are also the top suppliers of AI-related goods and services within our dataset.

Nonetheless, the dataset reveals that an emerging class of firms and universities appears to also play a consequential role in China’s AI-related military procurement. Close to three-quarters of the 338 entities analyzed in this report are nontraditional vendors (NTVs), or firms with no self-reported state ownership ties. NTVs won 764 contracts, the most of any of the three categories. Most NTVs were established relatively recently, with two-thirds founded after 2010. On their websites, NTVs often highlight their focus on developing dual-use technologies, indicating that these firms see both the civilian and defense sectors as avenues for growth. Finally, the dataset reveals that some research institutions without well-documented linkages to China’s defense sector actively bid on and win contracts to supply the PLA with AI-related products with clear military applications.

Several implications merit mention.

SOEs continue to lead AI-related defense procurement in China, but our findings suggest that while barriers remain for smaller, newer NTVs, these entities appear to be playing a substantial role in providing AI-related technologies to the PLA, potentially accelerating technological development and AI diffusion throughout the Chinese military. Although it is unclear whether Beijing’s efforts to promote its MCF strategy are responsible for these trends, this report indicates that NTVs and research institutions are active participants in China’s military procurement for AI-related goods and services.

The apparent diversification of China’s AI-related defense industrial base presents several challenges. First, it may complicate the United States’ ability to hamstring China’s military modernization by restricting certain legacy defense players’ access to critical technologies and funding. Moreover, our findings could indicate that China has, to some degree, succeeded in fostering competition within its historically inefficient defense sector. If so, these findings may have implications for our understanding of China’s ability to incorporate dual-use technologies developed in the civilian sector for military end uses. Finally, this dynamic complicates U.S. due diligence for research funding, export licensing, and outbound-investment screening.

The vast majority of NTVs and research institutions in the dataset are not subject to U.S. sanctions. As the boundaries between civilian and defense technologies blur, the United States will face difficult trade-offs between preserving the openness necessary for innovation while mitigating national security risks. Accordingly, the United States should develop a sophisticated, evidence-based approach to safeguarding research and economic security to both impede the PLA’s acquisition and adoption of advanced technologies and ensure that benign and beneficial collaborations with Chinese entities are able to continue.

13. Video: Our National Fever

Worth the nearly 5 minutes to refelct on ths issues.\

Our National Fever

CNN Michael Smerconish grapples with the lack of empathy in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/13/us/video/smr-american-discourse-has-become-sick#:~:text=CNN Michael Smerconish grapples with,Now playing

14. Terrorist financing since 9/11: How the threat and the response have evolved

Always follow the money.

Terrorist financing since 9/11: How the threat and the response have evolved

https://www.acamstoday.org/terrorist-financing-since-9-11-how-the-threat-and-the-response-have-evolved/

Sep. 10, 2025

Dustin Eaton, CAMS

s we pause to remember the tragic events of September 11, 2001 (9/11), we are reminded that 9/11 has forever changed how the world combats terrorist financing.

The 9/11 attacks triggered a revolution in the financial surveillance landscape, forcing governments and institutions to rethink the structures that fund terrorism. Today, nearly a quarter century later, those threats have mutated—but so have our tools to fight them.

What is terrorist financing?

Terrorist financing refers to the process of raising, moving and using funds to support terrorist activities. Unlike other forms of financial crime, these funds may originate from both illicit sources (e.g., drug trafficking, smuggling, extortion) and legitimate ones (e.g., donations, charities or personal savings). The defining factor is not where the money comes from, but how it is used: to plan, promote or execute acts of terrorism.

According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), terrorist financing often involves small amounts of money spread across diverse channels, from hawala and money services businesses to cryptocurrencies, making detection difficult and demanding close international cooperation.1 This complexity means countering terrorist financing requires both financial intelligence and international cooperation.

How terrorist financing has changed over time

Several key shifts underscore how the landscape has transformed since 9/11.

Expansion of financial intelligence: Post-9/11, financial monitoring evolved into strategic intelligence. Tools like targeted sanctions under Executive Order 13224 and the integration of financial intelligence into law enforcement became central to disrupting terrorist funding. The scope of anti-money laundering (AML) regulations broadened to encompass sectors once overlooked, such as jewelers and hawaladars.2
Rise of identity fraud: The formal financial system became more resilient, but adversaries adapted. Deepfakes, synthetic identities and counterfeit ID (e.g., passport cards) now challenge customer verification processes.3 Terrorist actors can exploit these tools to evade detection when moving funds.
Virtual assets and de-risking dilemmas: The rise of virtual asset service providers (VASPs) has opened new channels for illicit transfers. At the same time, FIs face the risk of “de-risking,” or cutting off VASPs entirely to avoid regulatory liability, even though this can hamper oversight of digital flows.4
Cartels designated as terrorists: Perhaps most consequentially, criminal cartels— long treated as drug trafficking organizations—are now being formally designated as terrorist organizations.5 This marks a fundamental shift in how states classify and combat them.

Response from FIs

Faced with this new reality, FIs and regulators have adopted several strategies, including but not limited to those listed below.

Regulatory and legal response

Enhanced sanctions and intelligence access: U.S. authorities are leveraging new tools to trace cartel-linked financial flows. One example is the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, which unlocks SWIFT messaging data when a nexus to terrorism is suspected.6
Heightened due-diligence and compliance protocols: Firms must redesign their risk frameworks, especially for Mexican and Latin American dealings. Recognizing that law-abiding sectors (e.g., agriculture, fuel) may be fronted by cartels, institutions now implement deep due diligence, adverse-media mining and risk scoring beyond simple list screening.7
Secondary sanctions and liability exposure: The foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) designation triggers broader obligations—even indirect contact or support may lead to exposure under secondary sanctions regimes. Businesses could face criminal and civil liability, including against charges of “material support” or Anti-Terrorism Act lawsuits.8

Operational and technological response

Innovations in detection tools: Institutions are increasingly adopting machine learning, graph-based models and privacy-preserving analytics to reduce AML false positives and improve threat detection accuracy.9 Gamified training programs help sharpen investigative capabilities against dark-web and crypto threats.
Regulator outreach and cross-border coordination: Bodies like the U.S. Department of Treasury have intensified private-sector outreach via AML/counter-terrorist financing dialogues, fostering awareness of emerging risks and sharing best practices across the Middle East/North Africa and Latin American jurisdictions.10

The new era of terrorist financing

Two decades of progress have built sophisticated tools and frameworks, but criminals continue to adapt. FIs now face a landscape where organized criminal cartels are treated as terrorists, privacy-preserving technologies obscure flows and data intelligence must constantly evolve.

Moving forward, success hinges on continued innovation in detection technologies, agile risk frameworks and international collaboration. The next era will demand that regulated institutions act not just as gatekeepers, but as front-line defenders combining vigilance, transparency and foresight.

Dustin Eaton, CAMS, CGSS, CAMS-RM, CAFS, principal, AML & Fraud, Taktile, djenzwm@yahoo.com,

“FATF’s global efforts on combating terrorist financing,” Financial Action Task Force, https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/topics/Terrorist-Financing.html
Juan C. Zarate, “How Efforts to Counter Terrorist Financing Have Evolved Since 9/11,” K2Integrity, September 12, 2022, https://www.k2integrity.com/en/knowledge/expert-insights/2022/the-evolution-of-cft-efforts
“How Has Terrorism Financing Changed Since 9/11?,” Institute for Financial Integrity, September 12, 2024, https://finintegrity.org/how-has-terrorism-financing-changed-since-9-11
Ibid.
Julie Watson, “US charges high-ranking Mexican drug cartel suspects with narco-terrorism,” AP News, May 13, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/627911a04e4072216db93cdeb4afe4f4
Carl A. Valenstein and Christian C. Contardo, “US Designation of Cartels as Terrorist Organizations Increases Risk of Doing Business in Mexico,” Morgan Lewis, March 24, 2025, https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2025/03/us-designation-of-cartels-as-terrorist-organizations-increases-risk-of-doing-business-in-mexico
Ron Giammarco, Walid Raad, Tom Scazzafavo, et al., “How cartels as foreign terrorist organizations create compliance risks,” EY, March 31, 2025, https://www.ey.com/en_us/insights/forensic-integrity-services/compliance-cartels-as-foreign-terrorist-organizations
Matteson Ellis, James Tillen and Maria Lapetina, “FCPA Changes & Terrorist Designations for Cartels Create Dangerous New Math in Latin America,” Corporate Compliance Insights, March 19, 2025, https://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/fcpa-changes-terrorist-designations-cartels-latin-america
Ahmad Naser Eddin, Jacopo Bono, David Aparício, et al., “Anti-Money Laundering Alert Optimization Using Machine Learning with Graphs,” Cornell University, December 14, 2021, https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.07508
“Joint Testimony Daniel Glaser, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes,” U.S. Department of the Treasury, April 18, 2007, https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/hp361

15. The City Leading China’s Charge to Pull Ahead in AI

Money, talent, and entrepreneurial spirit used to be American strengths.

The City Leading China’s Charge to Pull Ahead in AI

Money, talent and entrepreneurial spirit have turned DeepSeek’s hometown into a global AI hub

https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/the-city-leading-chinas-charge-to-pull-ahead-in-ai-de0063ee

By Shen Lu

and Hannah Miao

| Photographs by Gilles Sabrié for WSJ

Sept. 12, 2025 11:00 pm ET

HANGZHOU, China—China is racing to develop world-leading artificial-intelligence technology. This city is paving the way.

More than two decades ago, Jack Ma launched Alibaba from a small apartment here, kick-starting his hometown’s transformation from scenic city to tech powerhouse.

These days, Hangzhou is an AI hub at the center of China’s global tech ambitions. Its breakthrough moment came earlier this year, when local company DeepSeek shocked the world with an AI model that rivaled American programs, at a much lower cost.

“All of Hangzhou went into a frenzy,” said Zhao Ji, a 41-year-old entrepreneur who is building an AI startup from his apartment in the city.

DeepSeek’s shot to fame was no fluke. The capital of the eastern Zhejiang province and a prosperous city of roughly 13 million people, Hangzhou has spent decades cultivating entrepreneurship. Supportive government policies, research universities, major tech companies such as Alibaba and NetEase and relatively low living costs compared with Beijing and Shanghai have made Hangzhou a mecca for tech talent.

Zhao moved to Hangzhou from Beijing in 2018 and was a marketing director for Alibaba for about three years. He is one of many Alibaba alumni now looking to make their mark in the AI industry.

Zhao Ji works on his AI startup from his home in Hangzhou.

On a recent Friday, Zhao and two of his employees huddled around a table at his two-story apartment in a gated community near Alibaba’s headquarters. Zhao’s 8-year-old son’s toys were scattered on the floor. A signed poster of Buzz Aldrin on the moon and a framed Life magazine cover of Abraham Lincoln on Broadway adorned the walls. A biography of Walmart founder Sam Walton sat on the table.

They are building an AI agent to help businesses generate video and audio content, with the ability to clone users’ voice and likeness. Zhao launched the startup, AlphaFin, last year.

Last October, Zhao was invited to speak about AI at an expo hosted by the Hangzhou government. After his presentation, local officials approached him to add him on WeChat, China’s do-everything app, and invited him to their districts. He didn’t yet have a working product.

“They really value tech and innovation,” Zhao said.

Known for its picturesque West Lake, a source of inspiration for poets and painters throughout Chinese history, Hangzhou has long been a center for trade, thriving far from China’s political centers. Family workshops in Zhejiang province were among the first to jump into the private sector when the Chinese economy opened up in the early 1980s. Then Alibaba helped lend Hangzhou its tech-forward sheen.

Alibaba has played a big part in Hangzhou’s evolution into a tech hub.

A replica of the place where Jack Ma started Alibaba is on display at the company’s visitor center.

Drawing inspiration from Silicon Valley, the Hangzhou government built what it calls an innovation corridor in the city’s west, near Alibaba’s campus, where startups make AI models, robotics, brain-computer interfaces and AI-assisted software. Hangzhou is known for its “Six Little Dragons,” an informal cohort of six leading AI-related tech companies in the city that includes DeepSeek.

Hangzhou earlier this year said it approved two innovation-focused funds totaling more than $28 billion. Zhejiang ranks as the top province for science and technology investment: more than $12 billion in 2024.

Alibaba is also a major funder for highflying AI startups, in addition to its own AI business, which includes chips and models. The company has said it plans to invest more than $52 billion in AI and cloud infrastructure over the next three years.

Husband and wife Wei Dabao and Wu Xiaobao have had a front-row seat to the rapid development in Hangzhou. They own a bookstore near Alibaba’s campus where tech workers browse translated books and meet for reading events. When the shop opened five years ago, it was surrounded by construction sites. Now, the area is full of shiny buildings.

Wei said Hangzhou is a “gathering place” for tech talent, thanks to Alibaba. Most people in town have either worked at Alibaba or have friends who are current or former employees.

“Everyone is connected, more or less,” he said.

The northern suburb of Liangzhu has become famous in China’s AI community for events that bring tech founders and aspirants together. Many residents call themselves “villagers.” AI entrepreneurs present ideas and mingle in a shaded backyard at a monthly gathering called “Demo Day.” Independent programmers work on projects side by side at a local coffee shop during weekly meetups known as “Crazy Thursday.”

Then there is Hangzhou’s premier research university, Zhejiang University, which counts many entrepreneurs among its alumni, including DeepSeek founder Liang Wenfeng. In the early 2000s, Zhejiang started aspiring to become a kind of Stanford University for China.

“The joke was ‘How to build a Silicon Valley? Build a world-class university and wait 30 to 50 years,’” said Duncan Clark, author of a book about Alibaba and a former visiting scholar at a Stanford entrepreneurship program. Zhejiang University, he said, “did it faster.”

In 2017, the school, the provincial government and Alibaba together set up an AI lab. The same year, Zhu Qiuguo, an engineering professor at Zhejiang, founded Deep Robotics, one of Hangzhou’s “Six Little Dragons.”

Hangzhou is known for its West Lake.

Wei Dabao, sitting, and Wu Xiaobao own a bookstore near the Alibaba campus and have seen the area transform.

Hangzhou is also home to Westlake University, a new research institution supported by both private and public funding that aims to rival the California Institute of Technology. It has attracted many high-profile professors who have returned to China from American universities, as the U.S. cuts academic funding and heightens scrutiny of Chinese scientists. AI researcher Guo-Jun Qi and data scientist She Yiyuan are among Westlake’s newest hires from the U.S.

China’s research universities still have some catching up to do when it comes to invention. Nine of the top 10 institutions for international patent applications from academia are American, while the highest-ranked Chinese university is 29th, according to 2021-2024 data from the German Economic Institute.

Industry players and analysts also caution that China’s attempts to prop up specific industries have had mixed success because of potential resource misallocation or excessive political attention or restrictions. The scars of Beijing’s crackdown starting in 2020 on China’s tech companies are still fresh.

“The state has a deadening hand that just as often crushes entrepreneurship as it does to promote it,” said Dan Wang, a research fellow at Stanford’s Hoover History Lab.

For now, though, there are plenty of people eager to ride the AI wave.

Besides Hangzhou, Beijing and Shanghai, Guangdong province’s Shenzhen—home to tech giants such as WeChat parent Tencent and Apple rival Huawei—is another AI hub.

Liu Pei heard about Hangzhou’s AI scene and moved to the city from Beijing in May to found an AI media startup called White Whale Lab.

“When you come to Hangzhou, the people you meet make you feel really happy,” she said. “They’re really eager to seize the opportunities in AI.”

The recently established Westlake University aims to attract talent to Hangzhou.

Alibaba is a major funder for AI startups.

Zhao Yueling contributed to this article.

Write to Shen Lu at shen.lu@wsj.com and Hannah Miao at hannah.miao@wsj.com

16. Treaty allies are developing fallback options in case the US disengages from the region, an analyst said

Yep.

Home Editorial & Opinion

Sun, Sep 14, 2025 page7

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2025/09/14/2003843750?utm

Treaty allies are developing fallback options in case the US disengages from the region, an analyst said

By Chris Megerian, Didi Tang and Kim Tong-hyung / AP, WASHINGTON
US President Donald Trump’s aggressive trade and immigration policies are undermining relationships that have been cornerstones of US foreign policy to counter China’s growing influence, eroding years of diplomatic investments spanning administrations.
The latest fracture came on Friday, when hundreds of South Korean workers were detained at a Hyundai manufacturing plant in Georgia, a facility that had been a showcase for closer economic ties between the two countries. Some of the workers, who were being investigated for visa issues, were shackled.
Administration officials insist that trade will not be impacted, but foreign-policy analysts have watched deteriorating relationships with alarm. Instead of following the conventional wisdom of building coalitions as a bulwark against China, Trump has reveled in turning the screws on friend and foe alike.
Illustration: Louise Ting
“Treaty allies are developing fallback options if the United States disengages from the region,” said Zack Cooper, a senior fellow at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, where he studies US strategy in Asia. “Some partners are hedging by cultivating better relationships with China.”
Ties with India have also cooled despite a previously cordial friendship between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Trump, a Republican, imposed tariffs on India as punishment for buying Russian oil during the war in Ukraine and he has grown closer with Pakistan, a bordering rival.
Modi was recently photographed with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) during a security summit in Tianjin, China, prompting a social media jab from Trump.
“Looks like we’ve lost India and Russia to deepest, darkest, China,” he wrote. “May they have a long and prosperous future together!”
It is possible that recent spats could blow over. Trump called Modi “my very good friend” when announcing trade talks between the two countries would continue in a Truth Social post.
“I feel certain that there will be no difficulty in coming to a successful conclusion for both of our Great Countries,” he wrote.
Modi responded by calling the two countries “close friends and natural partners” and said he was “confident that our trade negotiations will pave the way for unlocking the limitless potential of the India-US partnership.”
However, concerns among Asian nations might not be temporary, especially if there is a sense that Trump’s skeptical view of foreign engagement will linger after he is no longer in office.
“Most countries in the region believe that Washington’s protectionist policies, unilateral tendencies and greater skepticism of overseas engagement will outlast the Trump administration,” Cooper said.
In a statement, the Chinese embassy in Washington said that the country never engages “in zero-sum games or geopolitical confrontations where one wins and the other loses,” but “is committed to maintaining world peace, stability and development, sharing development opportunities with countries around the world.”
Trump has occasionally talked tough toward China, and he risked a trade war between the world’s first and second-largest economies by announcing steep tariffs.
However, both sides have stepped back from that confrontation and Trump has been focused on seeking a summit with Xi.
After a meeting between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) over the summer, the US Department of State said that both sides “agreed to explore areas of potential cooperation, while seeking to manage differences.”
The tension between Trump and Modi has been particularly surprising given their closeness during Trump’s first term.
However, Modi has declined to indulge Trump’s attempt to claim credit for brokering a recent ceasefire between India and Pakistan, although Pakistan has nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize that he covets.
In addition, India has been caught in the crossfire of Trump’s efforts to resolve the Russian invasion of Ukraine. To put indirect pressure on Moscow, Trump increased tariffs on India for buying Russian oil during the war.
Eric Garcetti, who served as US ambassador to India under former US president Joe Biden, said that years of diplomacy would not be reversed, but said “a lot of damage can be done,” and he warned that it would be a “very lonely world” if India and US are not on the same page.
“This is one of the most critical relationships for our success and for the world,” he said.
Rick Rossow, a senior adviser focused on India and emerging Asia economics at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that the US-India relationship is at “a low point,” but “such moments always feel like they are more significant than they actually are.”
However, tensions could jeopardize a planned visit by Trump to India to attend a summit that would also include leaders from Japan and Australia. The strategic grouping, known as the Quad, is viewed as a mechanism to counter Beijing’s military and political influences in the region.
The raid at the Hyundai facility stands out as a highly public display of the Trump administration’s willingness to enforce its aggressive immigration policy, even if it also comes at an economic cost, sparking anger and a sense of betrayal in South Korea, less than two weeks after a White House meeting between Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae-myung.
“Damage has already been done as anti-American sentiment is clearly on the rise,” said Bong Youngshik, a professor at Seoul’s Yonsei University, citing public shock in South Korea over the detentions and US authorities releasing video showing the workers being chained and taken away.
Trump has pushed Seoul to expand US industrial investments, but without a visa system to support enough skilled workers to establish new manufacturing facilities.
“There’s a growing perception among South Koreans that the United States is engaging in bullying behavior, not only about this case but also with their aggressive push to increase tariffs,” Bong said. “There’s a widespread feeling that it is taking things too far.”
The issue would remain a “ticking time bomb” and “it will become extremely difficult for South Korean companies to send their employees to the United States,” Bong said.

17. Finland planning attack on Russia, claims Dmitry Medvedev

Who believes this kind of disinformation? Only Putin supporters.

Finland planning attack on Russia, claims Dmitry Medvedev

The former Russian president and Putin ally, threatened Finnish statehood in an echo of Putin’s aggressive sentiment towards Ukraine

https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/finland-attack-russia-medvedev-putin-qjz22kf8q

Marc Bennetts

Tuesday September 09 2025, 5.00pm BST, The Times

Finnish soldiers complete a drill along their border with fellow Nato member Norway. The country also shares an 830-mile border with Russia

JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

A senior security official in Moscow has accused Finland of laying the ground for an attack on Russia by Nato, in comments that echo President Putin’s justifications for the invasion of Ukraine.

Dmitry Medvedev, the former president and prime minister who is now the deputy head of Russia’s national security council, issued his warning after a visit to Russia’s 830-mile border with Finland.

“After joining Nato, under the guise of defence measures, Helsinki is pursuing a confrontational course in preparation for war with Russia, apparently preparing a springboard for an attack on us,” Medvedev wrote in an article that was published by Tass, a Russian state news agency.

Dmitry Medvedev said Finland’s Nato participation was “evidence” of its intention to attack Russia

SPUTNIK/ALEXEI MAISHEV/REUTERS

Finland became a member of Nato in 2023 after decades of neutrality after the Second World War, when it sided with Nazi Germany in an effort to recapture land that had been seized by the Soviet Union.

Medvedev cited Finland’s participation in recent Nato military exercises as “evidence” of Helsinki’s intentions and warned that confrontation with Russia “could lead to the collapse of Finnish statehood forever.”

He also slammed Nato’s opening of a military command centre in the Finnish city of Mikkeli, about 150 miles from St Petersburg.

Although Medvedev is notorious for his hardline and frequently apocalyptic rhetoric, this is the first time a senior Russian official has made such allegations against a specific Nato member state since Putin sent tanks into Ukraine in 2022.

His comments came after satellite images showed that Russia has been building new military bases close to the Finnish border. Both Russia and Finland are strengthening their border defences. Helsinki has accused Moscow of directing migrants towards Finland in a “hybrid operation”.

Putin alleged in the build-up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that the former Soviet republic could become an “advanced staging ground” for an attack by Nato on Russia, if it was allowed to join the western military alliance.

The Kremlin did not object to Finland joining Nato two years ago, but threatened that Russia would respond if the western alliance deployed troops and military infrastructure to the Nordic state. Neighbouring Sweden joined Nato in 2024.

Finnish soldiers drive Leopard tanks in an exchange of fire with “enemy troops” during a Nato training exercise

LEON NEAL/GETTY IMAGES

Warnings by western officials of a potential war with Russia by the end of the decade have been portrayed in Moscow as proof that Nato member states in Europe are actively seeking a conflict.

Medvedev said in July that Russia should be prepared to carry out “preventive strikes” against western countries. Russia has almost doubled military spending to more than 6 per cent of its GDP since the start of the war in Ukraine.

• Russia will strike West if US rockets hit us, says Putin ally

Medvedev also echoed Putin’s false claims that Ukraine was a Nazi state, by suggesting that the use of a swastika symbol on Finnish air force flags was evidence that Helsinki had not fully shaken off its Nazi past.

The swastika was adopted by Finland’s air force in 1918, years before the emergence of the Nazis, when it was seen globally as a good luck symbol. A Finnish official said last month that the symbol would no longer be used, however, as it had led to “awkward situations” at international events.

• Finland stays strong in face of Russia threat: ‘We are talking about war’

Last year, an outdoor exhibition that was staged by a Kremlin-backed historical society in Moscow detailed what it called “episodes of Russophobia” in Finland. It also said that the Helsinki’s ascension to Nato “undermined international security and increased the danger of a global war”.

Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, has spoken regularly to President Trump in recent months as European countries try to persuade the US leader to take a harder line on Moscow.

European leaders with President Trump in August

ALEXANDER DRAGO/REUTERS

“We try to explain that Putin cannot be trusted,” Stubb said during a meeting on Tuesday in Helsinki with Karol Nawrocki, the new Polish president.

Amid tensions, Russia and its ally Belarus will hold military drills from September 12-16, close to the Polish and Lithuanian borders. The drills have been held every four years since 1999 but this is the first time they have been staged since 2022.

They will involve drills on the use of nuclear weapons, as well as Russia’s hypersonic Oreshnik missile, Belarus said.

18. Trump Military Attack on Venezuelan Boat Intends To Redefine War | Opinion

Whoever in the Administration is working on redefining war may want to consult with Clausewitz. (note my attempt at sarcasm).

This is a brutal critique.

Trump Military Attack on Venezuelan Boat Intends To Redefine War | Opinion

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-military-attack-venezuelan-boat-intends-redefine-war-opinion-2127827

Published Sep 12, 2025 at 11:23 AM EDT

01:07

JB Pritzker Rejects Trump's Plan Of Federal Intervention In Chicago

By Mark Weisbrot

Co-Director, Center for Economic and Policy Research

Newsweek Is A Trust Project Member

opinion

Translate

President Donald Trump is famously difficult to predict. Many of his most disruptive measures begin as distractions, then fade away and come back as he moves to create other breaking news. The current epidemic of tariffs seemed to start out this way, but then consolidated and endured to the point of causing real economic damage.

But this latest international episode—with the U.S. military killing 11 people in a boat from Venezuela—seems particularly threatening because it involves war.

The strike on the Venezuelan boat represents a new kind of war, in which our government claims the right to summarily execute civilians from the air in what legal experts, including from the military, consider illegal killings.

Referring to the alleged drug trafficking boat, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said "Instead of interdicting it, on the president's orders, we blew it up. And it will happen again." Trump also boasted after the attack: "When they watch that tape, they're going to say, 'Let's not do this.'"

It seems like this intimidation could be one of the main points of this operation: to show the world that the United States can do this, to whomever they want, whenever they want. Even when there is no actual war and the people assassinated—who are still unknown—pose no imminent threat to other people's lives.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media before boarding Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington D.C., on September 11, 2025. Mehmet Eser / Middle East Images via AFP/Getty Images

The record shows that the Trump administration has been preparing for this transformation of war—redefining military attacks on certain civilians as legitimate, defensive actions—since Trump took office and even before. In January, Trump issued an executive order mandating that "certain international cartels" and "other organizations" be designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Since then, they have continually moved toward the policy—illegal under U.S. and international law and treaties—of treating alleged drug-trafficking suspects as enemy combatants.

This abandonment of the rule of law, and the removal of restrictions on the use of force and violence outside the U.S., has real implications for Americans at home.

It is possible that Trump could actually cause a war, given the military actions he has been threatening for months—including attacks on Mexican territory. Rubio and Secretary of State Pete Hegseth have also indicated that Rubio's long-sought goal of regime change in Venezuela is still on the agenda.

A war, for instance in Venezuela, could be used to justify more repression at home. Trump has already tried to do just that, invoking a fictional "invasion" of the U.S. by a South American gang to deploy the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

In violation of the U.S. Constitution and decades of court decisions, Trump has sent federal troops into Los Angeles and Washington D.C.—against the wishes of the vast majority of residents as well as state and local authorities. This includes the state of California, which legally and historically has had the right to make this decision.

A federal magistrate judge in D.C. reviewing the operation there said it had touched off a "constitutional crisis" and warned that "the rule of law is being flushed down the toilet," as reported by the Washington Post.

Trump's most recent threats to Chicago sound frighteningly unhinged. "Chicago is about to find out why it's called the Department of WAR," he said, alluding to his executive order rebranding the Defense Department under its former name, the Department of War. He added references to the graphically violent Vietnam War movie Apocalypse Now, for effect.

Thousands of people took to the streets in protest in Washington D.C. and Chicago this past weekend. Governors Gavin Newsom of California and J.B. Pritzker of Illinois have condemned Trump's actions and threats, and taken steps to resist them, including legal action.

Members of Congress have also condemned the military strike on the boat, including Reps. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), "Chuy" Garcia (D-Ill.), and Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.). The top Democrats on the House Armed Services and Intelligence Committees both questioned the "legality and constitutionality" of the attack.

In response to the U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean prior to the strike, and Trump administration threats directed at Venezuela, Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Tex.) proposed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would prohibit the U.S. from using military force in, or against, Venezuela without Congressional authorization. The amendment has been cosponsored by eight other House members so far, including Reps. Joaquin Castro (D-Tex.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), and Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.).

All of this pushback—from the public as well as political leaders—needs to get stronger, before it's too late, and Trump's new forms of warfare abroad and at home become even more normalized.

Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of "Failed: What the 'Experts' Got Wrong About the Global Economy" (Oxford University Press).

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

19. America’s choice after the assassination of Charlie Kirk

The best legacy and the only way to honor the late young Mr. Kirk is for Americans to unite and call an end to political violence, return to civil disagreement, remember that friction and compromise are the fundamental nature of our political system, and end the hatred of the "other." And most important to stop letting "exaggerated grievances communicated well" maniuplate our emotions and prevent our critical thinking. It is our choice. It is our choice.

America’s choice after the assassination of Charlie Kirk

Political violence could become routine. But it doesn’t have to

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/09/12/americas-choice-after-the-assassination-of-charlie-kirk?giftId=818ca38c-8d1c-427a-8445-40be83e88890&utm_campaign=gifted_article

Photograph: AP

Sep 12th 2025

5 min read

ive years before Charlie Kirk was born, a man walked into a school in Stockton, California, and opened fire, killing five children. His name is now forgotten—they always are. He had carved abstract nouns into the gun’s stock—“freedom”, “victory”—and, though he was a white man who grew up in northern California, he seemed to sympathise with Hizbullah and Palestinian liberation. He had “death to the Great Satin” written on his jacket. He was pathetic, probably mentally ill, a nightmarish curiosity.

By the time Mr Kirk was in middle school, shootings like this were, if not common, then no longer surprising. The shooter in Stockton had imitators in the mid-1990s. Then came the school shooting at Columbine High School, in Colorado, in 1999. After that, school shootings seemed to become contagious. The combination of mental illness and an inability to pass gun laws made them seem like acts of nature, like a twister or a flood, something to face with stoicism and resolve rather than something that could be eradicated. After Mr Kirk’s assassination, it is fair to ask whether the same is becoming true of political murder in America.

In June Melissa Hortman, a state representative from Minnesota, was murdered. In April someone tried to kill Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, by setting his house on fire. In December Brian Thompson, the chief executive of United Healthcare, was murdered in New York. Donald Trump was shot while he was campaigning. Some of the people who broke into Congress on January 6th 2021 wanted to hang the speaker of the House and the vice-president. Steve Scalise, the current House majority leader, was shot in 2017. Gabby Giffords, a congresswoman from Arizona, was shot in 2011.

America has been through spikes of political violence before, at the end of the 19th century and the turn of the 20th, and then again starting in the 1960s. After Bobby Kennedy’s murder in 1968, which followed his brother’s assassination and that of Martin Luther King, the British journalist Alastair Cooke said that America seemed to be experiencing “a resurgence of its frontier traditions in a later time”. There were two attempts on Gerald Ford’s life in September 1975. Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981. From the early sixties to the early eighties it seemed like the shootings would never stop.

And then they did, either because presidential security became so tight, or because crazy, violent, lonely men changed their targets and methods. In the 1990s federal law-enforcement agencies worried most about home-grown extremists, like Timothy McVeigh, who blew up a federal building in 1995 in Oklahoma City, killing more than 150 people. After 9/11 the threat changed again. And then that waned too.

Whether Mr Kirk’s murder is a turning point is unknowable, but it feels that way. One possible future is that even political activists will now need extraordinary levels of security protection. Politicians already know their jobs come with death threats and get on with their work anyway. But people will surely be put off serving their country or taking a full part in their democracy. Even in that new, impoverished normal, political life will go on—just as parents continued to send their children to school after Columbine.

There is an even darker scenario, where the death of a close political ally of the president becomes the occasion for a permanent political emergency. In this future liberties would be exchanged for order. Changes of government would become much more than the metronomic swing in and out of office. Under such a system, the consequences of losing power would be full of dark threats to livelihoods and liberty. The idea that your political opponents are your mortal enemies, so poisonous to politics as normal, would become a reality.

And then there is a third possibility: that this moment too passes. This will not happen on its own. Mr Kirk may not have been an elected official, but he was an important political figure. He connected young conservatives to politics. Part of his skill as a communicator was to make mainstream conservative points in ways that caught people’s attention. He was also inflammatory and offensive.

“Jewish donors”, he once said, “have been the number one funding mechanism of radical, open border, neoliberal, quasi-Marxist policies, cultural institutions, and non-profits.” He said there should be a “Nuremburg-style trial” for doctors who assist children to transition to a new gender. He claimed that “prowling blacks” went around America “for fun to go target white people”. He also said wiser things: “when people stop talking, that’s when you get violence. That’s when civil war happens, because you start to think the other side is so evil, and they lose their humanity.”

Just now, in the days after his death, it is important for his opponents not to lose their humanity and to recognise that Mr Kirk was killed while doing politics: talking about ideas, trying to bolster his allies and, most important of all, trying to persuade his opponents.

Polling shows that Americans are too ready to believe that their opponents are extremists who condone violence, whereas they themselves are peaceful and reasonable. President Trump, regrettably, reinforced this view on the right in the hours after Mr Kirk’s death by decrying only rhetoric on the left. J.B. Pritzker, the governor of Illinois and a presidential hopeful, added to the harm. In the same breath as he lamented Mr Kirk’s murder, he accused Mr Trump of fomenting violence.

Democracy is a mechanism for managing conflict. To make it work requires not just empathy but self-awareness. Spreading conspiracies about stolen elections and calling opponents radical extremists erodes it. So does clipping only Mr Kirk’s worst bits from thousands of hours of podcasting and calling him a fascist. It’s often said Americans need to listen more closely to their opponents, and it’s true. They also need to do a better job of hearing what they themselves are saying.

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