Quotes of the Day:
"I attribute my success to this — I never gave or took any excuse." - Florence Nightingale
"The Bill of Rights is the United States. The United States is the Bill of Rights. Compromise the Bill of Rights and you dissolve the very foundation upon which the Union stands… Nowhere in the Bill of Rights are the words ‘unless inconvenient’ to be found."
- A. E. Samaan, historian
"If we look to the answer as to why for so many years we achieved so much, prospered as no other people on earth, it was because here in this land we unleashed the energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has ever been done before. Freedom and the dignity of the individual have been more available and assured here than in any other place on earth."
-Ronald Reagan, 1981
1. Opinion | The Navy SEALs, a Christmas story
2. “NUTS!” — MCAULIFFE’S 1944 CHRISTMAS LETTER
3. The leader who's standing up to China
4. If the U.S. Rolls Back Iran Sanctions, Business Beware
5. U.S. Considers Warning Ukraine of a Russian Invasion in Real-Time
6. Housing company that defrauded military ordered to pay $65 million
7. What happens when US rejects Putin’s ultimatum?
8. Duterte weaponizes Filipino custom in the Covid era
9. Court frees Pinoy jailed for killing US Colonel James Rowe in 1989
10. Visualizing the $94 Trillion World Economy in One Chart
11. ISIS shares chilling Christmas poster showing decapitated Santa
12. China’s Soft-Power Advantage in Africa
13. Japan, US draft operation plan for Taiwan contingency: sources
14. Biden signs historic bill punishing China for Uyghur genocide
15. White House: Russia Stepping Up Disinformation In Possible Invasion Prelude
16. Trump pushes back on Candace Owens: 'People aren't dying when they take the vaccine'
1. Opinion | The Navy SEALs, a Christmas story
Respect for the SEALs and USSOCOM efforts.
We should all reflect on this. It is a lesson for more than the SEALs and the SOF community but the military writ large.
Excerpt:
Clarke told me this week that intense combat such as the kind his Special Forces experienced over the past 20 years brings two kinds of dangers: The first, obviously, is being killed or wounded by the enemy. But the second is internal: “the risk of moral injury in going outside the rules of conduct.”
Opinion | The Navy SEALs, a Christmas story
The Washington Post · by David IgnatiusColumnist Yesterday at 5:52 p.m. EST · December 23, 2021
It might seem like a stretch to view the Navy SEALs, among the most fearsome warriors on the planet, as a Christmas story of humility and renewal, but let me explain.
Two years ago, the SEALs were near rock bottom. Almost two decades of vicious war in Iraq and Afghanistan had exhausted and degraded these elite fighters. SEALs were carrying hatchets into battle. Some bragged of “canoeing” their victims by splitting their heads open with a bullet. Too many were behaving like pirates rather than disciplined warriors.
“We have a problem,” Rear Adm. Collin Green, the SEALs commander, announced in July 2019. The most obvious example was Special Operations Chief Eddie Gallagher, who had been convicted that month by a military court for posing with a trophy photo of a dead Islamic State prisoner in Iraq.
The problem was much deeper than that. Gallagher was a symbol of a force that had become too glamorous for its own good. America wanted heroes after 9/11, and the SEALs fit the bill. Gallagher was a walking poster boy: He was super-fit, fearless, churchgoing, movie-star handsome and ready to do anything and go anywhere to destroy America’s enemies.
But Gallagher lost his way, senior Navy officers told me. He became a political figure in an organization that required discipline and professionalism. When a Navy review board was considering whether to strip Gallagher of his prized Trident pin after his conviction, President Donald Trump ordered it to stand down. Young SEALs who had reported Gallagher’s improper actions were “ostracized,” commanders told me.
“We were soft on accountability,” a senior Navy commander recalled this week. “Our junior officers were more cheerleaders than naval officers. … I think we needed to look at ourselves.” Green moved on to Special Operations Command (SOCOM), where he is now deputy commander and was promoted last week to vice admiral.
The redemption story began two years ago, in the aftermath of the Gallagher fiasco. Army Gen. Richard Clarke, head of SOCOM, ordered a comprehensive review of the “culture and ethics” of all special forces, including the SEALs. Clarke summarized the findings in January 2020: Nearly two decades of war had “imbalanced” the elite combat forces and “set conditions favorable for inappropriate behavior.”
“Trust is our currency,” but recent discipline issues had “jeopardized that trust,” Clarke wrote in a letter to service members.
Then something amazing happened. The SEALs regrouped to begin a process of healing and rebuilding. A new commander, Rear Adm. H. Wyman Howard III, opted for “a complete restart,” he told me. He cut the operational side of the organization nearly in half, from 72 platoons to 48. He changed recruitment, training, assessment and promotion procedures. He actually borrowed some ideas from the Army and Marines!
Howard chose as his closest aide Lt. Cmdr. Forrest Crowell, a SEAL who had been warning that something was wrong. Back in 2015, Crowell had written a thesis for the Naval Postgraduate School titled “SEALs Gone Wild: Publicity, Fame and the Loss of the Quiet Professional.” Howard began to rebuild a force that, as he put it to me, “had over-rotated to counterterrorism” and “got too famous.”
As the SEALs reinvented themselves, they focused on new missions for a world where counterterrorism is no longer the overriding priority. Facing peer competitors such as China and Russia, the SEALs now conduct intelligence-gathering and other secret missions that are, if anything, more dangerous than sniping at Islamic State fighters, as Gallagher’s generation did.
To remind today’s SEALs about the essence of their mission, Howard gives them a copy of the Constitution and a letter he wrote with Force Master Chief Bill King, his top enlisted man. The letter is worth a careful read in this season of reflection.
The SEAL commander reminds his warriors that they are “a team humble in triumph and fully accountable in failure. Our pride is a quiet one — firmly anchored in humility, a humility sharpened through combat losses, mission failures, and imperfection. … We must all guard against activities that provide opportunities to politicize Naval Special Warfare.”
Clarke told me this week that intense combat such as the kind his Special Forces experienced over the past 20 years brings two kinds of dangers: The first, obviously, is being killed or wounded by the enemy. But the second is internal: “the risk of moral injury in going outside the rules of conduct.”
The rebirth of the SEALs carries an important message for the United States in this testing time for our national institutions: The efforts by Gallagher and Trump to write their own rules failed. Good leaders did the right things. Real toughness, the kind that wins battles but never boasts, ended up winning. As the SEAL motto puts it: “The deed is all — not the glory.”
The Washington Post · by David IgnatiusColumnist Yesterday at 5:52 p.m. EST · December 23, 2021
2. “NUTS!” — MCAULIFFE’S 1944 CHRISTMAS LETTER
Think of what these great Americans endured.
“NUTS!” — MCAULIFFE’S 1944 CHRISTMAS LETTER
DECEMBER 24, 2021
MERRY CHRISTMAS
HEADQUARTERS 101ST AIRBORNE DIVISION
Office of the Division Commander
24 December 1944
What’s Merry about all this, you ask? We’re fighting — it’s cold, we aren’t home. All true but what has the proud Eagle Division accomplished with its worthy comrades the 10th Armored Division, the 705th Tank Destroyer Battalion and all the rest? Just this: We have stopped cold everything that has been thrown at us from the North, East, South and West. We have identifications from four German Panzer Divisions, two German Infantry Divisions and one German Parachute Division. These units, spearheading the last desperate German lunge, were headed straight west for key points when the Eagle Division was hurriedly ordered to stem the advance. How effectively this was done will be written in history; not alone in our Division’s glorious history but in World history. The Germans actually did surround us, their radios blared our doom. Their Commander demanded our surrender in the following imprudent arrogance:
December 22nd 1944
“To the U. S. A. Commander of the encircled town of Bastogne.
The fortune of war is changing. This time the U. S. A. forces in and near Bastogne have been encircled by strong German armored units. More German armored units have crossed the river Ourthe near Ortheuville, have taken Marche and reached St. Hubert by passing through Hompres-Sibret-Tillet. Libramont is in German hands.
There is only one possibility to save the encircled U. S. A. Troops from total annihilation: that is the honorable surrender of the encircled town. In order to think it over a term of two hours will be granted beginning with the presentation of this note.
If this proposal should be rejected the German Artillery Corps and six heavy A. A. Battalions are ready to annihilate the U. S. A. Troops in and near Bastogne. The order for firing will be given immediately after this two hour’s term.
All the serious civilian losses caused by this Artillery fire would not correspond with the well known American humanity.
The German Commander”
The German Commander received the following reply:
22 December 1944
“To the German Commander:
N U T S !
The American Commander”
Allied Troops are counterattacking in force. We continue to hold Bastogne. By holding Bastogne we assure the success of the Allied Armies. We know that our Division Commander, General Taylor, will say: “Well Done!”
We are giving our country and our loved ones at home a worthy Christmas present and being privileged to take part in this gallant feat of arms are truly making for ourselves a Merry Christmas.
/s/ A. C. McAULIFFE
/t/ McAULIFFE
Commanding.
3.The leader who's standing up to China
Fascinating story.
Nature or nurture? Why are Tsai and Xi so different?
Excerpts:
Just as they have divergent views on the future of Taiwan, Tsai and Xi, born just a few years apart, could not be more different. Tsai, fluent in English and educated at elite Western institutions, uses social media to connect with supporters. Xi, son of a famous revolutionary and a product of China’s vast party bureaucracy, appears only at tightly scripted events.
The leader who's standing up to China
Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen is wielding a mixture of soft and hard power as she seeks to fend off a more assertive China under President Xi Jinping. Associates tell the story of her journey from academia to the thick of the U.S.-China cold war.
By MARI SAITO, YIMOU LEE and DAVID LAGUE
Filed: December 24, 2021, 8 a.m. GMT
Reuters · by not required here · December 24, 2021
Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen is wielding a mixture of soft and hard power as she seeks to fend off a more assertive China under President Xi Jinping. Associates tell the story of her journey from academia to the thick of the U.S.-China cold war.
Filed: December 24, 2021, 8 a.m. GMT
In January 2020, on the eve of her re-election victory, Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen stood before a crowd of supporters and delivered a stark warning about China: Beware.
It was a major departure from speeches earlier in her career. Tsai had a reputation for being wooden on the stump. This time was different.
Tsai campaigned passionately in the contest, exploiting heightened fears about life under Chinese rule by zeroing in on the pro-democracy protests that shook Hong Kong in 2019. Beijing was pressuring Taiwan to accept the same formula of limited autonomy - “one country, two systems” - it had pledged for Hong Kong. Tsai declared that China was reneging in Hong Kong and Taiwan must not give in.
“With their lives, blood and tears, the young people in Hong Kong have demonstrated for us that one country, two systems is not feasible,” Tsai said. Supporters roared in approval. Some waved the black-and-white flags carried by pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong. “Tomorrow, we will let everyone see that Taiwan can safeguard this fortress of democracy for the world.”
It was the culmination of a remarkable transformation for Tsai. A close adviser said she had lost her first presidential run, in 2012, in part because she shied away from talking about the standoff with China, which views Taiwan as its own. She won her second term by a landslide, capitalizing on Taiwan’s fast-growing national identity, after years spent learning from earlier setbacks.
With Tsai now well into her second term, fears in Taiwan about an increasingly belligerent China dominate her presidency. Tsai leads an island of 23.5 million people caught in the middle of a battle for dominance between the United States and a more assertive China under President Xi Jinping. Xi, who sees unification with Taiwan as a fundamental requirement to restoring China to its traditional status as a great power, has repeatedly threatened to bring the island to heel, if necessary by force.
Just as they have divergent views on the future of Taiwan, Tsai and Xi, born just a few years apart, could not be more different. Tsai, fluent in English and educated at elite Western institutions, uses social media to connect with supporters. Xi, son of a famous revolutionary and a product of China’s vast party bureaucracy, appears only at tightly scripted events.
Under Tsai, Taiwan has enjoyed a surge of international backing, with key U.S. allies openly acknowledging the island’s strategic importance. Tsai has hosted several high-level U.S. officials to the island in recent years, while Taiwan retains broad support from American lawmakers, making the island one of the few areas where there is bipartisan agreement in Washington. The opposition KMT, however, says cross-strait relations have deteriorated during Tsai’s presidency.
Tsai declined to comment for this profile. The Chinese government didn’t respond to questions from Reuters.
This article traces pivotal moments in Tsai’s rise as a politician now playing a lead role in one of the world’s great geopolitical dramas. It draws on interviews with diplomats, advisers, activists and other long-time observers of Taiwan’s leader, as well as Tsai’s autobiography.
“This is Tsai Ing-wen, always proving herself in the quietest way.”Tsai Ing-wen
REUTERS/Ann Wang
Quiet Childhood
Born to middle-class parents in 1956, Tsai spends part of her childhood in a hilly suburb of Taipei, now popular with diplomats and wealthy families. In her autobiography, Tsai writes of her sheltered life as the youngest child, doted upon by her father, a car mechanic turned successful businessman, and her mother, who prepared her lunches well into her university years. Describing herself as reserved and “boring,” Tsai excels in school and enters the prestigious college of law at the National Taiwan University.
REUTERS/Ann Wang
Studies abroad
Tsai receives a master’s degree from Cornell University and a PhD from the London School of Economics, both in law, despite her own admission in her autobiography that she found the English language initially challenging. In her book, Tsai describes her academic success as the result of her quiet determination. “This is Tsai Ing-wen, always proving herself in the quietest way,” she says.
United Daily News
Introduction to politics
After returning from her studies abroad, Tsai is appointed to be the youngest ever professor at the well-regarded National Chengchi University. Her life before entering politics is unassuming. “A person who liked to stick close to the wall when walking down the street … who disliked attracting attention from others,” she writes about her years as an academic.
But through her involvement in Taiwan’s international trade negotiations from the 1980s to 2000, first as a translator and later as a key adviser, Tsai quickly learns that her natural demeanor is an advantage in diplomacy. Looking across the table at American trade negotiators, Tsai says she trained herself to remain calm, showing no expression and giving nothing away to her rivals. “This isn’t that hard for me, as I’m relatively introverted,” she says later in her autobiography. As a result of the negotiations, Taiwan joins the World Trade Organization in 2002 as the “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.”
“We did not oppose her bid to run, but she also didn’t ignite passion from supporters.”Yao Chia-wen, a senior adviser to President Tsai
REUTERS/Kenny Wu
A turning point
Appointed in 2000 to head the Mainland Affairs Council, the body charged with handling ties with China, Tsai is thrust into the thick of cross-strait negotiations. Trade links with China were severed after the nationalist Kuomintang (KMT) forces under Chiang Kai-shek lost to the Communists in the civil war in 1949 and retreated to Taiwan. Her efforts to reinstate trade ties face enormous pressure from domestic critics. The following year, trade, transportation and postal links, which eventually expand to be known as the “Three Links,” are re-opened between Taiwan’s outlying Kinmen and Matsu island groups and China’s Fujian province.
The agreement marks a turning point for Tsai, who had long worked as a non-partisan technocrat. In 2004 she formally joins the Democratic Progressive Party, which advocates for Taiwan’s national identity and protecting the island’s sovereignty. Four years later, she is tapped to chair the party. Yao Chia-wen, a senior adviser to the president who has known Tsai for decades, says she faced little competition for the chairmanship, as the party was in disarray after a series of bruising corruption scandals. “We did not oppose her bid to run, but she also didn’t ignite passion from supporters,” says Yao, who previously served as DPP chairman.
“She wasn’t bold enough to talk about Taiwan independence and Taiwan’s fight against China”Yao Chia-wen, senior adviser to Tsai
REUTERS/Shengfa Lin
Bitter defeat
In 2012, Tsai, the first woman to run for the presidency, loses to the incumbent President Ma Ying-jeou of the long-dominant KMT, which favors closer ties with China. In her campaign, Tsai focuses primarily on domestic policies and fails to communicate her position on Taiwan’s national status, putting off some pro-independence voters. “She didn’t explain it clearly enough,” Yao says.
A trip to the United States before the election doesn’t go as well as hoped. Yao says Tsai tells him she believes that American officials “did not have a very good impression of her.” Tsai uses her U.S. trip to convey that she is determined to maintain peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait but some officials in Washington express concerns her presidency could worsen relations with China.
REUTERS/Shengfa Lin
At her rain-soaked concession speech in New Taipei City, Tsai abandons her signature cool and calls on voters to not lose hope. “We must optimistically continue to work hard for this piece of land, Taiwan,” she says. Tsai ends her concession speech with a deep bow. Young supporters sob in the rain.
REUTERS/Toby Chang
Sunflower movement
Hundreds of thousands of Taiwanese flood the streets of Taipei to protest an unpopular trade pact with China in 2014. Protesters say the agreement was rushed through the island’s legislature and could leave Taiwan increasingly beholden to China’s Communist Party leaders. Protesters carry sunflowers, a symbol of hope, and hold massive rallies in Taipei. Hundreds occupy Taiwan’s legislature for weeks to protest the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement, which would have opened Taiwanese industries such as banking, healthcare and tourism to Chinese investment. They call for the resignation of President Ma of the KMT, whom they see as too close to China. The protests, dubbed the Sunflower Movement, expand into the largest display of anti-China sentiment in Taiwan in years.
REUTERS/Damir Sagolj
Presidency
Riding a wave of popular dissatisfaction with the KMT, in 2016 Tsai becomes the first woman to be elected president of Taiwan. Learning from her earlier, failed campaign, Tsai is outspoken on Taiwan’s national status. “In the past, she was not opposed to these claims, she just didn’t emphasize them,” says Yao, her adviser. With Tsai’s victory, the DPP takes control of the legislature for the first time in history. With a popular mandate for what Tsai calls a “new era” for Taiwan, she quickly pursues progressive policies. Tsai’s party passes pension reform and an ambitious plan to boost the island’s renewable energy target. Her government appoints Audrey Tang, a software developer who describes herself as a “conservative anarchist,” to be Taiwan’s minister overseeing the island’s digital transformation.
“It was a controversial issue within the DPP. If not for Tsai or (Premier) Su Tseng-chang, no one else could have achieved it”Jennifer Lu, a prominent activist behind the years-long push for marriage equality
REUTERS/Tyrone Siu
Equality and democracy
In May 2019, Taiwan becomes the first government in Asia to legalise same-sex marriage. Tsai’s push to pass the legislation is initially unpopular even within her own party. “It was a controversial issue within the DPP. If not for Tsai or (Premier) Su Tseng-chang, no one else could have achieved it,” says Jennifer Lu, a prominent activist behind the years-long push for marriage equality. Hundreds of couples marry the same day the law comes into effect. Under Tsai, Taiwan offers a radically different template for a modern Chinese-speaking society, one which Lu says the island’s leader uses to distinguish it further from Xi’s increasingly authoritarian vision for China. “We are different from China. You don’t need to waste time explaining that anymore,” Lu says. “I can’t think of any other politician who could have achieved this."
Retired U.S. Marine Corps Lieutenant General Wallace Gregson, who served as an assistant secretary of defense in President Barack Obama’s administration, attended Tsai’s 2016 inauguration with other American guests. He recalls an event where guests sat outside in the sun entertained with musical acts and stories that dealt with the inclusion of minorities in Taiwan’s society. He said there was an acknowledgement of past shortcomings. “I remember thinking there could not be a stronger contrast with the way the Chinese Communist Party looks at their people,” Gregson recalls. “Think Tibet, think Xinjiang,” he says. China denies any mistreatment of its minority peoples.
REUTERS/Mark Schiefelbein/Pool
Strained ties
Cross-strait relations sour. Following Tsai's victory, the Beijing-controlled Global Times warns that relations between China and Taiwan are entering a new era of uncertainty. China flies bomber patrols near Taiwan, pressures foreign firms to refer to Taiwan as part of China, and whittles away at the island’s diplomatic allies. Taiwan, which sits just 130 km (80 miles) east from China’s southeastern coast, endured colonization and decades of authoritarian rule before it began democratic reforms in the 1980s.
After Tsai’s election victory, Beijing becomes more vocal about unification. Speaking in the Great Hall of the People in central Beijing in January 2019, Xi calls for “peaceful reunification” but refuses to rule out the use of force. Tsai, on the other hand, says Taiwan is already an independent country, called the Republic of China, and vows to defend its freedom and democracy. Opinion polls show most Taiwanese do not want to unify with China and prefer closer ties with the United States.
Senior KMT lawmaker Johnny Chiang says to Reuters relations between Taiwan and China have “gone backwards” under Tsai’s watch. Diplomatically, politically “and in the Sino-U.S. relationship, the two sides are at war,” says Chiang, who formerly chaired the KMT and now sits on parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee. “This has not benefited Taiwan.”
REUTERS/Tyrone Siu
Hong Kong
In June 2019, more than a million people take to the streets of Hong Kong to protest the proposed introduction of a law that would clear the way for defendants to be tried in mainland China in courts controlled by the Communist Party. The peaceful protests escalate into clashes as the city’s police use force to quell the mass gatherings. Tsai’s government expresses support for protesters and promises to help relocate those escaping to the island. Tsai’s stance helps boost her popularity at home, which had begun to slide towards the end of her first term.
REUTERS/Tyrone Siu
“Hong Kong today, Taiwan tomorrow”
Months of anti-government protests in Hong Kong capture the sympathy of voters in Taiwan, who share fears of a political future dominated by the Chinese Communist Party. Former Hong Kong lawmaker Emily Lau Wai-hing, who first met Tsai when they were both students at the London School of Economics in the 1980s, attended Tsai’s final rally ahead of the 2020 election. Lau remembered Tsai to be “cool and quite aloof” during their earlier meetings and was surprised to see her transformation. “Of course all the young Hong Kong and Taiwanese people (in the crowd) were very, very excited,” Lau says. “Tsai really knew how to work that crowd.”
In January 2020, Tsai wins her second term, capturing 57.13% of the vote. A few months later, China passes a sweeping national security law in Hong Kong that punishes crimes related to subversion, secession, terrorism or colluding with foreign forces with up to life in prison. At least 100 young protesters and pro-democracy activists are soon arrested under the law. China says the law is a legitimate effort to shore up national security and it respects human rights.
“Spicy Taiwanese sister”A nickname that became popular after Tsai pushed back against Xi’s unification speech in 2019
Source: screenshot from official Facebook account of Tsai Ing-wen, via REUTERS
Popular appeal
In contrast to Xi, who is often seen standing alone at highly choreographed events, Tsai makes a point of embracing supporters on the streets and rarely turns down a request for a selfie. Xi’s private life is obscured behind tight security. Tsai, an animal lover, is often pictured holding her cats and dogs. She is not above sharing memes of her public image. During this year’s mid-Autumn festival, Tsai shares a cartoon drawing of herself eating mooncakes with white rabbits to her more than 900,000 followers on Instagram, calling on the Taiwanese people to observe COVID-19 protocols during the holiday season. Though Tsai can still come across as stiff in her public speeches, one Taiwan-based foreign official who knows her well says she is funny and charming in private.
Taiwan's Office of the President/Handout via REUTERS
Tsai is seen here comforting a family member of a soldier who died in a helicopter crash. She uses social media to thank foreign leaders, including U.S. President Joe Biden, for their support. In November, Tsai posts a video on Twitter thanking Enes Kanter Freedom, a professional basketball player, for his support of Taiwan. During her appearance on a TV cooking show, Tsai wears a blue apron and banters with the host while also talking about the optimistic outlook for Taiwan’s pork exports. Tsai laughs off the host’s reference to her as “spicy Taiwanese sister,” a nickname that became popular after she pushed back against Xi’s unification speech in 2019.
Tsai, often pictured in uniform and photographed next to soldiers, is leading a major military build-up.
Taiwan’s Office of the President/Handout via REUTERS
Military focus
Far removed from her early career as a quiet and bookish technocrat, Tsai dons a uniform and is routinely photographed with troops and the top brass at exercises and drills. She is bolstering the island's military in the face of a growing Chinese threat. With key foreign assistance, Tsai’s government is now building eight new submarines, the first of which they hope will be completed by 2025.
Yao, Tsai’s adviser, says she has dispelled old stereotypes about women not being qualified military commanders by frequently attending military events and rubbing shoulders with soldiers. Some strategists criticize Tsai’s administration for spending on big-ticket items like fighter jets and tanks rather than cheaper mobile anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles that they say could do more damage to a Chinese invasion force before it reaches Taiwan. Tsai now talks about the need for Taiwan to acquire these types of mobile weapons.
In September, Tsai’s government announced it would spend $9 billion over the next five years on missiles and war ships, in addition to the $17 billion it plans to spend next year on defense. Despite these efforts, Taiwan’s military is still dwarfed by China’s growing might, with Beijing pouring an estimated $252 billion into its military just in 2020, according to an April 2021 report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Tsai is pushing ahead with the defense buildup. For now, the decades-long impasse with China is holding, but it remains unclear how ready Taiwan is to meet the threat. “When it comes to our capacity, can we wage an arms race” with the Chinese, asks Chiang, of the opposition KMT. “It’s impossible.”
Taiwan’s Office of the President/Handout via REUTERS
Additional reporting by Ben Blanchard and Sarah Wu
T-DAY: The Battle for Taiwan
By Mari Saito, Yimou Lee and David Lague
Photo editing: Edgar Su and Simon Newman
Design: Catherine Tai
Edited by Janet McBride
- Follow Reuters Investigates
Reuters · by not required here · December 24, 2021
4. If the U.S. Rolls Back Iran Sanctions, Business Beware
Excerpts:
The 300-plus sanctioned entities and individuals that nonpolitical career experts at the Treasury Department have determined to be bad actors will still be terror-aiders and money launderers. The administration’s implicit and contradictory message to corporate risk managers, executives, and directors is this: If the U.S. suspends any terrorism sanctions on Iran, the private sector should be on notice that all firms receiving sanctions relief remain tied to terrorism and money laundering.
No responsible fiduciary would knowingly expose his company to such illicit activity. To do so could put legitimate businesses at odds with regulations governing anti-money laundering and countering financing of terrorism. Negative publicity, controversy levels, and risk scores would increase. The legal, financial, and reputational risk of doing business with known supporters of terrorism would be extraordinary—particularly if Republicans were to reverse Biden’s policy after taking control of Congress in 2022 or the White House in 2024.
Removal of terrorism sanctions on Iran would be a big mistake. But it would be an even bigger mistake for any firm to knowingly do business with terrorists and money launderers just because it became convenient for the Biden administration to temporarily remove these formal labels. Calling a grizzly bear a “teddy” does not make it any less of a killer.
If the U.S. Rolls Back Iran Sanctions, Business Beware
Barron's · by David Eisner and Richard Goldberg
Text size
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
EVELYN HOCKSTEIN/POOL/AFP/Getty Images
About the authors: David F. Eisner, formerly a Wall Street executive and corporate CEO, served as the assistant secretary for management at the U.S. Department of the Treasury in 2018-2021. Richard Goldberg, senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, served as the director for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction for the White House National Security Council in 2019-2020.
As indirect talks between the United States and Iran continue in Vienna, business leaders around the world are watching to see if President Joe Biden will lift U.S. sanctions on the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. If he does, multinational corporations should think twice before jumping into any deals.
Bipartisan support for terrorism sanctions against Iran goes back to 1984, when the United States first designated the Islamic Republic as a state sponsor of terrorism. Since then, Congress and every U.S. president have repeatedly reaffirmed U.S. policy opposing Iran’s sponsorship of international terrorism.
In 2017, while the United States remained a participant in the Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Congress passed bipartisan legislation that mandated sanctions against entities tied to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. This legislation was enacted in response to the IRGC’s longstanding support of international terrorism and related nefarious activities, such as money laundering. The United States withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018. In 2019 and 2020, the U.S. Treasury Department implemented the 2017 legislation and imposed sanctions on a wide range of Iranian entities, including Iran’s central bank and national oil company, as well as its financial and energy sectors. Despite their differences over the JCPOA, Democrats and Republicans agreed on one basic principle: Nothing should prevent the U.S. from imposing terrorism sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
By the time the Biden administration took office, more than 300 Iran-connected companies, institutions, and individuals were sanctioned explicitly for their support for terrorism and the IRGC. These sanctions put enormous pressure on Tehran’s terror-related budgets, with news reports of the Iran-funded Lebanese militia Hezbollah even pleading for local donations.
During Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s nomination hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a senator asked him whether he believed it was in America’s national security interest to lift these terrorism sanctions. Blinken responded, “I do not. And I think there is nothing, as I see it, inconsistent with making sure that we are doing everything possible—including the toughest possible sanctions—to deal with Iranian support for terrorism.” Blinken continued, “we will continue non-nuclear sanctions as a strong hedge against Iranian misbehavior in other areas.” Indeed, an Obama White House publication even pledged that under the JCPOA, “non-nuclear sanctions (such as for terrorism) must remain in effect and be vigorously enforced.”
As promised during his campaign, President Joe Biden made rejoining the JCPOA a priority of his administration. After months of Iranian intransigence, the Biden administration backed down from Blinken’s commitment to defend U.S. terrorism sanctions, and, according to the Wall Street Journal, offered to lift sanctions on the central bank, oil company, and other key banks, companies, and sectors that finance the IRGC. Reporters asked the State Department how it could suspend terrorism sanctions without Iran’s halt of its terror sponsorship. A State Department official responded that the Trump administration had imposed these sanctions illegitimately. Terrorism sanctions weren’t terrorism sanctions, the Biden administration claimed; they were politically imposed to block a future administration from rejoining the JCPOA.
Anyone who has served at high levels in the Treasury Department knows that to be untrue. Every potential sanctions package is subjected to an intense and lengthy interagency approval process. Targets take months to develop. Teams of intelligence, sanctions, and legal experts review and finalize every designation. It is simply not possible to impose terrorism sanctions without clear and indisputable evidence of support for terrorism.
When confronted with that reality by the media, the Biden administration stopped calling terrorism sanctions illegitimate and pivoted to a new message: Terrorism sanctions could be inconsistent with the economic benefits promised to Iran under JCPOA. In other words, if terrorism sanctions are lifted, it will not be because of any change in behavior but simply to deliver economic relief to the regime.
The 300-plus sanctioned entities and individuals that nonpolitical career experts at the Treasury Department have determined to be bad actors will still be terror-aiders and money launderers. The administration’s implicit and contradictory message to corporate risk managers, executives, and directors is this: If the U.S. suspends any terrorism sanctions on Iran, the private sector should be on notice that all firms receiving sanctions relief remain tied to terrorism and money laundering.
No responsible fiduciary would knowingly expose his company to such illicit activity. To do so could put legitimate businesses at odds with regulations governing anti-money laundering and countering financing of terrorism. Negative publicity, controversy levels, and risk scores would increase. The legal, financial, and reputational risk of doing business with known supporters of terrorism would be extraordinary—particularly if Republicans were to reverse Biden’s policy after taking control of Congress in 2022 or the White House in 2024.
Removal of terrorism sanctions on Iran would be a big mistake. But it would be an even bigger mistake for any firm to knowingly do business with terrorists and money launderers just because it became convenient for the Biden administration to temporarily remove these formal labels. Calling a grizzly bear a “teddy” does not make it any less of a killer.
Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barron’s and MarketWatch newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit commentary proposals and other feedback to ideas@barrons.com.
Barron's · by David Eisner and Richard Goldberg
5. U.S. Considers Warning Ukraine of a Russian Invasion in Real-Time
I would hope so. It is the least we could do.
U.S. Considers Warning Ukraine of a Russian Invasion in Real-Time
Dec. 23, 2021
U.S. officials say intelligence sharing is essential to the Ukrainian government’s survival, even as they try to avoid escalating the situation.
Send any friend a story
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.
A Ukrainian soldier fires a Javelin missile during a military exercise. The United States has been supplying Ukraine with the anti-tank guided missiles since 2018.Credit...Gleb Garanich/Reuters
Dec. 23, 2021
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is working on a plan to provide Ukraine with battlefield intelligence that could help the country more quickly respond to a possible Russian invasion, senior administration officials said.
But as more than 100,000 Russian troops mass at the Ukrainian border, the Biden administration is seeking to project support for the former Soviet republic’s independence from Moscow and its territorial integrity. The United States and its allies have warned President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia that an invasion would bring both economic pain for his country, in the form of sanctions, and military losses.
Officials in the Biden administration have moved cautiously to avoid escalating the situation, even as they consider ways to better assist Ukraine and deter Russia.
A small Pentagon team recently visited Ukraine to evaluate the country’s air defense needs, John F. Kirby, the chief Pentagon spokesman, said Monday. On Tuesday, Karen Donfried, the State Department’s top diplomat for Europe, told reporters that the United States would increase its military assistance to Ukraine if Russia invaded.
The United States has been supplying Ukraine with anti-tank guided missiles called Javelins since 2018; Mr. Biden authorized an additional Javelin delivery this fall as part of a $60 million military aid package.
The list of ideas being drawn up at the Pentagon, the State Department and the White House include redirecting helicopters and other military equipment once allocated for the Afghan military to Ukraine, officials said. The administration is also considering sending additional cyberwarfare experts to Ukraine. The United States and Britain have sent some experts to shore up defenses in case Mr. Putin launches a cyberstrike on Ukraine either in advance or instead of a ground invasion.
But the proposal at the Pentagon for “actionable” intelligence is potentially more significant, two U.S. officials said. The information would include images of whether Russian troops were moving to cross the border. Such information, if shared in time, could enable the Ukrainian military to head off an attack.
The Biden administration has recognized how important real-time awareness is for the survival of Ukraine’s government. U.S. intelligence agencies are already giving Kyiv access to more material than they had before the Russian military build up, said a person briefed on the administration’s actions. The person and U.S. officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the plans.
“The number one thing we can do is real time actionable intelligence that says, ‘The Russians are coming over the berm,’” said Evelyn Farkas, who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia in the Obama administration. “We tell them, and they use that to target the Russians.”
She said that “we’ve been nervous about that in the past.”
One potential problem with providing actionable intelligence, American officials acknowledge, is that it could lead Ukraine to strike first — the sort of scenario Western officials believe that Mr. Putin has been trying to sell to the Russian public.
This summer, Mr. Putin argued in an article that Russians and Ukrainians were one people and said that the formation of a Ukrainian state hostile to Moscow was comparable “in its consequences to the use of weapons of mass destruction against us.”
He has continuously painted the Ukrainian government as the aggressor, backed by the West. But if Russian tanks are moving over the border, and Ukraine targets them, it will be hard for Mr. Putin to make that argument. Russian disinformation campaigns have attacked the Ukrainian government and accused President Volodymyr Zelensky of creating a humanitarian crisis in the country’s east, where Ukrainian government forces have been battling Russian-led separatists for years, Western officials said.
Last Friday, Mr. Putin codified what he has long been saying to American and European officials in meetings, demanding that the United States and its allies halt all military activity in Eastern Europe and Central Asia in a Cold War-like security arrangement. That the demand came when Russian troops were at Ukraine’s border explicitly linked the deployment to a possible invasion, American officials said.
American and NATO officials privately dismissed the main demands of the Russian proposal, which came in the form of a draft treaty suggesting that NATO should offer written guarantees that it would not expand farther east toward Russia and halt all military activities in the former Soviet republics.
Understand the Escalating Tensions Over Ukraine
Card 1 of 5
Ominous warnings. Russia called the strike a destabilizing act that violated the cease-fire agreement, raising fears of a new intervention in Ukraine that could draw the United States and Europe into a new phase of the conflict.
The Kremlin’s position. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who has increasingly portrayed NATO’s eastward expansion as an existential threat to his country, said that Moscow’s military buildup was a response to Ukraine’s deepening partnership with the alliance.
But the United States also set up talks with Moscow, for January, during which officials said they would tackle the range of complaints detailed by Russia. On Wednesday, Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke with his Russian counterpart, Gen. Valery Gerasimov. Ukraine has sought NATO membership for years — a move that would enrage Russia — but despite the delay, the United States has balked at taking Ukraine’s accession off the table.
For the Biden administration, the escalating situation on the border is demanding a balancing act. With Moscow spooked by the Ukrainian government’s perceived anti-Russia policy shift, Mr. Putin wants to put pressure on the government, while also exposing the limits of what the United States and Europe are willing to do for Ukraine, officials said. The Biden administration, officials say, must strike the right note: by bolstering aid to the Ukrainian military to discourage an invasion but not to the point where Russia feels threatened and decides it must to act.
If Mr. Putin launches an attack right after Orthodox Christmas in early January — which American and allied intelligence officials believe is the earliest it would come — Russia would have more than two months while the ground is frozen and tanks can effectively move in Eastern Ukraine. Some intelligence officials believe the muds of late March in Ukraine could be the country’s best defense.
Whenever he chooses to cross the border, Mr. Putin will “have the likelihood of sudden loss of life, in significant enough numbers that they can’t be smuggled back to Russia under the cover of night,” Ms. Farkas said. “The Russians have been trying to sell any conflict as a reaction, but the Russian people do not want to fight their Ukrainian brothers and sisters. You can only fool them so long.”
Military experts say that the Russian army could quickly overwhelm the Ukrainian military, even one that is backed by the United States and its European allies. But a Ukrainian insurgency would most likely take hold, bogging down the Russian military for years.
“You need to have that in mind when you push the trigger to do something,” Gen. Micael Byden, the supreme commander of the Swedish Armed Forces, said in an interview. “It won’t be over in weeks.”
6. Housing company that defrauded military ordered to pay $65 million
It seemed like a good idea at the time. We had a very good experience with contract on post housing in 2007-2010 at Fort Bragg. But the service provided seemed too good to be true and I guess it was. I have not heard anything good about contract housing in recent years.
Excerpts:
The company pleaded guilty to one count of major fraud as part of a plea deal. The deal was accepted by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.
Balfour Beatty, headquartered in Malvern, Pa., operated privatized military housing communities at 55 Air Force, Navy and Army bases across the nation, which were occupied by tens of thousands of service members and their families.
The decision Thursday marked a “global resolution” of the Justice Department’s criminal and civil investigations into the company.
Today’s global resolution sends a clear message to companies that if they do not maintain adequate compliance programs, voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, and fully cooperate with the government, t
Housing company that defrauded military ordered to pay $65 million
Richard Taylor, President, Facility Operations, Renovation & Construction for Balfour Beatty Communities, testifies during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on Dec. 5, 2019. Balfour Beatty Communities LLC was sentenced Thursday, Dec. 23, 2021, to pay $32 million in restitution to the U.S. military and $33.6 million in criminal fines. (Carlos Bongioanni/Stars and Stripes)
WASHINGTON — One of the largest private companies that manages military family housing and pleaded guilty to fraud was sentenced Thursday to pay nearly $32 million in restitution to the U.S. military.
Balfour Beatty Communities LLC was also ordered to pay $33.6 million in criminal fines. The company must also go on probation for three years, during which it will undergo close monitoring for compliance.
According to the Justice Department, company employees engaged in a scheme to alter maintenance records to appear as though Balfour Beatty was meeting goals required for financial bonuses from the U.S. Air Force when it was not.
“Instead of promptly repairing housing for U.S. service members as required, BBC lied about the repairs to pocket millions of dollars in performance bonuses,” Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco said in a statement. “This pervasive fraud was a consequence of BBC’s broken corporate culture, which valued profit over the welfare of servicemembers.
The company pleaded guilty to one count of major fraud as part of a plea deal. The deal was accepted by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.
Balfour Beatty, headquartered in Malvern, Pa., operated privatized military housing communities at 55 Air Force, Navy and Army bases across the nation, which were occupied by tens of thousands of service members and their families.
The decision Thursday marked a “global resolution” of the Justice Department’s criminal and civil investigations into the company.
Today’s global resolution sends a clear message to companies that if they do not maintain adequate compliance programs, voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, and fully cooperate with the government, they will pay a price that outweighs the profits they once reaped,” Monaco said.
Nikki Wentling
Nikki Wentling has worked for Stars and Stripes since 2016. She reports from Congress, the White House, the Department of Veterans Affairs and throughout the country about issues affecting veterans, service members and their families. Wentling, a graduate of the University of Kansas, previously worked at the Lawrence Journal-World and Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. The National Coalition of Homeless Veterans awarded Stars and Stripes the Meritorious Service Award in 2020 for Wentling’s reporting on homeless veterans during the coronavirus pandemic. In 2018, she was named by the nonprofit HillVets as one of the 100 most influential people in regard to veterans policymaking.
Subscribe to Stars and Stripes
7. What happens when US rejects Putin’s ultimatum?
Excerpts:
What is almost certain, however, is that the United States will not fulfill Russia’s demands and provide guarantees that NATO will not expand eastward.
Russian officials, for their part, claim to have a plan B in case the US and NATO do not respond to Moscow’s proposals, although they refuse to say what actions the Kremlin would take.
Such a narrative was advanced in 2014, when the myth of Putin’s so-called “cunning plans” was born. In reality, Russia’s actions have always been rather limited, calculated and carefully coordinated with its Western partners.
Even now, amid fears of a large-scale conflict between Russia and Western-backed Ukraine, Russian military officials often hold talks with their Western counterparts. Even so, a potential Ukrainian offensive in the Donbass is not out of the question.
“One gets the impression that a third military operation is being prepared in Ukraine and they are warning us – do not interfere. We must somehow react to this”, Putin stressed in his speech.
Indeed, the Kremlin will react. But Moscow is more likely to yet again implement half measures, aiming to preserve its de facto control over the Donbass while at the same time not blowing up its relations with the West.
What happens when US rejects Putin’s ultimatum?
Russian leader talks tough on Ukraine in end-of-year address but any next move will likely be limited, calculated and even coordinated with the West
Russian President Vladimir Putin does not seem ready to burn his bridges with the West just yet, judging by his highly anticipated end-of-year speech delivered on December 23.
Despite threats and harsh rhetoric amid a threatened war on Ukraine, the Russian leader at the same time says that the United States’ response to the Kremlin’s demands for legally binding security guarantees to defuse the stand-off has been “positive”, even though Washington still has not formally responded to Moscow’s proposals.
Does that mean Russia is actually not poised to invade the neighboring country that was part of the former Soviet Union?
Not necessarily. If Ukraine launches a full-scale military offensive in the Donbass, Moscow will likely have to intervene to protect the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic and Lugansk People’s Republic.
Otherwise, the West would interpret Russia’s lack of a firm response as another sign of weakness, and eventually Ukraine, strongly supported by the United States, could seek to restore its sovereignty over Crimea.
“The future of the Donbass has to be decided by the people living in the Donbass,” said Putin during his highly anticipated end-of-year press conference.
The people of the Donbass, of course, already decided their future in May 2014 when they held a referendum and declared “self-rule”, or de facto independence from Kiev. To this day, however, the Kremlin refuses to recognize the referendum.
But in case of a potential Ukrainian offensive, Russia may implement the same strategy it used in 2008 after Georgia attacked its breakaway region of South Ossetia. Moscow intervened, expelled Georgian forces from the region and recognized the independence not only of South Ossetia but also of Abkhazia.
Given that west Ukraine has a far greater strategic and economic importance than Georgia, such a Russian action would result in severe sanctions that would negatively impact on Russia’s economy. In order to prevent such a scenario, the Kremlin is now demanding “security guarantees” that NATO will not expand eastward into Ukraine.
A Russian soldier takes aim along the Ukrainian border. Photo: Facebook
“You must give us guarantees, and immediately – now”, Putin said.
It remains unclear, though, why the Kremlin is in such a hurry. In early October former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev penned an article in which he pointed out that “Russia knows how to wait”, and that Moscow should wait until “sane figures” come to power in Kiev and replace the current Ukrainian leadership.
Two months later, however, Putin is pressuring the United States to promise that Ukraine will not join NATO. The alliance has already ruled out any compromise over NATO’s “key principles”, which means that the West will almost certainly not provide the “security guarantees” Putin seeks.
What will Moscow do in that case?
“The United States needs to understand that we simply have nowhere else to go. Do they think we’re going to stand by and watch,” Putin said a couple of days before his annual year-end media conference, claiming that the US could push Kiev to attack Crimea.
To be sure, such rhetoric from Putin is nothing new. In August 2016, Putin accused the Ukrainian Defense Ministry of killing a Russian soldier and a Federal Security Service (FSB) officer in Crimea, at the border with Ukraine.
Apparently, Ukraine sent a sabotage-reconnaissance group to Crimea, which resulted in a brief border clash. Putin said Russia would “not let such things slide by,” but Moscow never responded to the alleged killing of its military and intelligence personnel.
Thus, if Ukraine eventually really stages massive provocations in Crimea, Russia’s response may not be as fierce as some might expect.
Although the Kremlin claims that Ukraine and the United States are preparing to “commit provocations” that could include a chemical attack, such a scenario does not seem very realistic. Russia has a history of ringing such “false alarms” in Syria.
For instance, in 2017, Moscow accused Washington of concocting a “provocation” in Syria, while a year later the Kremlin claimed that rebels were planning a chemical weapons attack with the intent of blaming it on Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad.
In November this year, Russia’s Defense Ministry warned that Turkey-backed militants plan to stage a provocation and use chemical weapons against civilians in the Middle Eastern country.
Given that no chemical provocation ever took place, it seems unlikely that Kiev and Washington will launch such an adventure in Crimea either.
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspects a ground-attack helicopter at a base in Korenovsk, in western Russia. Putin has supplied advanced defensive missile systems to Syria. Photo: AFP / Mikhail Klimentyev / Pool
What is almost certain, however, is that the United States will not fulfill Russia’s demands and provide guarantees that NATO will not expand eastward.
Russian officials, for their part, claim to have a plan B in case the US and NATO do not respond to Moscow’s proposals, although they refuse to say what actions the Kremlin would take.
Such a narrative was advanced in 2014, when the myth of Putin’s so-called “cunning plans” was born. In reality, Russia’s actions have always been rather limited, calculated and carefully coordinated with its Western partners.
Even now, amid fears of a large-scale conflict between Russia and Western-backed Ukraine, Russian military officials often hold talks with their Western counterparts. Even so, a potential Ukrainian offensive in the Donbass is not out of the question.
“One gets the impression that a third military operation is being prepared in Ukraine and they are warning us – do not interfere. We must somehow react to this”, Putin stressed in his speech.
Indeed, the Kremlin will react. But Moscow is more likely to yet again implement half measures, aiming to preserve its de facto control over the Donbass while at the same time not blowing up its relations with the West.
8. Duterte weaponizes Filipino custom in the Covid era
I do not think Duterte has any respect for the people of the Philippines.
Duterte weaponizes Filipino custom in the Covid era
Philippine leader’s militarized Covid-19 response apes his brutal drug war where the enemy is framed as ‘undisciplined’ citizens
So it was surprising when Duterte announced the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act, legislation granting him additional authority to combat Covid-19 in the Philippines.
The Act grants Duterte rare and special powers to combat Covid-19 such as the ability to intervene in the daily functions of civil society, interfere in the operations of private businesses and even take over companies that refuse to comply with his orders.
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte holding a vial of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine during a ceremony at a military airbase in Manila, shortly after the vaccines arrived from Europe on March 4, 2021. Photo: AFP / King Rodrigues
Retraumatizing communities
Over the past six months, a team of researchers from York University, University of the Philippines and the University of Nottingham have been studying the impact of Covid-19 in urban poor communities in Manila.
During our interviews, local leaders shared that Duterte’s militarized response to Covid-19 was re-traumatizing because the tactics were very similar to his “war on drugs” which used sensationalist rhetoric to portray drug users as a threat to state and society.
Duterte’s Covid-19 response was articulated as a “war” where the enemy was the pasaway. This narrative has been labeled the “pasaway myth” because the urban poor have largely restricted their mobility during one of the longest and strictest lockdowns in the world.
The country’s Covid-19 restrictions, and Duterte’s warning in a televised address that quarantine violators should be shot dead by police, are compelling reasons to follow the rules. However, the militarized response and brutal rhetoric have left deep scars in urban poor communities.
A woman wears a mask as a precautionary measure against the spread of Covid-19 coronavirus in Manila on March 13, 2020 Photo: AFP/Maria Tan
Under the banner of what Bankoff calls “state-sponsored bayanihan,” Duerte’s actions have drastically changed the meaning of the word. The original essence that used to mean so much to local communities is gone, and has been hijacked to meet political ends.
The militarization of the government’s Covid-19 response has incentivized citizens to take actions that oppose the bayanihan spirit. Instead of coming together to help one another, neighbours are encouraged to report each other to stop the pasaways from spreading the virus. Naming the Act the Bayanihan to Heal as One, is a mockery of the term and what it represents.
Covid-19 impacts in Manila
Based on our research, we’ve discovered that instead of rogue political acts from the government, community members want livelihoods, food security and better health care.
Many urban poor communities have a high percentage of informal workers that rely on daily wages. In our interview with Manila’s mayor, Francisco Moreno Domagoso (Isko Moreno), he shared that transport workers, such as jeepney and pedicab drivers, were the ones most heavily impacted by the lockdown.
Food security was a key concern — most households had limited savings and quickly ran out. But to be eligible to receive government relief packs, residents had to be part of an official government list. Our interviewees noted that anyone who was not “friendly” with barangay (village) captains ran the risk of exclusion from the lists.
An interviewee from the office of Vice President Leni Robredo, who was involved in the distribution of relief packs, also told us that their mission was denied access to areas that were not politically aligned with Robredo.
Supporters cheer for Philippine Vice President Leni Robredo on her candidacy to join the 2022 presidential race outside the Cultural Center of the Philippines in Pasay, Metro Manila on October 7, 2021. Photo: AFP / Jam Sta Rosa
We were told that the pandemic meant that access to routine healthcare was curtailed: frequently, routine health checks were canceled and local health clinics were shut. Maternal care was limited as hospital and community midwives were redeployed to the Covid-19 effort.
Many urban poor found it hard to attend checkups because they were reliant on public transport that was no longer running. In some cases, a lack of timely medical care led to miscarriage and death. Routine vaccinations for children were canceled and generally people feared going to the hospital.
Ultimately, our research tells us that communities need jobs, food and health care, not political acts that hijack the spirit of bayanihan or false narratives of pasaway.
9. Court frees Pinoy jailed for killing US Colonel James Rowe in 1989
When I wrote that I would rather see a criminal freed than a traitor I had not seen this article. This is terrible news.
I recall that years later all the embassy vehicles having a special plate that covered the door seams because apparently this sparrow team member was lucky enough to shoot through the seams.
Some articles from the time of the assaassination.
Court frees Pinoy jailed for killing US Colonel James Rowe in 1989 | Philippines Lifestyle News
By Margret Fermin -December 24, 2021
The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court has ordered the release of the Filipino imprisoned in New Bilibid Prison for the 1989 murder of a United States Army Colonel, James Rowe.
In a report by Rod Vega on Super Radyo dzBB on Thursday, it was said that Muntinlupa RTC Branch 204 upheld the writ of habeas corpus filed by the camp of prisoner Juanito Itaas, considered the longest detained political prisoner.
The court in 1991 sentenced Itaas to up to 39 years in prison for the 1989 murder of James Rowe.
The shooting of Rowe happened at the intersection of Tomas Morato Street and Timog Avenue in Quezon City. His driver, Joaquin Vinuya, was also injured.
Itaas was later arrested in Davao City, admitting that he shot the victims who were in the vehicle when the incident occurred.
But at the hearing of the case, Itaas said that his captors tortured him in Davao City, so he confessed to the crime.
He was also allegedly threatened to admit the sworn statements of the Central Intelligence Service officer.
At the time, Itaas was accused of being a New People’s Army member.
Court frees Pinoy jailed for killing US Colonel James Rowe in 1989
In the year 2,000, the Supreme Court upheld the guilty verdict against Itaas.
According to the Muntinlupa court, Itaas has been imprisoned for more than 30 years. In addition, Itaas has also reportedly earned 29 years from his Good Conduct Time Allowances.
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra said the Office of the Secretary-General had filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s decision.
“As I have said earlier, the Supreme Court has the final say on any and all issues of constitutionality. The OSG has filed an MR in the RTC. It is ready to challenge the trial court’s ruling all the way up,” according to the secretary in a message sent to journalists.
“The DOJ crafted the revised implementing rules and regulations of the GCTA law in accordance not only with the letter but more so with the spirit of the law,” he added.
10. Visualizing the $94 Trillion World Economy in One Chart
Visualizing the $94 Trillion World Economy in One Chart
The $94 Trillion World Economy in One Chart
Just four countries—the U.S., China, Japan, and Germany—make up over half of the world’s economic output by gross domestic product (GDP) in nominal terms. In fact, the GDP of the U.S. alone is greater than the combined GDP of 170 countries.
How do the different economies of the world compare? In this visualization we look at GDP by country in 2021, using data and estimates from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
An Overview of GDP
GDP serves as a broad indicator for a country’s economic output. It measures the total market value of final goods and services produced in a country in a specific timeframe, such as a quarter or year. In addition, GDP also takes into consideration the output of services provided by the government, such as money spent on defense, healthcare, or education.
Generally speaking, when GDP is increasing in a country, it is a sign of greater economic activity that benefits workers and businesses (while the reverse is true for a decline).
The World Economy: Top 50 Countries
Who are the biggest contributors to the global economy? Here is the ranking of the 50 largest countries by GDP in 2021:
RankCountryGDP ($T)% of Global GDP 1 U.S.$22.924.4% 2 China$16.917.9% 3 Japan$5.15.4% 4 Germany$4.24.5% 5 UK$3.13.3% 6 India$2.93.1% 7 France$2.93.1% 8 Italy$2.12.3% 9 Canada$2.02.1% 10 Korea$1.81.9% 11 Russia$1.61.7% 12 Brazil$1.61.7% 13 Australia$1.61.7% 14 Spain$1.41.5% 15 Mexico$1.31.4% 16 Indonesia$1.21.2% 17 Iran$1.11.1% 18 Netherlands$1.01.1% 19 Saudi Arabia$0.80.9% 20 Switzerland$0.80.9% 21 Turkey$0.80.8% 22 Taiwan $0.80.8% 23 Poland$0.70.7% 24 Sweden$0.60.7% 25 Belgium$0.60.6% 26 Thailand$0.50.6% 27 Ireland$0.50.5% 28 Austria$0.50.5% 29 Nigeria$0.50.5% 30 Israel$0.50.5% 31 Argentina$0.50.5% 32 Norway$0.40.5% 33 South Africa$0.40.4% 34 UAE$0.40.4% 35 Denmark$0.40.4% 36 Egypt$0.40.4% 37 Philippines$0.40.4% 38 Singapore$0.40.4% 39 Malaysia$0.40.4% 40 Hong Kong SAR$0.40.4% 41 Vietnam$0.40.4% 42 Bangladesh$0.40.4% 43 Chile$0.30.4% 44 Colombia$0.30.3% 45 Finland$0.30.3% 46 Romania$0.30.3% 47 Czech Republic$0.30.3% 48 Portugal$0.30.3% 49 Pakistan$0.3*0.3% 50 New Zealand$0.20.3%
*2020 GDP (latest available) used where IMF estimates for 2021 were unavailable.
At $22.9 trillion, the U.S. GDP accounts for roughly 25% of the global economy, a share that has actually changed significantly over the last 60 years. The finance, insurance, and real estate ($4.7 trillion) industries add the most to the country’s economy, followed by professional and business services ($2.7 trillion) and government ($2.6 trillion).
China’s economy is second in nominal terms, hovering at near $17 trillion in GDP. It remains the largest manufacturer worldwide based on output with extensive production of steel, electronics, and robotics, among others.
The largest economy in Europe is Germany, which exports roughly 20% of the world’s motor vehicles. In 2019, overall trade equaled nearly 90% of the country’s GDP.
The World Economy: 50 Smallest Countries
On the other end of the spectrum are the world’s smallest economies by GDP, primarily developing and island nations.
With a GDP of $70 million, Tuvalu is the smallest economy in the world. Situated between Hawaii and Australia, the largest industry of this volcanic archipelago relies on territorial fishing rights.
In addition, the country earns significant revenue from its “.tv” web domain. Between 2011 and 2019, it earned $5 million annually from companies—including Amazon-owned Twitch to license the Twitch.tv domain name—equivalent to roughly 7% of the country’s GDP.
CountriesRegionGDP (B) TuvaluOceania$0.07 NauruOceania$0.1 PalauOceania$0.2 KiribatiOceania$0.2 Marshall IslandsOceania$0.2 MicronesiaOceania$0.4 Cook IslandsOceania$0.4* TongaOceania$0.5 São Tomé and PríncipeCentral America$0.5 DominicaCaribbean$0.6 St. Vincent and the GrenadinesCaribbean$0.8 SamoaOceania$0.8 St. Kitts and NevisCaribbean$1.0 VanuatuOceania$1.0 GrenadaCaribbean$1.1 ComorosAfrica$1.3 SeychellesAfrica$1.3 Antigua and BarbudaCaribbean$1.4 Guinea-BissauAfrica$1.6 Solomon IslandsOceania$1.7 Timor-LesteAsia$1.7 St. LuciaCaribbean$1.7 San MarinoEurope$1.7 Cabo VerdeAfrica$1.9 BelizeCentral America$1.9 GambiaAfrica$2.0 EritreaAfrica$2.3 LesothoAfrica$2.5 BhutanAsia$2.5 Central African RepublicAfrica$2.6 SurinameSouth America$2.8 ArubaCaribbean$2.9 BurundiAfrica$3.2 AndorraEurope$3.2 South SudanAfrica$3.3 LiberiaAfrica$3.4 DjiboutiAfrica$3.7 Sierra LeoneAfrica$4.4 EswatiniAfrica$4.5 MaldivesAsia$4.6 FijiOceania$4.6 BarbadosCaribbean$4.7 SomaliaAfrica$5.4 MontenegroEurope$5.5 LiechtensteinEurope$6.8* GuyanaSouth America$7.4 MonacoEurope$7.4* TajikistanAsia$8.1 Kyrgyz RepublicAsia$8.2 TogoAfrica$8.5
*2019 GDP (latest available) used where IMF estimates for 2021 were unavailable.
Like Tuvalu, many of the world’s smallest economies are in Oceania, including Nauru, Palau, and Kiribati. Additionally, several countries above rely on the tourism industry for over one-third of their employment.
The Fastest Growing Economies in the World in 2021
With 123% projected GDP growth, Libya’s economy is estimated to have the sharpest rise.
Oil is propelling its growth, with 1.2 million barrels being pumped in the country daily. Along with this, exports and a depressed currency are among the primary factors behind its recovery.
RankCountryRegion
2021 Real GDP Growth (Annual % Change)
1 Libya Africa123.2% 2 Guyana South America20.4% 3 Macao Asia20.4% 4 Maldives Asia18.9% 5 Ireland Europe13.0% 6 Aruba Caribbean12.8% 7 Panama Central America12.0% 8 Chile South America11.0% 9 PeruSouth America10.0% 10 Dominican RepublicCaribbean9.5%
Ireland’s economy, with a projected 13% real GDP growth, is being supported by the largest multinational corporations in the world. Facebook, TikTok, Google, Apple, and Pfizer all have their European headquarters in the country, which has a 12.5% corporate tax rate—or about half the global average. But these rates are set to change soon, as Ireland joined the OECD 15% minimum corporate tax rate agreement which was finalized in October 2021.
Macao’s economy bounced back after COVID-19 restrictions began to lift, but more storm clouds are on the horizon for the Chinese district. The CCP’s anti-corruption campaign and recent arrests could signal a more strained relationship between Mainland China and the world’s largest gambling hub.
Looking Ahead at the World’s GDP
The global GDP figure of $94 trillion may seem massive to us today, but such a total might seem much more modest in the future.
In 1970, the world economy was only about $3 trillion in GDP—or 30 times smaller than it is today. Over the next thirty years, the global economy is expected to more or less double again. By 2050, global GDP could total close to $180 trillion.
11. ISIS shares chilling Christmas poster showing decapitated Santa
ISIS shares chilling Christmas poster showing decapitated Santa
ISIS butchers have shared a sinister Christmas poster showing a decapitated Santa Claus in a chilling threat to shoppers.
The masked militant is portrayed brandishing a bloody knife in one hand and holding the severed head of Father Christmas in the other.
The poster shows a jihadi killer brandishing decapitated Santa's head
This image shows riffles stabbing a Christmas tree with US army helmets and Stars and Stripes baublesCredit: MEMRI
ISIS and its jihadi supporters have been quiet since the collapse of its caliphate in Syrian and Iraq in 2017.
But that appears not to have damped down calls for mass murder among the remaining fanatics.
The latest grotesque call to kill is an echo of its sick snuff videos showing the decapitation of westerners that it used to peddle online.
The poster shows a beheaded Santa, with the text reading: "We send a message to our monotheist brothers in Europe, America, Australia, Canada, Russia, and other countries of unbelief and apostas.
“We say to you, our brothers, oh monotheists, avenge your brothers and sisters who have been killed and captured by these scumbags.
“Attack the citizens of crusader coalition countries with your knives, run them over in the streets, detonate bombs on them, and spray them with bullets.”
ISIS is “evolving into a new beast” in order to strike the West, a Brit who fought the terrorist group has warned.
Macer Gifford chucked in his job as a currency trader in the City in 2015 and went to Syria to fight the Islamist extremists alongside Kurdish forces.
He warned that despite the collapse of the Caliphate and the loss of almost all its territory ISIS still posed “as much of a threat today” as they went about recruiting fighters.
“All terrorist groups are quite adaptable, you have seen it happen over the last 10/20 years how Al-Qaeda has operated and how ISIS operates as well.
“I think ISIS want to prove to the world that they will endure, that they are still a threat to the West and still a force to be reckoned with."
The group has been gathering momentum across the world as splinter groups that swear allegiance to ISIS attempt to gain a foothold in a number of locations, including India, Congo and Mozambique.
The 14th commander of the United States Central Command is shown being roastedCredit: MEMRI
A poster was also made for the New Year celebrationsCredit: MEMRI
ISIS bride Shamima Begum claims she doesn't hate UK and 'my only crime was going to Syria' in fresh plea to come home
12. China’s Soft-Power Advantage in Africa
Friends like a drug pusher. Once you get hooked.....
Also, it seems like China is trying to take some pages from the Cold War playbook,e.g.g, Fullbright scholarship like activities and other education initiatives that could have long term benefits.
Excerpts;
China is beginning to fill this vacuum across a range of sectors. According to a recent UNESCO report, for example, 16 percent of all scholarships for citizens from African countries to study abroad were sponsored by the Chinese government—making Beijing the single largest provider. Even among wealthy members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States trailed in fifth place. If Washington is serious about improving its relationship with the African continent, increasing educational opportunities for African students is a good place to start.
If Biden’s B3W plan stands a chance of transforming Washington’s relationship with the developing world, his administration must realize the power of building people-to-people connections. Policymakers must take seriously the importance of investing in long-term relations with everyday citizens in countries across Africa and elsewhere, regardless of their governments’ ideologies. Divisive events such as the Summit for Democracy, by contrast, can end up pushing excluded countries closer to Beijing. Programs that focus on human capital development aren’t just the right thing to do; they’re also sound policy.
China’s Soft-Power Advantage in Africa
Beijing Isn’t Just Building Roads—It’s Making Friends
When U.S. policymakers consider China’s influence in Africa, they often think of big-ticket infrastructure development programs such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Over the past two decades, Beijing has spent billions building dams, highways, railways, and ports in countries from Egypt to South Africa.
But those sorts of projects are only part of the story. China’s evolving presence in Africa, including the BRI, is based as much on investment in building social and human capital as it is on giant infrastructure projects. Since the beginning of this century, Beijing has invested heavily in cultivating political, educational, and institutional relationships with leaders and citizens in almost all African countries with which it has diplomatic relations. As similar opportunities for Africans with Western states have declined, China has stepped into the breach.
To its own detriment, Washington has failed to fully reckon with these less visible elements of Beijing’s diplomacy. If the administration of President Joe Biden is serious about countering Chinese influence across the developing world, it would do well to understand how China’s policies actually work and the benefits that the country stands to gain from its efforts in Africa—and across the globe.
GOING TOGETHER
Many U.S. officials, policymakers, and experts have raised concerns about China’s loans, investments, and infrastructure projects worldwide. In response, the Biden administration announced the Build Back Better World plan (B3W)—a global infrastructure program meant to counter China’s influence in the global South—at the G-7 meeting in June 2021. B3W is designed to outperform Beijing by offering alternative investment projects intended to entice countries into choosing the United States over China as their preferred partner.
The administration’s plans, however, reflect a narrow understanding of China’s global role. Although Beijing has poured billions of dollars into infrastructure projects across the developing world, it has also invested heavily in developing relationships and people-to-people connections with political, security, and business elites in many African countries. To be sure, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s engagement with the global South dates back to the Mao era, but the scope of these exchanges has accelerated rapidly. As of 2018, for instance, more than 80,000 African students were studying in China, compared with fewer than 2,000 in 2003. These scholarships are designed to improve China’s image overseas and showcase its development success story to visiting students.
Since 2018, moreover, the Chinese government has invested heavily in a series of annual visits to China for African government officials and defense attachés. High-ranking delegations from 50 African countries spend two weeks in China attending seminars and visiting People’s Liberation Army, PLA Navy, and PLA Air Force sites to learn more about China’s military capabilities. In 2018, as part of these exchanges, all sides agreed to expand Chinese-hosted trainings for African peacekeeping and police forces. For Beijing, these emerging military-to-military relationships represent an important investment in the future of Chinese diplomacy. If properly cultivated, such networks can build trust between Chinese and African militaries—and also yield potentially lucrative arms deals.
The Biden administration’s plans reflect a narrow understanding of China’s global role.
Beyond these extensive exchange programs, the CCP frequently sponsors trainings and seminars for civilian political party elites from across the continent. These programs are designed to teach leaders about the CCP’s approach to development, party leadership, and political organization. Typically, such opportunities also address the role of technology in governance, which presents an opportunity for Chinese technology companies to market their products.
Beijing has also sponsored a series of joint research initiatives between Chinese and African universities and think tanks—including partnerships with schools in 46 African countries that currently host Confucius Institutes, a network of state-sponsored Chinese language and cultural centers. These partnerships are meant to improve exposure to Chinese culture, history, and language across the continent. For the Chinese government, such programs also represent one way of reversing Western hostility to the country’s development model and reducing Beijing’s image deficit abroad.
Finally—and perhaps most notable—Chinese and African officials have launched a number of prominent multilateral events, including the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation. The FOCAC meeting, held every three years, is now one of the largest regular diplomatic gatherings of African leaders. The United States, by contrast, hasn’t convened a comparable event since the Obama administration’s 2014 U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington, D.C.
Like the BRI, the FOCAC is not focused just on developing joint infrastructure and lending programs. The forum is also designed to grow and deepen people-to-people connections between African countries and China. During the 2018 FOCAC meeting, for example, Beijing pledged to sponsor 50,000 new training opportunities for African professionals in the information technology, energy, tourism, and disaster relief sectors; announced a new cooperation plan between Chinese and African universities; and launched several training programs for African law enforcement personnel. Although limited by COVID-19 pandemic travel restrictions, FOCAC 2021, held in Senegal, produced a similar set of commitments.
A BRIDGE TO SOMEWHERE
Taken together, these activities represent a formidable expansion of China’s influence across the continent. Beijing’s efforts are already paying dividends. Today, 63 percent of Africans view China’s influence in the continent as “somewhat positive” or “very positive,” and China is now the preferred development model for a growing number of countries, including Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, and Mali.
Beyond measures of popularity, however, China’s diplomacy—including forums such as FOCAC—serves several other crucial purposes. For one, when hosted in China, these gatherings showcase Beijing’s development model. China’s booming e-commerce platforms, new infrastructure, and use of technology in governance are all on display to those who visit. The opportunity to “show and tell” China’s success helps government officials shape the narrative about Beijing’s growth and its potential applicability beyond China’s borders.
Washington downplays Beijing’s social and human capital investments in Africa at its own risk.
Forum diplomacy is therefore an ideal way of marketing Chinese products, practices, and norms. Several countries have already taken Beijing’s way to heart. With Chinese support, political parties in South Africa and Tanzania have opened training academies modeled after the CCP’s party schools (which train future party cadres), including the Julius Nyerere Leadership School near Dar es Salaam and an institute outside of Johannesburg sponsored by the African National Congress. Chinese-trained educators also founded Uganda’s Luyanzi Institute of Technology, a vocational training school near Kampala.
The benefits of Chinese diplomacy aren’t limited to these institutional outcomes, however. Testimony from students who attend Chinese schools on government-sponsored scholarships suggests that recipients frequently work to improve bilateral relations with China upon their return home. Proficiency in Mandarin is another straightforward way that this plays out: in non-Anglophone African countries, communicating with Chinese counterparts can be complicated. Civil servants with language skills and an understanding of Chinese culture inevitably facilitate smoother communication and collaboration on complex projects.
HUMAN CAPITAL MATTERS
Today, Washington downplays Beijing’s social and human capital investments in Africa at its own risk. These programs have quickly become a central pillar of China’s foreign-policy making in Africa, and they will continue to operate well into the future. Such efforts also address a growing need, as the number of U.S. and European scholarships, visas, and exchange programs available to citizens from African countries decreases and anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States and Europe rises.
China is beginning to fill this vacuum across a range of sectors. According to a recent UNESCO report, for example, 16 percent of all scholarships for citizens from African countries to study abroad were sponsored by the Chinese government—making Beijing the single largest provider. Even among wealthy members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States trailed in fifth place. If Washington is serious about improving its relationship with the African continent, increasing educational opportunities for African students is a good place to start.
If Biden’s B3W plan stands a chance of transforming Washington’s relationship with the developing world, his administration must realize the power of building people-to-people connections. Policymakers must take seriously the importance of investing in long-term relations with everyday citizens in countries across Africa and elsewhere, regardless of their governments’ ideologies. Divisive events such as the Summit for Democracy, by contrast, can end up pushing excluded countries closer to Beijing. Programs that focus on human capital development aren’t just the right thing to do; they’re also sound policy.
13. Japan, US draft operation plan for Taiwan contingency: sources
This is significant if accurate (or what a Northeast Asia expert and friend wrote when he flagged this for me: A BFD). I cannot recall ever being planning along these lines before. It was hard enough to conduct planning against the north Korean threat even after Kim Jong-il launched the Taepo-dong over Japan in 1998.
Japan, US draft operation plan for Taiwan contingency: sources - The Mainichi
A U.S. Marine Corps' high-mobility rocket artillery system is unloaded from a U.S. military transport aircraft during Japan-U.S. joint training at the Maritime Self-Defense Force's Hachinohe air base in Aomori Prefecture on Dec. 7, 2021. (Kyodo)
TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Japan's Self-Defense Forces and the U.S. military have drawn up a draft joint operation plan that would enable the setup of an attack base along the Nansei island chain in the country's southwest in the event of a Taiwan contingency, according to Japanese government sources.
Japan and the United States will likely agree to begin work to formalize an operation plan when their foreign and defense chiefs meet in early January under the "two-plus-two" framework, the sources told Kyodo News by Thursday.
The development will likely draw a backlash from China, which regards the self-ruled island of Taiwan as a renegade province to be reunified with the mainland, by force if necessary.
Under the draft plan, U.S. Marines will set up a temporary attack base at the initial stage of a contingency on the Nansei Islands, a chain stretching southwest from the Japanese prefectures of Kagoshima and Okinawa toward Taiwan. Okinawa hosts the bulk of U.S. military installations in Japan.
The U.S. military will get support from the SDF to send troops to the islands if a Taiwan contingency appears imminent, the sources said.
Such a deployment, however, would make the islands the target of attack by China's military, putting the lives of residents there at risk. Legal changes would be needed in Japan to realize the plan, the sources said.
Japan's SDF and the U.S. forces have around 40 candidate sites along the Nansei chain, which consists of around 200 islands, including uninhabited ones.
Most of the locations have residents and islands where the SDF has deployed or plans to deploy missile units -- Amami-Oshima, Miyako and Ishigaki near the Senkaku Islands controlled by Japan but claimed by China -- are among the candidates, the sources said.
As longtime security allies, Japan and the United States have been strengthening defense cooperation and boosting the interoperability of the SDF and the U.S. military. They face threats from China's military buildup and assertive moves at sea as well as North Korea's nuclear and missile development.
The U.S. Marine Corps have expeditionary advanced base operation manuals to dispatch Marines in small formations to necessary locations, apparently in view of China's assertive moves.
The Japanese government sources said the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command had proposed to the SDF to create a joint operation plan.
The condition under which the U.S. military will set up a temporary base is when the Japanese government judges that conflict between the Chinese and Taiwanese militaries will undermine the peace and security of Japan, if left as is, the sources said.
In such a scenario, the U.S. military will deploy its high mobility artillery rocket system to a temporary base location while the SDF will be tasked with logistical support by providing ammunition and fuel. To prevent coming under attack, U.S. Marines will change base locations, the sources added.
The United States has been hardening its stance on China as they compete for economic, technological and military superiority. Japan, for its part, has seen its relations with China frayed over history and the Senkakus, a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea.
Underscoring heightened vigilance, Japan and the United States stressed in a joint statement the importance of "peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait" when their leaders met in April. It was the first time in half a century for the two nations' leaders to mention Taiwan in a statement.
The United States would come to the aid of Taiwan should China turn to the use of force.
During a Taiwan think-tank event in early December, former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said any Taiwan contingency would also be an emergency for Japan and for the Japan-U.S. security alliance.
14. Biden signs historic bill punishing China for Uyghur genocide
Human rights is a national security issue as well as a moral imperative.
Biden signs historic bill punishing China for Uyghur genocide
Axios · by Fadel Allassan
President Biden signed a bill Thursday banning imports from China's Xinjiang region and punishing the Chinese government for its genocide of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities, per a White House release.
Why it matters: Human rights activists say the bill will impose the first substantive costs the Chinese government has ever faced for its atrocities in Xinjiang. This could set a precedent for other countries to follow suit, writes Axios' Zachary Basu.
Details: The measure imposes sanctions on those responsible for forced labor in the region and bars imports unless the U.S. determines with "clear and convincing evidence" that they were not made with forced labor.
Flashback: The bill easily passed both chambers of Congress earlier this month in a rare bipartisan consensus. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) was the lone opponent.
What they're saying: The release thanked elected officials of both parties, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer — as well as Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Chris Smith (R-N.J.) and Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fl.).
Editor's note: This article has been updated with details of Biden's signing of the ALS legislation.
Axios · by Fadel Allassan
15. White House: Russia Stepping Up Disinformation In Possible Invasion Prelude
White House: Russia Stepping Up Disinformation In Possible Invasion Prelude
U.S. sees rising likelihood of Russian military action against Ukraine, promises strong response.
Moscow has “stepped up efforts” to portray Ukraine and the United States as the instigator of increased tensions that include a massive buildup of Russian forces along the Ukrainian border, a senior White House official told reporters on Thursday.
That came hours after Russian leader Vladimir Putin told reporters that U.S. actions, particularly its financial and military support of Ukraine, were to blame for the rising standoff.
“How would the Americans react if on their frontier with Canada we deployed our missiles,” Putin said. ...“It's a question of security and you know our red lines.”
The White House official said, “To be clear, we see no evidence of that escalation on the Ukrainian side. And we have tried to be very clear to partners and allies that this is a Russian disinformation effort that's underway. It's not unexpected; it fits a standard playbook.”
Russia has positioned some 120,000 troops on the border of Ukraine and on the illegally annexed Crimean peninsula. From March until May, Russia staged a major exercise that some saw as a sort of dress rehearsal for a wider invasion, using techniques, such as smoke operations, commonly used to conceal offensive maneuvering. The White House has been meeting with both the Russian government and allies to negotiate a way out of the escalated tensions.
“It's clear to us that if Russia goes ahead with what may be underway, we and our allies are prepared to impose severe costs that would damage Russia's economy and bring about exactly what it says it does not want: more NATO capabilities, not less; closer to Russia, not further away,” said the official.
The remarks come on the heels of reports by The Times (of London) and the New York Times that the U.S. government has sent experts to Ukraine to help the country defend itself against a major attack.
The White House officials said the United States is prepared to take several steps in the event of wider Russian aggression against Ukraine, “including massive sanctions, support for Ukraine's ability to defend its territory, and force posture adjustments in frontline NATO-Allied states.”
The official declined to say what force posture adjustments those might be.
16. Trump pushes back on Candace Owens: 'People aren't dying when they take the vaccine'
Perhaps we are going to see a change. Maybe Republicans will begin heeding the former President's advice and will listen to him about vaccinations.
Trump pushes back on Candace Owens: 'People aren't dying when they take the vaccine'
The Hill · by Olafimihan Oshin · December 23, 2021
Former President Trump in an interview with conservative media personality Candace Owens pushed back over her claims undermining the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
In a Tuesday episode of the Daily Wire show "Candace," Trump told Owens that he takes credit for the "incredible speed" of how the vaccines were developed during his time in office and his partnership with private pharmaceutical companies.
"I came up with a vaccine, with three vaccines," Trump told Owens. "All are very, very good. Came up with three of them in less than nine months. It was supposed to take five to 12 years."
Owens then said to Trump that more people died from the virus in 2021 than in 2020 even with the vaccine being administered to the public, taking a shot at President Biden.
"Yet more people have died under COVID this year," Owens told Trump. "By the way, under Joe Biden, than under you and more people took the vaccine this year. So people are questioning how-"
"Oh no, the vaccines work, but some people aren't the ones. The ones who get very sick and go to the hospital are the ones that don't take the vaccine. But it's still their choice. And if you take the vaccine, you're protected," Trump told Owens.
"Look, the results of the vaccine are very good, and if you do get it, it's a very minor form," Trump continued. "People aren't dying when they take the vaccine."
Trump recently said during a sit-down interview with former Fox News host Bill O'Reilly that he has received his COVID-19 vaccine booster shot.
The former president went on to tell Owens that despite the inoculations working, he is against vaccine and mask mandates, saying that "people have to have their freedom."
The U.S. is currently dealing with a winter surge of COVID-19 infections as the omicron variant has taken hold across the nation.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Thursday retweeted a clip of the interview.
"Just going to echo former President Trump here on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines," Psaki said in a tweet. "Merry Christmas eve eve. go get boosted."
Speaking to media on Wednesday, Psaki said President Biden acknowledged that Trump sent an "important signal to many Americans about the importance of getting boosted."
Updated at 12:23 p.m.
The Hill · by Olafimihan Oshin · December 23, 2021
V/R
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Phone: 202-573-8647
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
