|
Quotes of the Day:
"Reality cannot be ignored except at a price; and the longer the ignorance persisted in, the higher and more terrible becomes the rice that must be paid"
- Aldous Huxley
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to blow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly."
- Albert Einstein.
“Is America the greatest country in the world?
It sure used to be. We stood up for what was right. We fought for moral reasons. We passed laws, struck down laws for moral reasons. We waged wars on poverty, not poor people. We sacrificed. We cared about our neighbors. We put our money where our mouths were and we never beat our chest. We built great big things, made ungodly technological advances, explored the universe, cured diseases. We cultivated the world's greatest artists and the world's greatest economy. We reached for the stars and acted like men. We aspired to intelligence, we didn't belittle it. It didn't make us feel inferior. We didn't identify ourselves by who we voted for in the last election and we didn't scare so easy.
We were able to be all these things and do all these things because we were informed by great men, men who were revered. First step to solving any problem is recognizing there is one. America is not the greatest country in the world anymore.”
The character played by Jeff Daniels in HBO’s “News Room,” Episode 10, The Greater Fool
(You Tube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W86k1cmCuGo&t=10s)
1. RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, JANUARY 20, 2023
2. U.S. to brand Russia’s Wagner Group a ‘transnational criminal’ entity
3. Russia's Wagner Chief Writes to White House Over New U.S. Sanctions
4. Facebook staffed with multiple fmr. CIA employees: Report
5. China Issues Veiled Warning to US Over Taiwan
6. 10 Reasons Xi Won’t Attack Taiwan Anytime Soon
7. America in Decline? World Thinks Again.
8. Macron boosts French military spending by over a third to 'transform' army
9. Is the U.S. running out of weapons to send Ukraine?
10. Navy Offers Up to $100K in Retention Bonuses for Select Special Warfare Sailors
11. 'China cannot be out, China must be in': France says it's diverging with Washington on Beijing ties
12. Air Force Moves F-16s from Europe to Japan as Ukraine War Lingers and Pacific Tensions Simmer
13. Coast Guard: Illegal Fishing Has Surpassed Piracy as a Global Threat
14. Defense bill OKs future national intelligence museum
15. We need an open source intelligence center
16. Ukraine Situation Report: Russian Casualties "Significantly Well Over 100k" Says Top U.S. General
17. From Fake News to Fake Views: New Challenges Posed by ChatGPT-Like AI
18. A college student aims to save us from a chatbot before it changes writing forever
19. ChatGPT is the Deepfake of Thought
20. ChatGPT expected to deepen disinformation crisis, says NYT chairman
21. Disinformation: Reliable Information is essential for democratic stability
22. A star on TikTok's BOOKTok is using the platform to improve his reading skills
23. FBI Director Christopher Wray Discloses Domestic ‘Homemade IED’ Drone Attempts Investigations
1. RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, JANUARY 20, 2023
Maps/graphics: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-20-2023
Key Takeaways
- Head of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov continues to frame Chechen fighters’ involvement in the war in Ukraine on distinctly religious grounds, thereby building out his reputation and the reputation of his power base.
- The Wagner Group appears to be struggling to present itself as an effective parallel military structure, thus increasingly proving to be a parasitic paramilitary entity.
- US intelligence confirmed the rivalry between the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and Wagner Group on which ISW has long reported.
- Prigozhin’s quest for legal recognition of the Wagner Group may also trigger further factionalization within the Russian government.
- The Kremlin continues to engage in demonstrative public actions aimed at setting informational conditions for a protracted war in Ukraine.
- Russian Telegram sources claimed that Putin dismissed Russian Commander of the Airborne Forces Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky, but these reports remain unconfirmed.
- The Kremlin continues to promote information operations threatening escalation over Western military assistance to Ukraine in order to weaken Western support.
- Russian and Ukrainian forces reportedly continued offensive operations near Svatove and Kreminna.
- Russian forces continued offensive operations across the Donetsk Oblast front line. Russian sources continued to falsely claim that Russian forces are close to encircling Bakhmut.
- Russian forces in Zaporizhia Oblast are still likely preparing for a defensive operation in the long term despite recent claims of territorial gains.
- Russian officials and sources continue to indicate that mobilization measures are ongoing despite numerous claims that mobilization has officially concluded.
- Russian officials and occupation authorities continue deporting Ukrainian children from occupied Ukraine to Russia.
RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, JANUARY 20, 2023
understandingwar.org
Kateryna Stepanenko, Karolina Hird, Riley Bailey, Grace Mappes, George Barros, Layne Philipson, and Frederick W. Kagan
January 20, 8:00 pm ET
Click here to see ISW’s interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.
Head of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov continues to frame Chechen fighters’ involvement in the war in Ukraine on distinctly religious grounds, thereby building out his reputation and the reputation of his power base. Kadyrov responded to the recent list of guidelines for grooming standards in the Russian army and noted that a majority of Chechen fighters wear beards in accordance with the Sunnah, and additionally claimed that his Chechen fighters have been responsible for major gains in Mariupol, Severodonetsk, and Lysychansk.[1] Kadyrov questioned the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD)’s justifications for these guidelines and said they would demoralize fighters who are "waging a holy war."[2] Kadyrov additionally amplified a sermon given by Chechen theologian Magomed Khitanaev on January 20 that claimed that the "special military operation" in Ukraine is aimed at eradicating Ukranian "satanism."[3] Kadyrov has repeatedly justified Chechen fighters’ involvement in the war on distinctly religious grounds, thus presenting himself as the protector of Muslim fighters and bridging the gap between Chechen forces and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s framing of the war on religious and moral grounds.[4]
Kadyrov also notably posted footage on January 20 of a group of Chechen theologians completing their training at the Russian Special Forces University in Grozny, Chechnya, and noted that over 300 qadis (magistrates and judges who implement sharia law) and imams are planning to undergo similar training and deploy into Ukraine.[5] The fact that Chechen qadis will supposedly be embedded in Chechen units that deploy to Ukraine is noteworthy—qadis typically serve a judicial role in criminal and civil matters, and their presence in Ukraine may suggest that Kadyrov intends Chechen forces to serve a basic governance function in occupied areas. ISW has previously reported on Kadyrov’s efforts to position himself and his Chechen powerbase as a parallel and complementary structure to the conventional Russian armed forces.[6] Kadyrov may hope to use qadis and imams in Ukraine to set social conditions for the long-term resettlement of Muslim populations from the Caucasus in occupied areas of Ukraine, although there is no independent evidence of any such plans. ISW has previously reported on Kadyrov’s efforts to import Chechen elements to Ukraine to fill administrative and law enforcement roles in occupied territories for similar purposes.[7]
The Wagner Group appears to be struggling to present itself as an effective parallel military structure, thus increasingly proving to be a parasitic paramilitary entity. Russian opposition outlet TV Dozdh reported on January 20 that a woman whose husband reportedly died fighting with Wagner in Ukraine received her husband’s sealed coffin, death certificate, and a medal of honor and buried what she thought was her husband before finding out that he was alive and in Ukrainian custody.[8] TV Dozdh claimed that it has collected many such stories and that Wagner representatives have essentially intimidated family members into not checking coffins to confirm the deaths of their relatives.[9] Moscow Duma deputy Evgeny Stupin relatedly noted appeals he has received from constituents claiming that once their relatives signed contracts with Wagner and deployed to Ukraine, they ceased to hear from their relatives entirely.[10] These reports suggest that Wagner lacks basic administrative organs to maintain records of individual servicemen and communicate properly with authorities. Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin ironically has gone to great lengths to criticize the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) establishment, which he has accused of being inept in precisely these ways.
The Wagner Group may additionally be relying on the Russian MoD for the use of military assets on the frontline. A prominent Wagner Group-affiliated Russian milblogger posted an infographic on January 20 reportedly showing the array of military assets that Wagner is using around Bakhmut, including a TOS-1A thermobaric artillery system (typically a military district-level asset), various self-propelled guns and mortar systems, several armored vehicles, and an Su-25 aircraft.[11] The use of these assets, particularly aviation assets such as the Su-25, suggests that Wagner is working with the Russian MoD to access and operate these systems. While Wagner servicemen can feasibly operate these systems independently, they likely continue to rely on the MoD for logistical support and maintenance functions. Taken in tandem with reports of pervasive administrative and communication failures within Wagner’s ranks, the use of MoD equipment suggests that Wagner is functioning more as a parasite attached to the Russian armed forces than as the entirely self-contained, parastatal organization that Prigozhin tries to present it as being.
US intelligence confirmed the rivalry between the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and Wagner Group on January 20. National Security Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby stated that a rift is forming between Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin and Russian MoD officials as a result of an ongoing competition between conventional Russian forces and Wagner mercenaries in Ukraine.[12] Kirby added that Wagner "is becoming a rival power center to the Russian military and other Russian ministries" with its 50,000-strong group of forces in Ukraine consisting of 40,000 convicts and 10,000 contractors.[13] ISW continues to monitor the progression of the Wagner-Russian MoD conflict in the information space, with the Russian MoD again deliberately avoiding directly acknowledging Wagner troops’ participation in a claimed capture of Klishchiivka, Donetsk Oblast, on January 19.[14]
Prigozhin’s quest for legal recognition of Wagner Group may also trigger some factionalization within the Russian government—whether he intentionally sets out to do so or not. Chairman of the Russian socialist Just Russia—For the Truth party Sergey Mironov published a picture of himself with a Wagner sledgehammer that he said was a gift from Prigozhin.[15] Prigozhin had engraved the settlement names of Bakhmut and Soledar, Donetsk Oblast, likely to support his ongoing effort to advertise his forces as victors of the Battle for Soledar. Mironov also responded to a comment from a social media user asking if he intended to use this sledgehammer in combat, sarcastically implying that he is already on the front lines and in the trenches at his current position.[16] Mironov’s actions could suggest that he is a member of the pro-war faction that Prigozhin had previously referenced in his rants and may be advocating for the legalization of Wagner in Russia. Mironov had an exchange with a different commenter who had asked him to define Wagner and how the Kremlin regulates the group, to which he responded that the commenter was too late to the conversation.[17] That social media user, in turn, interpreted Mironov’s response as disregarding the Russian Criminal Code provisions against illegal military structures such as private military companies.[18] ISW previously reported that Prigozhin used Mironov’s likeness in his advertisements for the Wagner Center in St. Petersburg and is likely attempting to expand his group of backers within the Kremlin to support his commercial interests.[19]
The Kremlin is likely intensifying its efforts to present Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as an existential war to set informational conditions for a protracted war in Ukraine. Russian and social media sources circulated images on January 19 and 20 showing Russian officials installing air defense systems on the roof of the Russian Ministry of Defense building in Moscow and elsewhere near the city.[20] Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov refused to comment on the images, and State Duma Deputy Yevgeny Lebedev called them fake.[21] Some Russian milbloggers responded to these images with satisfaction that Moscow residents would finally be aware that Russia is involved in a "difficult war" in Ukraine.[22] The Kremlin likely deployed the air defense systems in Moscow to generate inflammatory images that portray the war as more threatening to the Russian public. It is unlikely, however, that the Kremlin believes that Ukraine would target Moscow and it likely engaged in this ostentatious play to support intensifying information operations to prepare the Russian domestic information space for a protracted war in Ukraine and further sacrifices.[23] This demonstration is also likely a part of the emerging information operation to contextualize the war in Ukraine in the Russian mythos of the Great Patriotic War, which is likely meant to increase Russian support for the war effort and further mobilization by absurdly portraying Ukraine as threatening Moscow and the rest of the Russian heartland in a way to the way Nazi Germany did during its invasion of the Soviet Union.[24]
Prominent Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin replaced Russian Commander of the Airborne Forces, Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky, with First Deputy Head of the Russian General Staff Academy, Lieutenant General Oleg Makarevich, on January 20.[25] A prominent Russian news source initially claimed on January 13 that Teplinsky was only on a temporary leave and denied milblogger reports about Teplinsky‘s dismissal.[26] Some milbloggers complained that Makarevich is the least suitable candidate to command the Russian Airborne Forces and called for Putin to instead appoint Colonel Vadim Pankov, current commander of the 45th Separate Guards Spetsnaz Brigade.[27] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) has not yet confirmed Teplinsky’s dismissal nor confirmed Makarevich’s appointment. Teplinsky replaced former Commander of the Russian Airborne Forces, Colonel-General Andrey Serdyukov, in mid-June 2022, as ISW previously reported.[28] Teplinsky visited rear areas in east (left) bank Kherson Oblast in late December.[29]
The Kremlin continues to promote information operations threatening escalation over Western military assistance to Ukraine. Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated on January 20 that if Western defense ministers decided to provide Ukraine with heavy tanks at their meeting at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany, then this would only "add problems for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people."[30] The Kremlin seeks to undermine Western willingness to offer aid to Ukraine by stoking fears of an escalation, whether between Russia and the West or of the war in Ukraine itself, that Russia cannot execute.[31] The Kremlin will likely continue to respond to Western conversations about further military assistance to Ukraine with vague threats of escalation that have no corresponding action.
Russian President Valdimir Putin fired Russian Security Council Assistant Secretary Alexei Pavlov on January 20, likely in response to Pavlov’s antisemitic comments in Fall 2022. Pavlov had served as a subordinate to Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev since 2009. The Kremlin’s newswire TASS reported that Pavlov’s dismissal was in connection with his receiving a new unspecified position but did not provide the timeline for his next appointment.[32] Pavlov’s dismissal, however, likely relates to his highly publicized comments regarding the need to "desatanize" Ukraine in a Moscow government-owned outlet Argumenty I Fakty in October 2022.[33] Pavlov stated that there is a need for "desatanization" because there are many religious cults in Ukraine following Ukraine’s Revolution of Dignity in 2014, such as the Hassidic Jews. Pavlov’s antisemitic statement ignited criticism from Russian Hassidic Rabbi Berel Luzar and forced Patrushev to issue an apology promising that he would take appropriate measures to discipline the author of the piece.[34] It is unclear why Patrushev or Putin would have waited this long to take action.
Key Takeaways
- Head of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov continues to frame Chechen fighters’ involvement in the war in Ukraine on distinctly religious grounds, thereby building out his reputation and the reputation of his power base.
- The Wagner Group appears to be struggling to present itself as an effective parallel military structure, thus increasingly proving to be a parasitic paramilitary entity.
- US intelligence confirmed the rivalry between the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and Wagner Group on which ISW has long reported.
- Prigozhin’s quest for legal recognition of the Wagner Group may also trigger further factionalization within the Russian government.
- The Kremlin continues to engage in demonstrative public actions aimed at setting informational conditions for a protracted war in Ukraine.
- Russian Telegram sources claimed that Putin dismissed Russian Commander of the Airborne Forces Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky, but these reports remain unconfirmed.
- The Kremlin continues to promote information operations threatening escalation over Western military assistance to Ukraine in order to weaken Western support.
- Russian and Ukrainian forces reportedly continued offensive operations near Svatove and Kreminna.
- Russian forces continued offensive operations across the Donetsk Oblast front line. Russian sources continued to falsely claim that Russian forces are close to encircling Bakhmut.
- Russian forces in Zaporizhia Oblast are still likely preparing for a defensive operation in the long term despite recent claims of territorial gains.
- Russian officials and sources continue to indicate that mobilization measures are ongoing despite numerous claims that mobilization has officially concluded.
- Russian officials and occupation authorities continue deporting Ukrainian children from occupied Ukraine to Russia.
We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because those activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We will continue to evaluate and report on the effects of these criminal activities on the Ukrainian military and population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn these Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict, Geneva Conventions, and humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.
- Ukrainian Counteroffensives—Eastern Ukraine
- Russian Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine (comprised of one subordinate and one supporting effort);
- Russian Subordinate Main Effort—Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast
- Russian Supporting Effort—Southern Axis
- Russian Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts
- Activities in Russian-occupied Areas
Ukrainian Counteroffensives (Ukrainian efforts to liberate Russian-occupied territories)
Eastern Ukraine: (Eastern Kharkiv Oblast-Western Luhansk Oblast)
Russian and Ukrainian forces reportedly continued offensive operations near Svatove on January 20. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled a Russian assault near Novoselivkse (15km northwest of Svatove).[35] A Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations near neighboring Kuzemivka (15km northwest of Svatove) and that Russian forces are in a dangerous position as they have no other settlements to fall back to in the immediate area.[36] Former Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) Minister Vitaly Kiselev published footage on January 20 of Russian forces using thermobaric artillery systems against a Ukrainian position near Novoselivske.[37] The use of a military district-level asset indicates that Russian forces may be prioritizing the frontline north of Svatove. A Russian milblogger claimed that elements of the 6th Tank Regiment of the 90th Tank Division of the Central Military District have been operating in the Svatove area since late October 2022.[38]
Russian and Ukrainian forces also reportedly continued offensive operations near Kreminna on January 20. A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces tried to advance from near Zhytlivka (2km north of Kreminna) toward Terny, Donetsk Oblast (17km west of Kreminna).[39] Another Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces continued attempts to reach Kreminna from the south and that fighting is intensifying around the settlement.[40] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces also repelled a Russian assault near Bilohorivka (12km south of Kreminna).[41] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) stated that unspecified Central Military District (CMD) elements are operating in the Kreminna area.[42]
Russian Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine
Russian Subordinate Main Effort—Donetsk Oblast (Russian objective: Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)
Russian forces continued offensive operations around Bakhmut on January 20. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian assaults near Bakhmut itself, within 32km north of Bakhmut near Verkhnokamiankse, Krasnopolivka, Soledar, and Krasna Hora; and within 16km southwest of Bakhmut near Ivanivske and Dyliivka.[43] Geolocated footage published on January 19 indicates that Russian forces have likely captured the eastern part of Sil (15km north of Bakhmut).[44] A Russian milblogger claimed that Wagner Group fighters conducted an assault near Blahodatne (12km north of Bakhmut) and continued attempts to advance in the eastern outskirts of Bakhmut.[45] German outlet Der Spiegel reported that the German Intelligence Service has intelligence that indicates that Ukrainian forces are losing a three-digit number of soldiers every day in the Bakhmut area.[46] Fighting in the Bakhmut area continues to be highly attritional for Russian forces as well. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) Territorial Defense claimed that Russian forces captured Klishchiivka (7km southwest of Bakhmut) on January 20, following Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin’s claim that Wagner Group fighters captured the settlement on January 19.[47] The Russian MoD referred to Wagner Group fighters once again as "volunteers of assault detachments" likely to downplay the Wagner Group’s role in tactical advances while also shielding itself from previous criticism that it does not acknowledge the Wagner Group’s involvement in such claimed advances.[48]
Russian sources continue to falsely assert that Russian forces are close to encircling Bakhmut. DNR Head Denis Pushilin stated on January 20 that Wagner Group fighters are close to starting the operational encirclement of Bakhmut following Russian tactical advances in Soledar and supposedly in Klishchiiivka.[49] Russian forces have still not cut any major Ukrainian ground lines of communications (GLOCs) into Bakhmut from Siversk, Slovyansk, and Kostyantynivka. Russian forces would need to cut the majority of these GLOCs and advance further around Bakhmut to even begin an operational encirclement of the city. Russian forces are unlikely to achieve an operational encirclement in the near term as recent offensives to capture small settlements of little tactical significance have likely further degraded Russian manpower and equipment in the area. ISW continues to assess that the Russian offensive to capture Bakhmut is likely culminating due to the Russian military’s increasingly degraded operational capabilities in the area.[50]
Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Donetsk City-Avdiivka area on January 20. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian assaults within 32km southwest of Avdiivka near Vodyane, Marinka, and Pobieda.[51] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian and Ukrainian forces are continuing positional battles within Marinka (27km southwest of Avdiivka).[52] Another Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces conducted an assault near Paraskoviivka (36km southwest of Avdiivka).[53]
Russian forces conducted a limited ground assault in western Donetsk Oblast on January 20. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled a Russian assault near Novosilka (65km southwest of Donetsk City) in western Donetsk Oblast.[54] The Ukrainian General Staff also reported that Russian forces continued routine indirect fire along the line of contact in Donetsk and eastern Zaporizhia Oblasts.[55]
Supporting Effort—Southern Axis (Russian objective: Maintain frontline positions and secure rear areas against Ukrainian strikes)
Russian forces in occupied Zaporizhia Oblast are still likely preparing for a defensive operation in the long term despite recent claims of territorial gains. Russian sources claimed that Russian forces made territorial gains in Zaporizhia Oblast on January 20. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and several Russian milbloggers claimed that unspecified elements of the Russian Eastern Military District (EMD) seized Lobokove, 25km southwest of Orikhiv.[56] Russian milbloggers claimed that unspecified elements of the 5th Combined Arms Army of the EMD and the 58th Combined Arms Army of the Southern Military District (SMD) also seized Maly Shcherbaky, Shcherbaky, and Novoandriivka southwest of Orikhiv, and Novodanylivka, Mala Tokmachka, and Bilohirya to the southeast of Orikhiv to enable direct ground attacks against the settlement from multiple sides.[57] Prominent Russian nationalist media outlet Tsargrad reported that the claims are unverified.[58] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian ground attacks near Stepove (20km southwest of Orikhiv) and Mala Tokmachka (7km southeast of Orikhiv), contrary to the Russian claims.[59] A milblogger reposted January 19 battle footage from the Ukrainian General Staff showing a platoon-sized (30 people) group of Russian forces from the 58th Combined Arms Army conducting a ground attack in Zaporizhia Oblast.[60] The milblogger criticized Russian military command for allowing Russian forces to attempt a ground attack without heavy weapons or armored vehicle support, suggesting that Russian forces currently lack or are unwilling to dedicate the equipment necessary to sustain a prolonged offensive in Zaporizhia Oblast.[61] Another milblogger claimed that Russian forces may have conducted the localized attack to locate Ukrainian defensive positions for an upcoming offensive but conceded that Russian forces are only able to conduct limited operations with their current amounts of ammunition and manpower.[62]
Russian milbloggers circulated pictures on January 20 of a destroyed Russian S-400 air defense system in Ilyne, Zaporizhia Oblast from fall 2022, the first confirmed combat loss of a Russian S-400 system in Ukraine.[63] ISW has previously observed Russian S-400 air defense systems in northern Crimea, but not in Zaporizhia Oblast or other occupied Ukrainian territories.[64] One milblogger falsely claimed that Ilyne was out of Ukrainian HIMARS or HARM missile range.[65] Ilyne is 55km from the current front line, and Ukrainian HIMARS have a range of up to 80km (50 miles).[66]
Russian forces continued routine fire against areas in west (right) bank Kherson Oblast and Mykolaiv Oblast on January 20.[67] Ukrainian officials stated that Russian forces did not shell areas in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast for the fifth time in six months.[68]
Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts (Russian objective: Expand combat power without conducting general mobilization)
Russian officials and sources continue to indicate that mobilization measures are ongoing, despite numerous claims that Russian mobilization has officially concluded. Pskov Oblast deputy Artur Gayduk submitted a request for Russian President Vladimir Putin to issue an order officially ending mobilization, to which the Russian Presidential Administration stated that Putin’s initial partial mobilization decree continues to be in force.[69] Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov stated that the initial mobilization order continues to be in force due to a "legal feature" and urged Russians to focus on Putin’s statements on mobilization and not on the legal technicalities of the continued force of the mobilization order.[70] A local Telegram channel additionally reported on continued covert mobilization practices in Perm Krai and stated that military enlistment offices are quietly sending five to seven people to training centers every week in order to replenish mobilized detachments without sowing panic in the local population by conducting mass mobilizations.[71] Another Russian source reported that Ural Federal University appointed university officials in late December to be responsible for the distribution of mobilization summonses to students and employees in the mobilization reserve, indicating that the university’s infrastructure is continuing covert mobilization measures.[72]
Russian mobilization authorities continue to face bureaucratic challenges to force generation efforts. A Russian military correspondent posted interview footage on January 20 of volunteers of the Chebarkul-based 6th Tank Regiment of the 90th Tank Division of the Central Military District operating in the Svatove area of Luhansk Oblast.[73] The volunteers reportedly arrived in the combat zone in October and received a 9,000-ruble payment (approximately $131) in October and a 19,000-ruble (approximately $287) in November but have not received their promised salaries beyond the two payments.[74] The volunteers apparently have not received their payments because their documents claim they are still at training grounds in Chebarkul, which also means they cannot be registered as injured or dead in action because their deployment is not officially recognized.[75] A Russian media outlet reported on the case of 31 mobilized recruits from Krasnodar Krai who have been classified as unfit for service but are still receiving 180,000-ruble per month salaries because the Russian military bureaucracy does not know how to cancel their mobilization orders or handle the situation.[76]
The Kremlin is continuing its efforts to reinvigorate its defense industrial base (DIB) under unrealistic timelines, while also attempting to bypass Western-imposed sanctions. Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin on January 18 called on Russian officials to send all missing material and technical means that Russian Armed Forces needed in 2022 to the frontlines by no later than February 2023.[77] Mishutin added that government officials need to promptly take all relevant management decisions to supply Russian troops, mirroring Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent orders to improve the Russian DIB within a month to supply Russian forces in both the near and the long term.[78] The Kremlin also continues to find loopholes to avoid sanctions to sustain Russia‘s DIB by using Russian state nuclear power company, Rosatom, to procure raw materials for sanctioned enterprises. Ukrainian intelligence shared a letter reportedly from Rosatom dated October 2022 with The Washington Post indicating that the company—which presents itself as a "civilian entity"—had been working to supply Russia’s military industry with components, technology, and raw materials for missile fuel.[79] The Washington Post reported that Rosatom managed to avoid sanctions given its widespread involvement in nuclear power plants globally and control over supplies.
The Kremlin is trying to expand the authority of the Rosgvardia (Russian National Guard) likely in an effort to strengthen its control over segments of Russian enterprises and private military companies (PMCs) amidst the preparations for protracted war. Parliamentarians of the United Russia and the New People parties introduced a bill on January 20 that would allow Rosgvardia to send its elements to government agencies and companies.[80] Other Russian security structures already have such permissions, and Rosgvardia will be tasked with protecting important state facilities and special cargo, overseeing state control over the circulation of weapons and PMCs, and participating in a fight "against terrorism, extremism, and many others." The Kremlin may use Rosgvardia to establish control over lower-level government officials—such as military recruitment officers—or to monitor the workflow of DIB companies. The Kremlin may also be establishing future provisions to regulate PMCs such as the Wagner Group.[81]
Activity in Russian-occupied Areas (Russian objective: consolidate administrative control of and annexed areas; forcibly integrate Ukrainian civilians into Russian sociocultural, economic, military, and governance systems)
Russian officials and occupation authorities continue deporting Ukrainian children from occupied Ukraine to Russia. Russian Children’s Rights Commissioner Maria Lvova-Belova stated on January 20 that teenagers from Mariupol traveled to Moscow as part of the "Teenagers for Russia"—an organization that reportedly encourages personal development and self-determination in Russia’s teenage population.[82] A Ukrainian Kherson Oblast Telegram channel reported on January 20 that Russian occupation authorities have deported 138 Ukrainian children to occupied Crimea, amplifying unspecified Crimean officials’ claims that the children will not return to their homes in Kherson Oblast.[83] The Telegram channel noted that Russian occupation authorities claimed they returned 18 previously deported Ukrainian children to Kherson but that this claim is not verified. [84]
Russian forces and occupation authorities are continuing to seize and repurpose civilian infrastructure for military purposes in occupied territories. The Ukrainian General Staff reported on January 20 that Russian forces continue to use the network of civilian healthcare facilities in occupied territories to treat wounded servicemen.[85] The Ukrainian General Staff also reported that Russian forces established a field hospital on the territory of a maternity ward in Novopskov, Luhansk Oblast, to treat over 300 wounded Wagner servicemen.[86] Ukrainian Melitopol Mayor Ivan Fedorov stated on January 20 that Russian forces are overfilling civilian hospitals with wounded Russian servicemen as they continue to face significant losses along the frontline in Zaporizhia Oblast.[87] Ukrainian Kherson Oblast Military Administration Advisor Serhiy Khlan stated on January 20 that Russian forces are looting private homes and training in residential buildings in Kherson Oblast.[88]
Russian occupation authorities continue to face logistical issues in maintaining a sufficient pro-Russia workforce at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP). Ukrainian nuclear operating enterprise Energoatom reported on January 20 that Russian occupation authorities are struggling to recruit the highly-trained engineers necessary to operate the ZNPP as Ukrainian employees continue to refuse to sign work contracts with Rosatom.[89] Energoatom also stated on January 20 that Russian occupation forces are building fortifications around power units and the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at the ZNPP, continuing to disregard civilian and nuclear safety in occupied territories.[90]
Russian occupation authorities are continuing to restrict civilian movement in occupied territories. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian occupation authorities will require Melitopol residents to obtain passes from a military commandant’s office to pass checkpoints in Melitopol starting March 1.[91] This may be part of a Russian effort to crack down on partisan activities in Melitopol.[92] Luhansk Oblast authorities stated on January 20 that Russian forces continue to block the entrances to and exits from settlements in occupied Luhansk Oblast, emphasizing that Russian occupation authorities require certificates of work to enter Lysychansk and Rubizhne.[93]
Russian occupation authorities continue to intensify evacuation and passporitization measures for Ukrainian "evacuees." The Ukrainian Resistance Center reported on January 20 that Russian officials have deported more than two million Ukrainian citizens to the Russian Federation since February 24, 2022.[94] Kherson Occupation Administration Head Vladimir Saldo thanked officials in occupied Crimea for accepting 30,000 evacuated residents of Kherson Oblast as of January 20.[95]
ISW will continue to report daily observed indicators consistent with the current assessed most dangerous course of action (MDCOA): a renewed invasion of northern Ukraine possibly aimed at Kyiv.
ISW’s MDCOA warning forecast about a potential Russian offensive against northern Ukraine in fall 2023 remains a worst-case scenario within the forecast cone. ISW currently assesses the risk of a Russian invasion of Ukraine from Belarus as low, but possible, and the risk of Belarusian direct involvement as very low. This new section in the daily update is not in itself a forecast or assessment. It lays out the daily observed indicators we are using to refine our assessments and forecasts, which we expect to update regularly. Our assessment that the MDCOA remains unlikely has not changed. We will update this header if the assessment changes.
Observed indicators for the MDCOA in the past 24 hours:
- Nothing significant to report.
Observed ambiguous indicators for MDCOA in the past 24 hours:
- The Belarusian Ministry of Defense reported that Russian and Belarusian pilots continued conducting joint tactical flight exercises as part of the joint Russian-Belarusian Regional Grouping of Forces (RGV) on January 20.[96] The Belarusian Ministry of Defense announced that these exercises are occurring at the Ruzhany and Machulishchi airfields.[97]
- Belarusian elements continue conducting exercises in Belarus. The Belarusian Ministry of Defense announced that unspecified elements of the Belarusian 6th Separate Guards Mechanized Brigade and 11th Separate Mechanized Brigade conducted unspecified tasks in an unspecified location as part of a joint combat coordination with the joint Russian-Belarusian Regional Grouping of Forces (RGV) on January 20.[98] The Belarusian Ministry of Defense also reported that elements of the Belarusian 103rd Airborne Brigade conducted tactical live-fire exercises at the Losvido Training Ground.[99]
Observed counter-indicators for the MDCOA in the past 24 hours:
- The Ukrainian General Staff reiterated that it has not observed Russian forces in Belarus forming a strike group as of January 20.[100] The Ukrainian General Staff also reported that Russian units continue training in Belarus and that Russia is increasing its aviation forces in Belarus under the guise of joint exercises.[101]
Note: ISW does not receive any classified material from any source, uses only publicly available information, and draws extensively on Russian, Ukrainian, and Western reporting and social media as well as commercially available satellite imagery and other geospatial data as the basis for these reports. References to all sources used are provided in the endnotes of each update.
[8] https://meduza dot io/feature/2023/01/20/dozhd-chvk-vagnera-vozvraschaet-pustye-groby-rodstvennikam-byvshih-zaklyuchennyh-pogibshih-v-ukraine
[9] https://meduza dot io/feature/2023/01/20/dozhd-chvk-vagnera-vozvraschaet-pustye-groby-rodstvennikam-byvshih-zaklyuchennyh-pogibshih-v-ukraine
[20] https://t.me/rybar/42857 ; https://meduza dot io/feature/2023/01/20/na-kryshah-domov-v-tsentre-moskvy-zametili-sistemy-pvo-na-vopros-chto-eto-takoe-v-kremle-ne-otvetili; https://twitter.com/auditor_ya/status/1616411102786584577; https://twit...
[21] https://www.rbc dot ru/politics/20/01/2023/63ca60259a7947f5b14e2e79 ; https://govoritmoskva dot ru/news/349001/
[25] https://vk dot com/wall-200391_308291?w=wall-200391_308291; https://t.me/kremlin_sekret/9681; https://t.me/NeoficialniyBeZsonoV/21527; https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/7069... ru/obshhestvo/universal-ny-j-soldat-chto-izvestno-ob-olege-makareviche-kotorogo-nazy-vayut-novy-m-komanduyushhem-vdv-i-pochemu-mihail-teplinskij-otpravlen-v-otstavku-1043133.html
[27] https://t.me/NeoficialniyBeZsonoV/21527; https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/7069... media/base/person/pankov-vadim-ivanovich/
[30] https://tass dot ru/politika/16846367
[32] https://tass dot ru/politika/16848253
[33] https://meduza dot io/news/2023/01/20/putin-uvolil-pomoschnika-sekretarya-sovbeza-rf-alekseya-pavlova-on-napisal-statyu-o-desatanizatsii-ukrainy-za-kotoruyu-prishlos-izvinyatsya-patrushevu; https://aif dot ru/society/religion/chto_varyat_v_vedminom_kotle_na_ukraine_nabrali_silu_neoyazycheskie_kulty
[34] https://meduza dot io/news/2023/01/20/putin-uvolil-pomoschnika-sekretarya-sovbeza-rf-alekseya-pavlova-on-napisal-statyu-o-desatanizatsii-ukrainy-za-kotoruyu-prishlos-izvinyatsya-patrushevu
[46] https://www.spiegel dot de/ausland/russland-ukraine-news-am-freitag-britische-geheimdienste-bis-zu-50-000-wagner-soeldner-in-der-ukraine-a-be2408e1-6e72-4325-bc06-29d76e0c4d5e;
[49] https://tass dot ru/politika/16849879
[58] https://zp.tsargrad dot tv/news/na-zaporozhe-zhdut-podtverzhdenija-informacii-o-vzjatii-shesti-naselennyh-punktov_708146
[69] https://www.interfax dot ru/russia/881570
[70] https://www.interfax dot ru/russia/881570
[77] https://www.gazeta dot ru/army/news/2023/01/18/19516459.shtml
[80] https://t.me/Hinshtein/3365; https://meduza dot io/news/2023/01/20/v-gosdumu-vnesli-zakonoproekt-kotoryy-pozvolit-rosgvardii-prikomandirovyvat-svoih-sotrudnikov-v-lyubye-organizatsii-i-uchrezhdeniya; https://sozd.duma.gov dot ru/bill/281054-8
[94] https://sprotyv.mod.gov dot ua/2023/01/20/deportovanym-ukrayinczyam-rozdadut-rosijski-pasporty/
understandingwar.org
2. U.S. to brand Russia’s Wagner Group a ‘transnational criminal’ entity
I think it's better to "brand" them criminals rather than terrorists which I fear is our usual default position.
U.S. to brand Russia’s Wagner Group a ‘transnational criminal’ entity
Wagner has risen to international renown as a ruthless shadow instrument of Russian power, now using convicts to wage Putin’s war against Ukraine
By Paul Sonne
January 20, 2023 at 5:44 p.m. EST
The Washington Post · by Paul Sonne · January 20, 2023
The United States will designate Russia’s Wagner mercenary group a “transnational criminal organization,” the White House said Friday, an attempt to disrupt the cash and weapons flow of a private military outfit prosecuting President Vladimir Putin’s war against Ukraine with an army of convicts and contractors.
The designation will come alongside additional U.S. sanctions against Wagner and its support network, spanning multiple continents, said John Kirby, coordinator for strategic communications at the White House National Security Council. The Treasury Department intends to formalize the penalties next week.
Speaking at a White House news briefing, Kirby said the designation would open up “additional avenues” for the United States to go after Wagner’s business activities around the world, and give other nations and institutions the firepower to follow suit.
“These actions recognize the transcontinental threat that Wagner poses, including through its ongoing pattern of serious criminal activity,” Kirby said. He noted the Russian mercenary group had carried out “atrocities and human rights abuses in Ukraine, and of course elsewhere around the world.”
The action comes a month after the Commerce Department imposed new restrictions on Wagner, designating the group a Russian “military end user” to hinder the mercenaries’ ability to acquire items that use U.S. technology.
At Friday’s briefing, Kirby also displayed photos depicting what he said were five Russian rail cars traveling from Russia into North Korea on Nov. 18 and returning along the same route the following day. He said those rail cars carried an initial delivery of North Korean infantry rockets and missiles for use by Wagner fighters in Ukraine.
Kirby said the arms transfers stood in “direct violation” of United Nations Security Council resolutions. Washington on Friday shared information regarding the prohibited activity with the Security Council’s North Korea sanctions committee panel of experts, Kirby said.
The Biden administration first alleged last month that North Korea was making weapons deliveries to Wagner. Pyongyang’s denials are false, Kirby said, pointing to the newly released imagery as proof of the U.S. allegation.
“We obviously condemn North Korea’s actions, and we urge North Korea to cease these deliveries to Wagner immediately,” Kirby said.
Since its first appearance in Ukraine in 2014, Wagner has risen to international renown as a ruthless shadow instrument of Russian power that has been accused of human rights abuses in Syria, Mali, Central African Republic and Ukraine.
Its founder, Yevgeniy Prigozhin, spent nine years in prison for robbery and other crimes, before operating a hot dog stand, casinos and a floating restaurant in post-Soviet St. Petersburg, where he came to know Putin.
Prigozhin’s company, Concord Catering, won contracts with Russian state and municipal entities. Meanwhile, the former convict and caterer meddled in foreign affairs, funding the notorious St. Petersburg troll farm, the Internet Research Agency, which interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and also backing Wagner, which swelled into a large battlefield force in Ukraine this past year after Putin allowed him to recruit convicts directly from Russian prisons.
The mercenary group — which U.S. officials say now has 40,000 convicts and 10,000 contractors deployed to Ukraine — for months has been waging a brutal and costly battle against Ukrainian forces in the city of Bakhmut. Wagner recently made gains in the area, pushing into neighboring Soledar.
“They are both mining towns — gypsum in Bakhmut and salt up in Soledar,” Kirby said. “We think that also has a role to play in why Mr. Prigozhin is so adamant on pouring, literally just throwing bodies into a meat grinder to get these two towns. It’s very much in keeping with his modus operandi in places like Africa, where he is going after mining rights and mining capabilities.”
Prigozhin responded in a statement Friday posted on his catering company’s VK page, in which he appeared to liken the United States itself to a criminal organization.
“Finally, the Wagner private military company and the Americans are colleagues,” Prigozhin said. “From now on, our relationship can be called a ‘showdown between criminal clans.’”
The pending designation follows months of tension between Prigozhin and the Russian Ministry of Defense. Prigozhin has assailed the Russian military for incompetent management of the war effort, and according to U.S. intelligence revealed last year by The Washington Post, has voiced similar criticisms personally to Putin. He has become a public figure in Russia after years of operating in the shadows.
Kirby said Friday that Russia has been searching for foreign weaponry to fuel its war effort in part through Wagner, which has long mixed business with private military power.
“To any company considering providing support to Wagner, our message is this,” Kirby said. “Wagner is a criminal organization that is committing widespread atrocities and human rights abuses, and we will work relentlessly to identify, disrupt, expose and target those who are assisting Wagner.”
The Washington Post · by Paul Sonne · January 20, 2023
3. Russia's Wagner Chief Writes to White House Over New U.S. Sanctions
Wagner is using Telegram to communicate with the White House.
Excerpt:
A letter in English addressed to Kirby and posted on the Telegram channel of Wagner founder Yevgeny Prigozhin's press service read: "Dear Mr Kirby, Could you please clarify what crime was committed by PMC Wagner?"
Russia's Wagner Chief Writes to White House Over New U.S. Sanctions
By U.S. News Staff U.S. News & World Report2 min
January 21, 2023
View Original
FILE PHOTO: An interior view shows PMC Wagner Centre, which is a project implemented by the businessman and founder of the Wagner private military group Yevgeny Prigozhin, during the official opening of the office block in Saint Petersburg, Russia, November 4, 2022. REUTERS/Igor Russak/File PhotoReuters
(Reuters) - The head of the Russian private military contractor Wagner published on Saturday a short letter to the White House asking what crime his company was accused of, after Washington announced new sanctions on the group.
White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said on Friday that Wagner, which has been supporting Russian forces in their invasion of Ukraine and claiming credit for battlefield advances, would be designated a significant Transnational Criminal Organization.
A letter in English addressed to Kirby and posted on the Telegram channel of Wagner founder Yevgeny Prigozhin's press service read: "Dear Mr Kirby, Could you please clarify what crime was committed by PMC Wagner?"
Kirby called Wagner "a criminal organization that is committing widespread atrocities and human rights abuses".
Last month, the White House said Wagner had taken delivery of an arms shipment from North Korea to help bolster Russian forces in Ukraine.
North Korea's Foreign Ministry called the report groundless and Prigozhin at the time denied taking such a delivery, calling the report "gossip and speculation".
Washington had already imposed curbs on trade with Wagner in 2017 and again in December in an attempt to restrict its access to weaponry.
The European Union imposed its own sanctions in December 2021 on Wagner, which has been active in Syria, Libya, the Central African Republic, Sudan, Mozambique and Mali, as well as Ukraine.
Prigozhin has described Wagner as a fully independent force with its own aircraft, tanks, rockets and artillery.
He is wanted in the United States for interference in U.S. elections, something that he said in November he had done and would continue to do.
(Writing by Kevin Liffey; Editing by Helen Popper)
Copyright 2023 Thomson Reuters.
Tags: Ukraine, Russia, United States, European Union, Europe
4. Facebook staffed with multiple fmr. CIA employees: Report
Quite a theory. If the CIA and Facebook are so good at this why aren't they employing these people and capabilities against our adversaries?
Excerpts:
Jim Hanson, president of information warfare analysis and consulting firm WorldStrat, stated last month that Facebook employs at least nine ex-CIA workers and six other former agency employees.
“The ones who are ideologically aligned with the woke left saw the danger of Trump and they wanted to affect that and the way they could be most influential was taking over our shared information space,” Hanson told the New York Post. “And they moved to the socials. And they were successful.”
“The ability of Americans to get information that doesn’t go through a leftist lens doesn’t exist,” he added. “You cannot ask a question online that doesn’t come back to you with a leftist’s filtered answer.”
Facebook staffed with multiple fmr. CIA employees: Report
americanmilitarynews.com · by Christopher Kirkman · January 20, 2023
Facebook parent company Meta has numerous former CIA employees and staff members from other federal agencies, according to a recent report.
Jim Hanson, president of information warfare analysis and consulting firm WorldStrat, stated last month that Facebook employs at least nine ex-CIA workers and six other former agency employees.
“The ones who are ideologically aligned with the woke left saw the danger of Trump and they wanted to affect that and the way they could be most influential was taking over our shared information space,” Hanson told the New York Post. “And they moved to the socials. And they were successful.”
“The ability of Americans to get information that doesn’t go through a leftist lens doesn’t exist,” he added. “You cannot ask a question online that doesn’t come back to you with a leftist’s filtered answer.”
A key example is Aaron Berman, Meta’s top policy manager for misinformation. He previously worked as a CIA senior analytics manager for 15 years.
Fellow Meta co-worker Scott Stern, who serves as a senior manager for trust and safety risk intelligence, worked for the FBI for over seven years, according to his personal LinkedIn page. Stern joined Facebook in 2020 to help develop the social media platform’s algorithms to combat misinformation.
Deborah Berman, Meta’s trust and safety manager, also worked at the CIA for a decade before joining the Big Tech giant, according to the Daily Mail.
Still another example is found in the case of Hagan Barnett, Meta’s head of harmful content operations. His LinkedIn profile shows that he worked as a self-employed contractor for the CIA from 2006 to 2008, according to the report.
Other reports have noted similar concerns with former federal agency employees working at Twitter and Google. The recent Twitter Files, for example, noted multiple close connections between the platform and FBI officials in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 presidential election as Russian misinformation.
A report by Mint Press’ Alan MacLeod also found dozens of former CIA who have been employed by Google.
“MintPress has ascertained that the Silicon Valley giant has recently hired dozens of professionals from the Central Intelligence Agency in recent years,” MacLeod wrote. “Moreover, an inordinate number of these recruits work in highly politically sensitive fields, wielding considerable control over how its products work and what the world sees on its screens and in its search results.”
Share
Flip
americanmilitarynews.com · by Christopher Kirkman · January 20, 2023
5. China Issues Veiled Warning to US Over Taiwan
China Issues Veiled Warning to US Over Taiwan
January 20, 2023 6:14 PM
voanews.com
Chinese President Xi Jinping issued a veiled warning to the United States in his new year message to the country, stressing that China will be engaged in "serious struggles" against separatism and interference in its relations with Taiwan, state media, CCTV and the Xinhua news agency reported Friday.
In a Lunar New Year reception in the Great Hall of the People attended by top party leaders in the Politburo, Xi said in a speech to the Chinese people that his party and the military have in the past year risen to the challenge of “high winds and choppy waters in the international situation,” a reference he also made in his speech at the 20th Party Congress in a warning about what he saw as a hostile international environment.
In a subtle message that referred to the United States and its relations with Taiwan, Xi vowed to “resolutely carry out major struggles against separatism and interference” and “firmly grasp the initiative in cross-strait relations,” state television, CCTV and Xinhua reported.
He also pledged to “make more friends” in the international arena and to actively engage in “major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics” to ensure stability in a “turbulent international environment.”
In recent years, the leadership has increasingly emphasized the importance of asserting a China-centered diplomatic and historical narrative and a determination to shift away from a Western-dominated world order.
On national defense, Xi said China has taken “solid steps” to modernize the defense and armed forces in the past year.
Xi, the chairman of the party’s Central Military Commission, also told the military in charge of border defense to raise their vigilance during the Lunar New Year and be ready for combat, according to a separate report in the Communist party’s flagship newspaper, the People’s Daily.
Xi spoke with soldiers responsible for border, coastal and air defenses via a video link ahead of the Lunar New Year and urged them to fulfil their “combat readiness” to safeguard national security and social stability to ensure “the Chinese people will be able to have a happy and safe Spring Festival.”
The report was prominently featured Friday on the front page of the People’s Daily, with a large portrait of Xi in an army uniform flanked by smaller photos of troops.
Xi’s securing of an unprecedented third term as the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party has fueled speculation on whether he will try to forcefully reunify with Taiwan in the next few years.
China has often accused the United States of supporting Taiwan independence by sending “wrong, dangerous signals” to the island it considers a renegade province. It insists that issues related to Taiwan are “internal matters” that the United States has no right to interfere in.
U.S. President Joe Biden and Xi met at the G-20 summit last November, during which Biden raised U.S. objections to China’s “coercive and increasingly aggressive actions” toward Taiwan. Xi told Biden that the Taiwan question was at the “very core of China’s core interests” and the “first red line” in bilateral ties that must not be crossed.
While China has softened its aggressive “wolf warrior” rhetoric since the 20th Party Congress in October, analysts say the shift in tone should not be seen as a fundamental pivot in its position.
Wang Yi, who stepped down as foreign minister but now oversees China’s foreign policy after being promoted to the 24-member Politburo, wrote in the January issue of the party’s Qiushi magazine that China is against the “monopolization of the definition of democracy.” In reference to the U.S. on Taiwan issues, he denounced “interference in the internal affairs of other countries in the name of so-called democracy."
“China is not afraid of bullying and will build a strong defense to safeguard national interests and national dignity,” he wrote.
voanews.com
6. 10 Reasons Xi Won’t Attack Taiwan Anytime Soon
Let's hope so. But again, I have to repeat Sun Tzu's admonition: "Do not assume the enemy will not attack. Make yourself invincible." The author does offer a cautionary conclusion.
I would also add this I received long ago from an eminent China watcher:
Chinese unification by force is untenable. Chinese peaceful unification is impossible. So the only option is unification by coercion.
Conclusion:
That said, arguing that Xi will not resort to force against Taiwan in the near future does not mean it will never happen. According to Deng Yuwen, cited above, one thing was crystal clear from Xi’s January 2, 2019 speech to mark the 40th anniversary of the “Message to Compatriots in Taiwan”: The 70-year-old cross-strait separation must be brought to an end by the time the People’s Republic of China celebrates its 100th anniversary in 2049. “The two sides must be unified and will definitely be unified,” Xi pledged.
10 Reasons Xi Won’t Attack Taiwan Anytime Soon
Yes, Chinese leader Xi Jinping has ambitions for absorbing Taiwan. But so did all his predecessors.
thediplomat.com · by Hemant Adlakha · January 20, 2023
Advertisement
When General Secretary Xi Jinping reiterated that China will “not renounce the use of force” to unify Taiwan with the People’s Republic of China at the 20th Party Congress in October 2022, he received prolonged applause from the 2,300 delegates. “Complete reunification of our country must be realized, and it can, without doubt, be realized,” Xi later thundered.
However, seven months earlier in March 2022 during the annual “Two Sessions,” namely the simultaneous convening of the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), Taiwan was mentioned only briefly, in reference to the “one China” policy.
Both in the government work report presented by the outgoing Chinese Premier Li Keqiang to the NPC on March 5 and in the CPPCC work report presented by its chairman Wang Yang the previous day, the Taiwan issue, including unification, was downplayed in a surprisingly uncharacteristic manner. This deemphasizing was particularly significant when viewed in light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which had started just a week before the convening of the Two Sessions.
Remember, within days of the Russian military invasion of Ukraine, the media and many observers globally started arguing that Taiwan could be the next Ukraine, with China playing the role of Russia. Interestingly, the cross-strait affairs analysts in Taiwan did not agree.
Most Taiwanese analysts were down-to-earth and realistic in interpreting the rhetoric coming from the 2002 Two Sessions. The Two Sessions were absolutely forthcoming in that China did not consider Taiwan and Ukraine comparable. On March 7, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi further dismissed the comparison between the Taiwan question and the Ukraine issue as “baseless speculation.” Second, and perhaps related, compared to previous years, the Two Sessions in March 2022 were remarkable for downplaying the discussion on Taiwan.
Internationally respected IR professor Hamada Koichi , who once served as special advisor to former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo of Japan, also observed that Xi is well aware that the forceful subjugation of Taiwan could well end up backfiring. “At a time when China is under severe economic pressure and growth is slowing sharply, this is the last thing it [the Chinese Communist Party] needs,” Hamada opined.
It’s undeniable that the unification of Taiwan with mainland China has been an integral component of Xi’s signature “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” goal. Yet some scholars maintain Beijing has no intention of forcing unification now or anytime soon. One recent commentary with a focus on the escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait put it plainly: “We have simply forgotten the number of times when the Xi Jinping administration has threatened to reunify China and Taiwan, even by use of force, if necessary. But one thing is clear – China won’t invade Taiwan.”
According to Professor Deng Yuwen, a council member of China’s Reform and Development Institute, rather than launching an invasion, “China will choose to put pressure on Taiwan using a combination of methods to promote unification… It may launch more preferential policies and try to initiate discussion on a ‘one country, two systems’ framework with Taiwan’s ruling and opposition parties.”
Advertisement
Here are 10 practical constraints making it highly unlikely that China will resort to using force.
First, a war between even a small country and a big power today is not only expensive but also not an easy walkover for the bigger side, as Russian President Vladimir Putin is finding out. With the war in Ukraine soon to complete one year of fighting, what is notable is that Ukraine has been able to sustain itself despite having a much smaller GDP and a weaker military than Russia.
Second, with China’s export markets drying up in Europe and the United States, the Chinese real estate crisis deepening further, the World Bank and the IMF predicting a gloomy economic growth outlook of 1.7 percent and 2.7 percent respectively, the immediate key priority for the Chinese leadership is not to use force in the Taiwan Strait but to strengthen the economy. China’s economy is struggling in the midst of a pressure campaign waged against it by the United States. At the same time, the Chinese economy is also slowing down sharply under the mounting pressure of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially following the CCP regime’s reversal of the zero COVID policy. Under such circumstances, it would be foolhardy on the part of Xi, or the CCP, to burden the national economy by taking on the enormous expense of a war.
Third, regardless of the fact that Xi has locked down a third five-year term, his goal to consolidate a power base within the party is far from accomplished. It is often the case that more control only breeds more paranoia among authoritarian leaders. The fear of being unable to keep forced unification a short-term exercise might be acting as a potent deterrent for Xi – especially as Putin has already paid a heavy political price for the war in Ukraine.
Fourth, though Xi will be in favor of waging a quick war on the cheap, that may not be within his control. There is always a risk that conflict will escalate into “total war” – a phrase that became popular to describe the situation in World War II, as each side used every possible resource to destroy their opponent.
Fifth, Taiwan and Ukraine cannot be compared in military strength – Taiwan is armed to the teeth. Unlike Ukraine’s steppe-like fertile plains and plateaus, Taiwan consists of over 100 islands. Taiwan’s outer islands are dotted with missiles, rockets, and artillery guns. In addition, Taiwan’s granite hills are home to tunnels and bunker systems.
Sixth is the possibility of U.S. involvement in. While officially Washington maintains “strategic ambiguity” on the question whether it would defend Taiwan militarily if needed, none other than President Joe Biden himself has repeatedly answered directly in the affirmative. Amid the China-U.S. competition it seems more and more likely that Washington cannot afford to allow Beijing a free hand in any military campaign against Taiwan.
Seventh is the Japan dimension. The current Japanese government under Kishida has followed up on signals from the late Prime Minister Abe that Tokyo would help to defend Taiwan. Abe once said, “A Taiwan contingency is a contingency for Japan.” The Kishida government’s push for a more muscular defense role in the region is believed to be in part motivated by the potential for a Taiwan contingency.
Eighth, according to a Hong Kong-based expert on Chinese politics, Xi will be well aware of the West’s solidarity during the Ukraine crisis The European Union is China’s major trading partner. Running afoul of it, as well as the United States and Japan, would be dangerous for a leader who knows he must raise living standards at home.
Ninth, Taiwan may not have been included in a series of recent U.S. multilateral security and trade initiatives in the Indo-Pacific region but the island is perceived as integral to defense mechanisms such as the Quad, AUKUS, etc. For example, the Quad insists on maintaining the status quo in the Indo-Pacific region. Hence, not only Japan but India and Australia might come to the rescue of Taiwan. In such a scenario, China might not want to risk facing three big military powers together.
Last but not least is the ASEAN factor. ASEAN has emerged as China’s largest trading partner and their bilateral trade is set to achieve the target of $1 trillion in a couple of years. Yet Southeast Asian governments are growing wary of China too. In a recent speech, the former Singapore foreign minister George Yeo said: “No country in ASEAN is going to turn down opportunities that come their way in China, but every country worries that too great a dependence on China will constrain our autonomy of action.” It is highly unlikely Beijing would resort to an action that will force countries in Southeast Asia to see China as an enemy.
Claims that “Xi wants to complete the task within his term of office” may be true. But there is no doubt that all of Xi’s predecessors – from Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping to Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao – also wanted to complete unification. All of them ultimately decided the internal and external conditions were not right. Xi, so far, has come to the same conclusion.
That said, arguing that Xi will not resort to force against Taiwan in the near future does not mean it will never happen. According to Deng Yuwen, cited above, one thing was crystal clear from Xi’s January 2, 2019 speech to mark the 40th anniversary of the “Message to Compatriots in Taiwan”: The 70-year-old cross-strait separation must be brought to an end by the time the People’s Republic of China celebrates its 100th anniversary in 2049. “The two sides must be unified and will definitely be unified,” Xi pledged.
Hemant Adlakha
Hemant Adlakha is a professor of Chinese at New Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University. He is also vice-chairperson and honorary fellow at the Institute of Chinese Studies, Delhi.
thediplomat.com · by Hemant Adlakha · January 20, 2023
7. America in Decline? World Thinks Again.
Beware the title and how it makes you feel.
Excerpts:
This upbeat view on the U.S. isn’t intended to warm patriotic or partisan fires. For one thing, the Davos Consensus is often wrong; not so long ago, this crowd was long on crypto and short on the U.S.
It’s also worth listening to the anxieties. They’re as revealing as the bullishness — about America and the state of the world.
...
This continuity is what makes Europeans sound conflicted on the U.S. The Inflation Reduction Act, which will push billions in subsidies to American industry, and a CHIPS Act that seeks to repatriate the production of semiconductors, prompted dismay in Europe. As does the Biden Administration’s indifference to the World Trade Organization. Joe Manchin, the principal author of the IRA legislation, felt the backlash firsthand in Davos, as my colleagues Alex Ward and Suzanne Lynch reported Thursday.
“The hope about the Biden administration was that it would be less inwardly looking than outward looking,” Cecilia Malmstrom, a Swedish politician who ran EU trade policy in the last decade, told a small lunch gathering in Davos. A European leader, who was speaking on background in another private meeting, put it more bluntly: “The U.S. undermines globalization, the other pillar of U.S. leadership. This could be the biggest strategic mistake in global relations for a long time.” To them, this approach is a rebuke of America’s commitment to a global order built on open trade and democratic values – what was known at one point as the Washington Consensus, which, as opposed to any fleeting one reached in Davos, held for decades.
If America will be both strong again and more willing to go alone, “this is a big thing!” said France’s Heisbourg. “This is very unlike the America of the past. It looks like this will be a century of disorder, and that’s pretty scary.”
America in Decline? World Thinks Again.
Politico
Magazine
Bolstered by a strong response in Ukraine, the U.S. is once again the talk of Davos.
A member of the U.S. Congress waives a Ukrainian flag as President Joe Biden delivers the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress. | Saul Loeb/Getty Images
01/20/2023 11:42 AM EST
Matthew Kaminski is POLITICO’s Editor-in-Chief.
DAVOS, Switzerland — For the American abroad, the signals are unmistakable — and dissonant.
The world is bullish on America and American power.
You read that right. This is the same world that looks on with glee or horror at the carnivalesque, occasionally violent politics on Capitol Hill. The same one that barely a year ago dismissed an America defeated in Afghanistan as a has-been and hailed the rise of a new authoritarian age led by China, with an assist from Vladimir Putin’s confident Russia.
Now some caveats. By the world, we’re referring to C-suite and political mastodons, and their assorted retinues, who spend $1,000 a night on a tiny bed in a drab two-star hotel to slosh around the icy streets of this Alpine town for a week of the World Economic Forum: the so-called Davos Man (and Woman). By bullish, we don’t mean unconditionally in love with America — when has that ever been the case? — but recognizing, sometimes begrudgingly, its deep strengths and appeal. And doing so in ways that were unimaginable recently and jarring to anyone marinated in the daily cycle of American news.
To be clear, we’re not in the “unipolar moment” of the early 1990s or the era of hyperpuissance — hyperpower, as a former French foreign minister called the U.S. at the close of the century, in what was not intended as a compliment. Nor does this moment resemble the Pax Americana of the neoconservatives of the George W. Bush years.
There’s, in addition, a giant caveat, most loudly voiced by the Europeans: This new American-led age could differ in one crucial and to them dangerous aspect from past ages in its tepid view of globalization and liberal world order, and that makes them very anxious.
But first, listen to the positives that Davos Man sees in America today — starting with its recently well-deployed hard power.
President Joe Biden probably won’t dwell on the irony of the gratitude for American leadership on Ukraine. Only months before Vladimir Putin ordered his troops to take Kyiv, Biden ordered his out of Kabul, ceding a 20-year war to the Taliban and infuriating his allies. Soon after, one European diplomat in Washington could memorably dismiss Biden’s brainy and inexperienced foreign policy team thusly: “They’ve never had sex, but they’ve read all the books about it.” The perception of a superpower in decline seemed to confirm Putin’s belief the U.S. lacked the stomach or muscle to stand in his way in Ukraine.
By many lights, the sole winner of the Russian war on Ukraine so far is the U.S. Accounting for nearly half the world’s military capability, the U.S. has reminded friends and adversaries of its superiority. Iraq and Afghanistan — that’s a bad but fading memory. Armed and aided by Washington, the Ukrainians have not just withstood the assault but destroyed a large chunk of the Russian military. Washington also gets points for its diplomacy. Even the French, usually eager to knock the U.S. down, sound complimentary.
“The U.S. has taken the lead convincingly and quite deftly on Ukraine,” François Heisbourg, the veteran and often critical French observer of American foreign policy in action, told me. Referring to the same advisers who were dismissed as callow incompetents in Afghanistan, he said, “Most of them are adults. They are potty trained. This [kind of U.S. response] hasn’t happened in over 20 years,” since the Clinton administration’s intervention in the Balkans. “We’re back to a world that people my age recognize,” added Heisbourg, who’s in his early 70s.
Another source of American power? Chinese weakness. As Putin’s military got shredded on the battlefield, Xi Jinping mismanaged the Covid response and cemented one-man rule at his party congress in ways that spooked neighbors and investors. Add an aging population and slowing growth, and — at least by the new Davos Consensus — we’ve passed “Peak China” and are headed the other way. This doesn’t mean China won’t be a danger; its frailties could make Xi less predictable and more dangerous. But the idea once dominant here that China would soon succeed the U.S. as the world’s leading power sounds ridiculous to Davos ears — as much as the claims about Japanese supremacy in 1980s did a few years after they were made.
Bearishness on China and on Europe’s prospects adds to America’s appeal, in particular, for business elites. Here’s a typical sentiment: “The U.S., in almost any sector, is the most attractive market, not just in terms of size but innovation,” Vas Narasimhan, who runs the Swiss drug maker Novartis, the world’s fourth-biggest pharmaceutical company with a large presence in Massachusetts, told me. As the world worries about possible recession, another part of the new consensus is that the U.S. would weather it best.
This upbeat view on the U.S. isn’t intended to warm patriotic or partisan fires. For one thing, the Davos Consensus is often wrong; not so long ago, this crowd was long on crypto and short on the U.S.
It’s also worth listening to the anxieties. They’re as revealing as the bullishness — about America and the state of the world.
In the wake of the Trump era, everyone feels free to doubt the stability of the American system, even if the midterms sent a reassuring message of back-to-normalcy. Most global companies and players know the policy paralysis and political polarization firsthand. And yet: As often as an executive will bemoan that members of Congress care more about Fox/MSNBC bookings than grappling with complex legislation, in this same breath, they’ll mention a constitutional order going back 250 years and traditions of rule of law hard to find in many other places. Until proven otherwise, probably by its own hand, democracy in America is one of the safer bets in the world, they say.
The new anxiety: America’s back on the world stage, but what kind of America?
On multilateralism, through NATO or the U.N., and on security in Europe, the Biden administration harkens back to another century — not to the Obama era, which began the distancing from traditional allies (who recoiled over the “pivot to Asia” and the “red line” in Syria that wasn’t) that Trump continued. But its approach to trade, to an industrial policy that prioritizes “reshoring” and “buy American,” to many Davos eyes, resembles Trump more than any other recent president.
This continuity is what makes Europeans sound conflicted on the U.S. The Inflation Reduction Act, which will push billions in subsidies to American industry, and a CHIPS Act that seeks to repatriate the production of semiconductors, prompted dismay in Europe. As does the Biden Administration’s indifference to the World Trade Organization. Joe Manchin, the principal author of the IRA legislation, felt the backlash firsthand in Davos, as my colleagues Alex Ward and Suzanne Lynch reported Thursday.
“The hope about the Biden administration was that it would be less inwardly looking than outward looking,” Cecilia Malmstrom, a Swedish politician who ran EU trade policy in the last decade, told a small lunch gathering in Davos. A European leader, who was speaking on background in another private meeting, put it more bluntly: “The U.S. undermines globalization, the other pillar of U.S. leadership. This could be the biggest strategic mistake in global relations for a long time.” To them, this approach is a rebuke of America’s commitment to a global order built on open trade and democratic values – what was known at one point as the Washington Consensus, which, as opposed to any fleeting one reached in Davos, held for decades.
If America will be both strong again and more willing to go alone, “this is a big thing!” said France’s Heisbourg. “This is very unlike the America of the past. It looks like this will be a century of disorder, and that’s pretty scary.”
POLITICO
Politico
8. Macron boosts French military spending by over a third to 'transform' army
Macron boosts French military spending by over a third to 'transform' army
Reuters · by Michel Rose
MONT-de-MARSAN, France, Jan 20 (Reuters) - France will boost military spending by more than a third in coming years, President Emmanuel Macron said on Friday, as he unveiled ambitions to transform the French army to deal with the great "perils" of this century.
Acknowledging the end of the "peace dividend" of the post-Cold War era, Macron said the planned 2024-2030 budget would adapt the military to the possibility of high-intensity conflicts, made all the more urgent since Russia's invasion of Ukraine almost 11 months ago.
The budget for the period will stand at 413 billion euros ($447 billion), up from 295 billion euros in 2019-2025, which will mean that by 2030, France's military budget would have doubled since he took power in 2017, Macron said.
"As war is changing, France has and will have armies ready for the perils of the century," said Macron, speaking at the Mont-de-Marsan air base in southwestern France.
"We need to be one war ahead," Macron added.
He added France would invest massively in drones and military intelligence, areas where French officials say recent conflicts had exposed gaps, and that the military should pivot towards a strategy of high-intensity conflict.
Macron's speech came as defence ministers from NATO and other countries were meeting at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany amid warnings that Russia will soon re-energise its invasion, in which it has seized parts of Ukraine's east and south.
Although France is the world's third-biggest arms exporter and the EU's sole nuclear power, it has come under criticism for not sending more weapons to Kyiv.
Macron has stepped up supplies since last summer, sending Caesar truck-mounted howitzers and promising AMX-10 RC tank destroyers, but French officials say operations in Africa and years of chronic under-investment had made it impossible to do more immediately.
Macron did not announce new support for Ukraine, but said France had to be ready for a new era, with an accumulation of threats. Some were old wars, others more unprecedented, "between sophistication and brutal simplicity", he said.
He also said France would beef up its capacity to respond to cyber attacks and would increase by near 60% the budget for military intelligence.
Last year, the head of French military intelligence resigned just a month after Russia launched what it calls its "special military operation" against Ukraine over what officials said was a failure to predict the invasion.
Macron also said France would pay particular attention to its military presence in overseas territories, especially in the Indo-Pacific, where new threats were emerging. ($1 = 0.9240 euros)
Reporting by Michel Rose in Paris and Clotaire Achi in Mont-de-Marsan; Additional reporting by Leigh Thomas; Writing by Ingrid Melander and Frances Kerry; Editing by Alex Richardson
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Reuters · by Michel Rose
9. Is the U.S. running out of weapons to send Ukraine?
No. Not yet.
Excerpts:
Sean Spoonts, a U.S. Navy veteran and editor-in-chief of Special Operations Forces Report (SOFREP), told Newsweek that "'running out of weapons' is a relative term."
"The U.S. military maintains vast stocks of ammunition in storage in case of war to give time for U.S. arms makers to ramp up replacement production," Spoonts said.
He added that when U.S. military officials speak of stockpiles getting low, they are often referring to a threshold in the inventory that is still capable of sustaining the U.S. military for months.
"Unlike Russia, which has a limited number of arms manufacturers making their weapons, the U.S. military relies on thousands of private companies both big and small to replace its stocks," Spoonts added.
He further noted that the U.S. has international partners like South Korea who have the ability to produce large numbers of materials needed for weapons within a short deadline.
George Mason University Schar School of Policy and Government professor Mark N. Katz told Newsweek that while Ukraine and Russia both continue using up large amounts of weapons, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky's forces have an advantage.
Is the U.S. running out of weapons to send Ukraine?
Newsweek · by Jon Jackson · January 20, 2023
Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro earlier this month warned that the U.S. may find it "challenging" to continue to arm itself and supply weapons to Ukraine if weapon production doesn't increase.
His comments came after European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said in September that "the military stocks of most [EU] member states has been, I wouldn't say exhausted, but depleted in a high proportion, because we have been providing a lot of capacity to the Ukrainians."
Such statements have led some to speculate whether the United States—as well as other Ukraine allies—will reach a point when it can no longer send more weapons to Ukraine because it needs to maintain a stockpile for its own defense.
"Whether the West could run out of weapons to supply Ukraine is a straightforward question at the same time that it is complex," William Reno, professor and chair of the political science department at Northwestern University, told Newsweek. "The straightforward answer is yes. Supplies are finite, including with increased production."
In the main picture, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky is seen during a press conference following the tripartite meeting on January 11, 2023, in Lviv, Ukraine. The smaller image shows a Ukrainian soldier holding a U.S.-made Stinger MANPAD (man-portable air-defense system) on the frontline on December 29, 2022, in Bakhmut, Ukraine. Some have wondered how long the U.S. can continue suppling Ukraine with weapons while keeping its own stockpiles at an adequate level for defense. Photo by Stanislav Ivanov/Pierre Crom/Global Images Ukraine/Getty Images
Reno said the topic of supplying weapons becomes more complex "when one considers impacts of weapons transfers on the military preparedness of providers." He detailed how a U.S. military division may pass weapons on to another department for training and how that unit's "command asks whether those transfers impair their own capacity to perform."
"Weapons transfers from smaller NATO member armed forces—Canada, Denmark, Norway—cut deeper into their capabilities and readiness," Reno said. "They expect the U.S. to back them."
However, Reno added that while the "burn rate" of weapons in Ukraine exceeds replacement capacities, the same "is true on the Russian side too," resulting in Russian President Vladimir Putin turning to Iran and North Korea for armaments.
Sean Spoonts, a U.S. Navy veteran and editor-in-chief of Special Operations Forces Report (SOFREP), told Newsweek that "'running out of weapons' is a relative term."
"The U.S. military maintains vast stocks of ammunition in storage in case of war to give time for U.S. arms makers to ramp up replacement production," Spoonts said.
He added that when U.S. military officials speak of stockpiles getting low, they are often referring to a threshold in the inventory that is still capable of sustaining the U.S. military for months.
"Unlike Russia, which has a limited number of arms manufacturers making their weapons, the U.S. military relies on thousands of private companies both big and small to replace its stocks," Spoonts added.
He further noted that the U.S. has international partners like South Korea who have the ability to produce large numbers of materials needed for weapons within a short deadline.
George Mason University Schar School of Policy and Government professor Mark N. Katz told Newsweek that while Ukraine and Russia both continue using up large amounts of weapons, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky's forces have an advantage.
"The difference, I believe, is that the West—especially the U.S.—has much greater capacity to produce weapons than does Russia and its allies," Katz said. "And since Russian weapons have relied on Western inputs, which Moscow can no longer obtain, this puts a severe limit on Russia's ability to resupply itself."
Steven Myers, a former member of the U.S. State Department Advisory Committee on International Economic policy and the National Security Membership Committee, told Newsweek that he believes the U.S. and Western allies could eventually hit their own issues with weapon production.
"Is the West going to run out of weapons? Yes and no," Myers said. "The U.S. can't keep sending weapons—for example artillery shells—without replenishing its stockpile. The Pentagon has been asking its contractors to ramp up production. But contractors, being sensible, are more than a little reluctant to do so without guarantees by the Pentagon for covering the capital expenses required for increasing production rate."
In Katz's estimation, if "the outcome of the war will be significantly determined by which side can deploy and replace the most weapons, Ukraine has the advantage—so long as Western states continue to supply it."
Spoonts credited much of Ukraine's success in the war to Western help, which he said Zelensky can likely continue to count on.
"They [Ukraine] are vulnerable in the sense that they probably could not continue the fight without the West's supplies. Negotiating with Russia, though, would not result in Ukraine continuing to exist as a country," Spoonts said. "Ukraine has little choice but to fight for its survival, and the West has to continue supplying them to assure that or take most of the blame for their defeat."
Newsweek reached out to the U.S. Department of Defense for comment.
Newsweek · by Jon Jackson · January 20, 2023
10. Navy Offers Up to $100K in Retention Bonuses for Select Special Warfare Sailors
Navy Offers Up to $100K in Retention Bonuses for Select Special Warfare Sailors - USNI News
news.usni.org · by Heather Mongilio · January 18, 2023
U.S. Navy SEALs survey a rooftop during consulate evacuation training during Weapons and Tactics Instructor (WTI) course 1-23 at Deuce Village, near Yuma, Arizona, Oct. 12, 2022. US Marine Corps Photo
Some senior enlisted members in the special warfare community have a chance to earn a retention bonus of up to $100,000, the Navy announced in a new memo.
NAVADMIN 004/23, released Jan. 10, details a new retention bonus program that targets naval special warfare senior enlisted sailors that have a SEAL special warfare operation (026X) or special warfare combatant craft board operator (052X) classification. The new program is the sea service’s new effort to increase retention.
“The NSW SSRB is part of the overarching effort of the Navy to size, shape, and stabilize the force,” the NAVADMIN reads.
In order to be eligible for the retention bonus, the senior enlisted sailors with the two classifications must have an E-7 or higher pay grade and have between 20 to 28 years of service, according to the NAVADMIN. The sailors must also be active duty and have a favorable recommendation from their commanding officer.
The retention bonus program will start with phase one, targeting those with the E-7 pay grade who have 20 to 24 years of service. E-7 sailors can earn up to $80,000 in retention bonuses for their contracts, with $20,000 awarded each year.
The second phase is for enlisted sailors with an E-8 paygrade and 24 to 26 years of service. They have the opportunity to earn up to $50,000 in retention bonuses, with $25,000 offered each year.
The third phase is offered for E-9 sailors with 26 to 28 years of service. These sailors have the ability to earn up to $100,000 in bonuses, with $25,000 offered each year. Sailors who have 27 and 28 years of service have an option to sign a contract for their 29th and 30th years of service.
Sailors who want to earn the retention bonus must re-enlist or extend their enlistment contracts for at least two years. The retention bonus contracts are for between two to three years, according to the NAVADMIN.
“Reenlistments and extensions may be combined to align service dates for the
maximum opportunity, up to a reenlistment of 6 years and an extension of up
to 12 months,” the NAVADMIN reads.
Those wishing to apply for the program should submit a request through their chain of command to the naval special warfare enlisted community manager, who is serving as the program manager. Any sailors already under one of the critical skills retention bonus programs, such as the selective reenlistment bonus program, or part of the High Year Tenure Plus pilot program – which suspends the high year tenure for two years – are not eligible.
Related
news.usni.org · by Heather Mongilio · January 18, 2023
11. 'China cannot be out, China must be in': France says it's diverging with Washington on Beijing ties
'China cannot be out, China must be in': France says it's diverging with Washington on Beijing ties
KEY POINTS
- The United States has taken a confrontational approach with China particularly when it comes to the technology sector.
- The European Union, however, has looked at striking a balance between its political friendship with the U.S. and its economic ties with China.
CNBC · by Silvia Amaro · January 20, 2023
French Minister for the Economy and Finances Bruno Le Maire spoke at a CNBC panel in Davos.
Ludovic Marin | Afp | Getty Images
DAVOS, Switzerland — The European Union does not see eye-to-eye with the United States when it comes to opposing China, the French finance minister told CNBC Friday.
Speaking at a panel at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, looking at the economic outlook, France's Bruno Le Maire said: "China cannot be out, China must be in. This is the difference of view we have between the U.S. and Europe."
"We don't want to oppose China, we want to engage with China, we want China to obey by the same rules," he said, "this is our policy."
The United States has taken a confrontational approach with China particularly when it comes to the technology sector. The European Union, however, has looked at striking a balance between its political friendship with the U.S. and its economic ties with China.
watch now
VIDEO2:4702:47
France's finance minister: Europe needs to invest in its own green technology
Davos - World Economic Forum
Though European officials have said China is a strategic rival, they also recognize they want to develop commercial ties with Beijing and work together against climate change.
France's President Emmanuel Macron is reportedly planning a trip to China in the coming weeks to discuss energy and trade, as well as the broader consequences of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Data from Europe's statistics office showed that China was the third-largest partner for EU exports of goods in 2021, and the largest partner for imports.
watch now
VIDEO2:4702:47
France's finance minister: We have entered a 'new era of globalization'
Squawk Box Europe
CNBC · by Silvia Amaro · January 20, 2023
12. Air Force Moves F-16s from Europe to Japan as Ukraine War Lingers and Pacific Tensions Simmer
A pivot to Asia?
Air Force Moves F-16s from Europe to Japan as Ukraine War Lingers and Pacific Tensions Simmer
military.com · by Thomas Novelly · January 17, 2023
The Air Force is temporarily moving fighter jets from Germany to Okinawa, Japan, after the Pentagon announced it was pulling older F-15 Eagles from Kadena Air Base in an attempt to bring more modern aircraft to the Pacific.
F-16 Fighting Falcons from the 52nd Fighter Wing at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, arrived at Kadena on Monday, even as the installation continues to slowly return its fleet of F-15C/D fighters to the United States.
The decision to move the fighter jets out of Europe comes as Russia's war in Ukraine continues.
David Ochmanek, a senior international and defense researcher at the nonprofit Rand Corp., told Military.com in an interview Tuesday that moving the F-16s out of Germany shouldn’t meaningfully diminish the Air Force's presence around Ukraine.
"Although F-16s are going from Europe to Kadena, it doesn't mean there will be less U.S. combat airpower deployed in Europe," Ochmanek said. "The Air Force has been rotationally deploying squadrons to Europe since the outbreak of war in Ukraine, and I think that's likely to continue for quite some time."
Last week in a meeting with Japan's ministers for foreign affairs and defense, the Pentagon and State Department announced a renewed alliance with the country; the U.S. and Japanese officials also reiterated their fears about China's military expansion in the Pacific.
Those announcements didn’t include a specific change to U.S. forces stationed in Japan, and Monday’s announcement from the Air Force described the repositioning as part of the Pentagon’s broader Asia strategy.
"As the F-16s begin operations, they too will integrate their unique strengths to help Team Kadena deter and, if necessary, prevail over acts of aggression that threaten peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific," the Air Force said Monday in a press release.
There have been notable recent provocations by China. On Dec. 21, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command issued a statement admonishing a Chinese fighter jet's "unsafe maneuver during an intercept" of an Air Force RC-135 Combat Sent aircraft in international airspace.
In August, China launched missile strikes near Taiwan during a military exercise shortly after a visit by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
"The Ministers concurred that China's foreign policy seeks to reshape the international order to its benefit and to employ China's growing political, economic, military, and technological power to that end," the Pentagon said in a statement after last week's meeting. "This behavior is of serious concern to the Alliance and the entire international community, and represents the greatest strategic challenge in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond."
Republican lawmakers publicly blasted the Pentagon's decision to replace the permanent F-15 fleets in Japan with rotational aircraft, namely F-16 and F-22 fighters sent for limited duration deployments, arguing it was not a wise move as tensions rise with China.
In November, Republican lawmakers -- led by Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida -- asked the Pentagon to provide a briefing "articulating specific steps to replace the deterrent value and combat capability of any assets removed from the Indo-Pacific region, as well as the administration's plan to establish a force posture in the Indo-Pacific that would be resilient to a [Chinese] attack and capable of deterring an invasion of Taiwan."
That same month, F-22 Raptors assigned to the 3rd Wing at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, were moved to Japan shortly after Kadena announced it was removing its fleet of F-15s, many of which are upward of 30 years old.
"Modernizing our capabilities in the Indo-Pacific theater remains a top priority for the U.S.," the base said in an October press release. "This transition to more capable aircraft at Kadena exemplifies our continued commitment to enhancing our posture and building on the strong foundation of our Alliance with Japan."
Ochmanek told Military.com that the F-16s and F-22s are a "net gain in modernization" for Kadena. But he said arguments over which type of manned aircraft to send to the base ignore some of the larger problems, such as defending installations in Japan from Chinese missile attacks.
"Whether you've got an F-16 or F-15 or F-22 sitting at Kadena, they're all vulnerable to attack by Chinese missiles," Ochmanek said. "Arguments about the details of what manned aircraft are where, to me, are less interesting than how they're going to evolve the overall posture not just to Kadena but in the region."
The 52nd Fighter Wing did not detail how many F-16s were moved from Germany to Japan.
"We are excited to be here supporting our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region," Lt. Col. Shaun Loomis, 480th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron commander, said in Monday's press release. "We look forward to training and operating in this uniquely complex and strategically vital region."
-- Thomas Novelly can be reached at thomas.novelly@military.com. Follow him on Twitter @TomNovelly.
military.com · by Thomas Novelly · January 17, 2023
13. Coast Guard: Illegal Fishing Has Surpassed Piracy as a Global Threat
Coast Guard: Illegal Fishing Has Surpassed Piracy as a Global Threat - USNI News
news.usni.org · by John Grady · January 19, 2023
Japanese fishing enforcement interdicts an illegal Chinese fishing boat in 2013.
Illegal fishing has surpassed piracy as a Coast Guard global concern in the maritime domain, the service’s top officer overseeing response policy said Wednesday.
“The Coast Guard has been in the [fishing] enforcement game for a long time,” said Rear Adm. Jo-Ann Burdian. Most recently it started with enforcing the ban on using high seas drift nets, roughly the size of a football field, that were rapidly depleting fish stocks.
Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing globally has had cascading effects on many nations’ food security and led to conflict on the oceans, as has occurred between Chinese fishing fleets and Filipino fishermen, she noted during a forum at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Illegal fishing, when combined with climate change’s impact on supply and rising sea levels, is also setting off a “crisis of regular migration,” as seen in the Caribbean, Burdian said.
Fishing “is the fundamental pillar [for] how [many of] these countries are sustaining themselves,” said Kelly Kryc, the deputy assistant secretary for international fisheries at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Maxine Burkett, the deputy assistant secretary of state for oceans, fisheries and polar affairs, said these “cascading, overlapping issues [of supply and environment] are going to shape foreign policy.” The situation is “especially acute now,” with criminal networks increasingly engaged in trafficking illegal catches, putting further stress on supply.
Natural issues – from depleted fishing stock to rising temperatures – are global issues, Kryc added. “The United States government cannot solve this problem alone” because “these are problems without borders.”
Kryc and the other panelists agreed. “We work with those who are willing to work with us on the problem at the source,” particularly in enforcement, Kryc said. Burkett said these partnerships have to come with no strings attached and must be continuous to be effective.
The panelists were measuring the impact of the Maritime SAFE Act. In introducing the bill that is now law, Sens. Christopher Coons (D-Del.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said, illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing “is an issue that not only poses a serious threat to our own national security but also contributes to instability in regions important to United States interests,” Coons said in a 2019 statement. “This legislation allows the United States to combat a multi-billion dollar criminal industry that undercuts the economic livelihoods of legitimate fishermen and threatens food security for communities around the world.”
Using the 14th Coast Guard District, headquartered in Honolulu, as an example of how the service is working with other nations, Burdian said it’s training smaller island nations’ maritime forces to perform enforcement operations and monitor their exclusive economic zones.
In addition to those larger missions, she said the Coast Guard provides basic help like just basic engine support.
The question is “how can we be better partners [with other nations in the Pacific, off the coasts of Central and South America and Africa] in obtaining domain awareness” that will add law enforcement, Burkett said.
Burdian said many nations use the U.S. Coast Guard as a model for how to conduct enforcement to protect fisheries. Kyrc added that for many nations, “fish is the primary currency” they rely on to feed their citizens and preserve their cultures.
Related
news.usni.org · by John Grady · January 19, 2023
14. Defense bill OKs future national intelligence museum
National Intelligence AND Special Operations Museum. It has been a great experience to be a part of this project. I have learned quite a bit about architecture and museum and exhibit design. This museum will be a great tribute to all special operators and intelligence officers and associated professionals of the past, present, and future.
Defense bill OKs future national intelligence museum
militarytimes.com · by Jonathan Lehrfeld · January 20, 2023
A new museum focusing on the intelligence and special operations communities is coming to northern Virginia.
In its latest national defense spending bill, Congress officially recognized the planned institution as The National Museum of Intelligence and Special Operations.
The $125 million privately funded facility is likely to hold a groundbreaking ceremony in July 2025 and officially open in late 2027, according to Charles Pinck, president of the organization developing the museum.
His group, The Office of Strategic Services Society, honors the agency that preceded U.S. Special Operations Command and the CIA.
“I hope people will take away how important these communities are to our national security and why they deserve our support,” said Pinck in an interview with Military Times, adding he also wants the roughly 8.5-acre site in Ashburn to inspire future generations to serve.
(Rendering of future National Museum of Intelligence and Special Operations / Courtesy of Charles Pinck, The OSS Society, Rendering by Fentress Architects)
The 60,000-square-foot museum is being designed by Fentress Architects, which also designed the National Museum of the Marine Corps. It is to be shaped as a spearhead — a symbol still used today by the special forces community — and will feature 14,000 square feet of exhibit space, an educational program area and an outdoor event pavilion naturally called “Tip of the Spear.”
RELATED
Navy picks location for new national museum
The Navy has found a location for its new national museum.
The estimated 100,000 patrons expected each year can anticipate special artifacts and interactive galleries that immerse visitors in the historic and current experiences faced by special operators and intelligence officers.
Pinck has long sought to create this type of space, and shared that he draws inspiration for the museum from his late father, Dan Pinck, who served as an operator for the OSS in China during World War II and later wrote a memoir about his experiences.
About Jonathan Lehrfeld
Jonathan is a staff writer and editor of the Early Bird Brief newsletter for Military Times. Follow him on Twitter @lehrfeld_media
15. We need an open source intelligence center
As anyone who reads my messages must know that I am a great believer in open source information. I have been sending out my daily open source news in various forms since 1996 when we first really started using email on a regular basis.
If I wore king for a day I would establish a "shadow" joint operations center (JOC) to parallel the actual JOCs but in the parallel version I would only use open source information and use that to information to inform those who are actually responsible for planning and executing operations.
We need an open source intelligence center
BY RODNEY FARAON AND PETER MATTIS, OPINION CONTRIBUTORS - 01/20/23 11:30 AM ET
https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3821075-we-need-an-open-source-intelligence-center/?utm_source=pocket_saves
In April 2018, Dutch authorities caught four Russian intelligence officers red-handed as they attempted to hack into the network of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) from the hotel across the street. The OPCW was investigating the substances used in the poisoning of a Russian defector living in the United Kingdom, and a chemical attack by Assad-backed forces in Douma, Syria. After the Dutch government publicly identified the four officers, open source researchers at Bellingcat — an independent investigative journalism group — leveraged the personal details of the four to identify 305 additional agents of the GRU, Russia’s principal military intelligence unit. Bellingcat’s researchers made the discovery using the agents’ car registrations, which were linked to the service’s training academy.
This kind of open source discovery — once thought to be within the exclusive purview of governments — has become somewhat routine for skilled researchers in the private sector. Their accomplishments include validating U.S. government claims about the Kremlin’s military build-up around Ukraine, exposing Beijing’s efforts to acquire foreign technology on a vast scale, uncovering the Chinese military’s investments in artificial intelligence, and identifying several Russian assassination and surveillance teams behind the attempts on the lives of Russian dissidents and defectors.
The discoveries point to a broader trend that the U.S. government would be wise to harness — the exponential growth of publicly and commercially available data, and the emergence of technologies that allow for its rapid processing and dot connecting.
The roughly 6.6 billion smartphone users, 5 billion internet users, and 5,500 active satellites in orbit, as well as countless other apps, surveillance cameras, and sensors have created unprecedented opportunities to observe patterns of human life based on their digital exhaust. By some estimates, human engagement with these devices and sensors is expected to generate some 463 exabytes of data daily by 2025 — roughly equivalent to 22,047 copies of the Library of Congress’ current digital collection (for reference, Library of Congress’s digital collection was 21 petabytes in 2022). As this data is being generated, new AI tools are becoming increasingly available and essential aides for researchers to sift through for patterns and trends. Large language and computer vision models can now generate insights from massive data sets of text, images, and video. AI-enabled tools could also build out predictive models to analyze open source data.
The imperative for the U.S. government to harness these trends is not only technological. The United States is engaged in a geopolitical rivalry with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that is wide in scope, multilayered in complexity, and fierce in intensity. We compete militarily in the Indo-Pacific and across domains. We compete diplomatically at the United Nations and across the world. We compete technologically for leadership over a wide tech stack. In an all-encompassing, constant competition, open source intelligence is an essential component of any winning strategy.
The White House and Congress appear to recognize the importance of open source. The Biden administration’s National Security Strategy released last October highlighted better exploitation of “open source materials” as one of the key areas where the intelligence community could help sharpen U.S. statecraft. The State Department last year announced the Strategic Open Source Coordination Office, to serve as a focal point for open source policy, tradecraft, and training. Congressmen Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) and Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) introduced a bill in the last Congress to create an Open Translation and Analysis Center with the mission of conducting open source work and making translations available to the public. Similarly, each Intelligence Authorization Act over the last five years has carried a number of open source provisions.
However, these proposed initiatives and programs have either not come to pass or have fallen short. A government of multiple small efforts is insufficiently prepared to harness the current open source revolutionary potential. The volume and variety of open and commercial source materials, urgency of the geopolitical rivalry, and continued development of tools to exploit the data all necessitate a systematic effort to harness open and commercial source to support decision making. The answer, we believe, rests on standing up a standalone open source entity.
This government entity would have a national mission to collect, process, analyze, and disseminate publicly and commercially available data related to foreign rivals. To be successful, it would need to have several key attributes. First, the entity would need a voice in the intelligence community to influence and plug into the intelligence cycle. Second, it must serve as a gateway between the Intelligence Community, the rest of the U.S. Government, and outside partners in business, academia, and civil society. Third, the entity would need to employ a hybrid workforce of both cleared and uncleared personnel. Meaningful connections to the national security apparatus require security clearances; however, many routine open source tasks are not sensitive and do not need to be concealed. Throughout this entire process, this entity would need to ensure that it collects, processes, and distributes data in comformity with U.S. privacy laws.
Where would it reside and what would be the objectives of such an entity have long been debated. There are four options to address the need immediately. One option would be to create an independent agency or one housed under an existing department, such as Commerce, Defense, State, or the General Services Administration, to name a few potential candidates. The second option would be the creation of a new intelligence agency, because the IC needs an agency with the budget, hiring power, and seat at the table to champion open source. Third, is an Open Source Coordination Office reporting to the Director of National Intelligence. The fourth is focusing on the normalization of open source use in all-source analytic products across the IC.
Apart from the benefits of harnessing open and commercial source information, such an entity could also serve as a training ground for future AI algorithms. The less classified environment would make it easier to experiment with commercially-available AI tools, streamlining adoption and — in the process — enabling the organization to become operational faster. In a race for actionable insight to compete with the PRC, an open source agency would prepare the IC to sprint. And the better it performs, the more it would encourage other IC agencies to push the pace.
Strategic competition calls for strengthening trade in the Americas
The folly of self-imposed red lines on US aid to Ukraine
The imperative for change is clearly here. Competition, conflict, and national security in a data-driven, technologically-enabled world must account for public facing data. The time is now.
Rodney Faraon is a partner at Crumpton Global, a management consultancy. He is a former senior intelligence officer at the Central Intelligence Agency.
Peter Mattis is Director for Intelligence at the Special Competitive Studies Project and a former counterintelligence analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency.
16. Ukraine Situation Report: Russian Casualties "Significantly Well Over 100k" Says Top U.S. General
Ukraine Situation Report: Russian Casualties "Significantly Well Over 100k" Says Top U.S. General
General Milley said the losses on both sides are horrendous and that it will only end via negotiation once Russia has left Ukraine.
BY
HOWARD ALTMAN
|
PUBLISHED JAN 20, 2023 6:55 PM
thedrive.com · by Howard Altman · January 20, 2023
Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, offered a slightly revised update Friday on the numbers of Russian casualties during the country's all-out war in Ukraine.
“I would say it’s significantly well over 100,000 now,” he said Friday at a press conference after the wrap-up of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting in Germany.
A view of debris at the Russian Armed Forces' temporary deployment location, where scores of Russian troops died after Ukrainian artillery attacks near Makiivka, Ukraine on Jan. 16, 2023. (Photo by Vladimir Aleksandrov/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
The last time Milley publicly discussed the number of Russian casualties, back in November, he said that “well over” 100,000 had been killed and wounded.
"Same thing probably on the Ukrainian side as well."
While not offering any further specifics about the Russian casualty numbers or offering any numbers at all about Ukrainian losses, he said “there are significant casualties on both sides.”
“The Russians have suffered a tremendous amount of casualties in their military,” Milley said, “and that includes the regular military and also the mercenaries in the Wagner group, and other types of forces that are fighting with the Russians. They’ve really suffered a lot.”
Ukraine, he said, “has also suffered tremendously. There's a significant amount of innocent civilians that have been killed as a result of the Russian actions. The Russians are hitting civilian infrastructure. There's a significant amount of economic damage, a significant amount of damage to the energy infrastructure, and the Ukrainian military has suffered ... This is a very, very bloody war.”
The funeral of three Ukrainian servicemen who died in battle – Sehii Yanets, Oleksandr Schavei and Taras Tomachkivskyi – held at the St. Nicholas' Greek-Catholic church in Kyiv. (Photo by Danylo Antoniuk/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
While Milley didn't offer any figures on Ukrainian casualties, a count Kyiv likes to keep a close hold of, the German newspaper Der Spiegel gave an indication Friday of how deadly one sector of the battlefield is for Ukraine, which is worrying German intelligence officials.
"The foreign intelligence service informed security politicians in the Bundestag in a secret meeting this week that the Ukrainian Army is currently losing a three-digit number of soldiers every day in battles with the Russian invaders" in Bakhmut, according to Der Spiegel.
Russia, meanwhile, has shown the capacity to regenerate its forces, at least in terms of headcount, Milley said.
“You saw that the Russians ... called up a mobilization of 300,000” troops. "I think they were able to get 200,000-250,000, something in that range. So they're replacing their losses in terms of manpower.”
What Milley didn’t get into, and wasn’t asked about, was how many of those troops will eventually be truly combat-worthy.
But because of all the issues he did raise, Milley said there will have to be negotiations to end the conflict.
“Sooner or later, this is going to have to get to a negotiating table at some point in order to bring this to a conclusion, and that will have to happen when the end state, which is a free, sovereign, independent Ukraine with its territory intact, is met,” he said. “When that day comes, then people will sit down and negotiate an end to this.”
Before The War Zone readers dive into the rest of the most recent updates on the ongoing conflict below, they can also first get up to speed on recent developments through our previous rolling coverage here.
The Latest
On the battlefront, with the exception of portions of Donetsk Oblast, the situation is largely static, Milley said.
"This is a very, very difficult fight," he said. "The front line goes from all the way from Kharkiv down to Kherson, and there's significant fighting ongoing. And it's more or less a static front line right this minute, with the exception of Bakhmut and Soledar [in Donetsk Oblast], with a significant offensive action going on really from both sides."
Not surprisingly, the two sides differ in their assessment of what's taking place in Donetsk.
Both the Russian Defense Ministry (MoD) and the pro-Russian Rybar Telegram channel claimed that the small town of Klischiivka, about five miles south of Bakhmut, has been captured.
Rybar added that in Bakhmut, "fierce clashes continue on the southern and eastern outskirts of the city."
Units of the Wagner mercenary group "storm the positions of Ukrainian formations in the area of the meat processing plant."
In Soledar, Wagner "assault detachments...are fighting with Ukrainian formations at the Krasnopolye-Razdolovka-Veseloye line, and are also advancing in the direction of Blagodatny," Rybar said.
Southwest of Soledar, "Russian troops have entrenched themselves on the northern outskirts of Krasnaya Gora and are moving into the center of the settlement. Enemy artillery randomly fires at Soledar and its environs: during one of the strikes, military commander Anastasia Yelsukova was injured."
Medics of the Ukrainian Army evacuate a wounded soldier on a road near Soledar. (Photo by Anatolii Stepanov / AFP) (Photo by ANATOLII STEPANOV/AFP via Getty Images)
The Ukrainian MoD was much more circumspect in its assessment.
"In the direction of Bakhmut, Verkhnokamyanske, Spirnye, Bilogorivka, Rozdolivka, Soledar, Bakhmut, Chasiv Yar, Klishchiivka, Bila Gora, Severnye, Zalizne and Mayorsk of the Donetsk region were damaged by fire," the Ukrainian MoD said on its Telegram channel, indicating that there are at least some Ukrainian troops in or near Klischiivka.
However, Ukraine's Armed Forces say they destroyed a Wagner headquarters and field depot in Soledar, according to the press office of the 45th Separate Artillery Brigade which published this video of an artillery strike on Facebook on January 20.
"The Armed Forces hit the headquarters and field staff of the Wagnerites in Soledar," the brigade wrote on its Telegram channel. "The occupiers use residential buildings and yards as headquarters and warehouses, but our gunners see everything."
That brigade also managed to strike at Russian troops in Soledar with drones, as you can see in this video below.
The battle for Bakhmut is causing trouble for Ukraine while Russia doesn't seem to mind massive losses, Der Spiegel reported.
The Federal Intelligence Service (BND) "warned that taking Bakhmut by the Russians would have serious consequences, as it would allow Russia to make further advances inland," the newspaper reported. "The BND also reported that the Russian Army was acting with merciless severity at Bakhmut. The briefing said that Russia is currently throwing soldiers forward like cannon fodder, and that high losses in its own armed forces apparently played no role in the Russian war tactics."
Speaking of those tactics, the Russians are apparently not just doing that in Donetsk, as these pictures seem to show of waves of them getting cut down by Ukrainian snipers in Zaporizhzhia Oblast.
And speaking of Wagner, the U.S. Treasury Department will impose additional sanctions on that group, according to The Associated Press.
Treasury will designate Wagner as a transnational criminal organization in the coming days, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby announced Friday. He said the designation will allow the administration to hit Wagner with tougher sanctions and squeeze its ability to do business around the world.
The White House, AP reported, also released images of Russia taking delivery of an arms shipment from North Korea that it said was intended to help bolster Wagner forces in Ukraine. Last month, the Biden administration first accused North Korea of providing infantry rockets and missiles to Russia. North Korea has denied assisting Russia.
Ammunition supplies are a major issue on both sides, with Russia going to North Korea for shells and other materiel and NATO pulling from every resource available to keep Ukraine armed.
Defense Secretary Austin stated the following today in Germany:
"Russia is running out of ammunition. It's suffering significant battle losses. And it's turning to its few remaining partners to resupply its tragic and unnecessary invasion. And even Iran and North Korea won't admit that they are supplying Russia. Just compare that to the groundswell of support for a free and sovereign Ukraine represented in this room."
This morning, the Ukraine Defense Contact Group of some 50 nations working to arm Ukraine in its fight against Russia wrapped up with no new announcement of modern western tanks being provided. You can read more about that here.
The news apparently didn't sit well in Germany, where thousands of Germans gathered in Berlin to urge the government to allow Leopard 2 tanks to be sent to Ukraine.
Yesterday, we wrote about air defense systems being set up in Moscow. Well, apparently they've also been set up near Vladimir Putin's bunker.
And finally, back in April, we interviewed a member of the Ukrainian Azov Regiment forces which were holding out against the Russians at the Azovstal steel plant in Mariupol. The plant was utterly destroyed and captured, but the fight pinned down Russian forces, allowing Ukraine to advance elsewhere. Here is a view of how it looks today.
That's it for now. We will update this story if there is anything major to add.
Contact the author:
thedrive.com · by Howard Altman · January 20, 2023
17. From Fake News to Fake Views: New Challenges Posed by ChatGPT-Like AI
Not just a challenge for teachers checking their students' papers.
From Fake News to Fake Views: New Challenges Posed by ChatGPT-Like AI
lawfareblog.com · by petersalib · January 20, 2023
Nikolas Guggenberger is Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center. He also holds an appointment at the Cullen College of Engineering’s Electrical and Computer Engineering Department. Guggenberger’s work focuses on antitrust, law & technology, privacy, and regulation. He has frequently advised government entities and served as expert witness on technology policy, financial markets regulation, and media law.
MORE ARTICLES
Peter N. Salib is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center and Affiliated Faculty at the Hobby School of Public Affairs. He thinks and writes about constitutional law, economics, and artificial intelligence. His scholarship has been published in, among others, the University of Chicago Law Review, the Northwestern University Law Review, and the Texas Law Review.
MORE ARTICLES
Just over a month ago, OpenAI released ChatGPT, a text-producing artificial intelligence (AI) application. ChatGPT is impressive. It can draft unique, plausible, college-level essays on topics ranging from economics to philosophy—in iambic pentameter if asked. At least without specialized tools, the AI’s writing is indistinguishable from that of a reasonably articulate, competent human, and it can produce such content across various domains.
ChatGPT is obviously a powerful new tool that has the potential to do much good in many sectors. But there will also be downsides. Among them, AIs like ChatGPT will be able to produce a limitless and practically free supply of “opinions” on anything. These fake opinions will supercharge online influence campaigns and erode another pillar of trust in liberal discourse: the very idea that our counterparts online are real people.
In 2015, the small-d democratic problem with online speech was disinformation and misinformation. Fabricated news stories claiming that, for example, Hillary Clinton helped to run a child trafficking ring out of a Washington, D.C., pizza shop spread like wildfire. These and countless following lies fed directly into a political movement that culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection attempt. No doubt, addressing deliberate disinformation is a difficult problem—especially when these lies come from the highest-ranking political officials in the country. Combating disinformation raises constitutional questions, and responses necessarily contain difficult trade-offs around free speech. Yet traditional media has updated its approach to covering disinformation, and social media has become more successful in identifying, labeling, and suppressing false information. Twitter’s recent, more lenient, approach to misinformation and particularly right-wing propaganda does not reverse the general trend. Sprawling research into disinformation and misinformation after the 2016 U.S. presidential election has contributed to a better understanding of howinformation consumption habits are changing, and digital media literacy is making its way into classrooms. Some studies show that younger people fare better at distinguishing facts from fiction. Altogether, the developments over the past years give some reason for hope.
Fake opinions, shared as a part of what looks like human dialogue, however, are another story entirely. Perhaps the most effective strategy for making someone believe something is convincing them that most other people like them already believe it. Propagandists understand this.
In 2016, the Russian government engaged in systematic campaigns to “astroturf” disruptive views. Astroturfing is a strategy for manufacturing the appearance of consensus by posting the controversial opinion over and over, in many places, from many accounts. Astroturfing circa 2016, however, was often either ineffective or expensive. Simple bots could copy and paste more-or-less identical social media posts over and over from newly created accounts. These bots’ repetitive content and suspicious posting patterns made them comparatively easy for social media platforms to identify and ban, even if doing so sometimes took time. The more effective but expensive strategy was to pay an army of real humans to maintain long-term social media accounts that liked, shared, and posted on a wide range of topics. Such influence accounts were much harder to detect. They looked like real users because they were. Over time, then, these naturalistic accounts could begin to mix in the opinion to be astroturfed without much fear of being banned. Their activity would be indistinguishable from that of a real human with a handful of controversial views.
ChatGPT, or similar AI, will make effective astroturfing practically free and difficult to detect. Unlike the bots of yesteryear, such AIs need not spam near-identical copy-pasted statements of fringe views. They can mimic humans, producing an infinite supply of coherent, nuanced, and entirely unique content across a range of topics. Just try asking ChatGPT to write an argument for arming schoolteachers or raising the minimum wage. A Facebook account run by such an AI might post daily recipes or stories about its dog. It might do this for months or years before beginning to sprinkle in, say, opinions to the effect that Ukraine is to blame for Russian aggression against it. Such accounts can and will be created by the millions at almost no cost. The bot accounts will not only post proactively but also react to other users’ posts and engage in long-term conversations. They can be programmed to look out for certain keywords, such as “Ukraine,” “Nato,” or “Putin,” analyze the past contributions, and produce a plausible reply.
The bottomless supply of practically free opinions could crowd out real—that is, human—contributions. Although propagandists have already relied on flooding the zone as a 21st-century version of censorship, ChatGPT-like AI will elevate that strategy to the next level. Once bot pundits become indistinguishable from humans, humans will start to question the identity of everyone online, especially those with whom they disagree.
To be sure, ChatGPT has plenty of limitations, some of which have drawn ridicule. Cognitive scientist Gary Marcus, who holds great hopes for AI, identifies two core problems: neural networks are “not reliable and they’re not truthful.” This, Marcus argues, results from the type of reasoning on which the large language models rely. And he is not alone. Leading Google AI researchers acknowledged in a recent paper that scaling the models alone will likely not do the trick. Size alone brings little “improvements on safety and factual grounding.” Journalist and pundit Ezra Klein, in a recent episode of the Ezra Klein Show, put it more drastically: The current systems “have no actual idea what they are saying or doing. It is bullshit [] in the classic philosophical definition by Harry Frankfurt. It is content that has no real relationship to the truth.” Much of the skepticism and criticism boils down to comparisons with humans, and, indeed, large language models do not think like we do.
These limitations of current AI technology, however, do not stand in the way of sowing distrust. In some respects, they may even be features, not bugs. Random users arguing on Twitter are not famous for the accuracy and sophistication of their contributions. Mistakes, inaccuracies, and even made-up sources may give the machines a human touch. What counts is plausibility, and the current version of ChatGPT is surely not less capable of producing plausible content than the average Twitter user. A C- college essay more than does the trick.
Social media companies will no doubt continue to try and discover and ban these bot accounts. But given current capabilities, sorting humans from AIs will be difficult—at least at scale. As such accounts become more and more human-like, it will be harder to shut them down without accidentally censoring real people, too. The choice may thus be between substantial underenforcement—letting lots of bots run wild—or substantial overenforcement—banning most bots and lots of humans, too. Perhaps new approaches—probably themselves algorithmic—will emerge that improve platforms’ ability to play spot-the-bot. But even then, the chatbots will continue to evolve to avoid detection, and public discourse could become a battle of the algorithms, with computing power defining the marketplace of ideas.
Another possible solution might be to treat opinions more like lies—deemphasizing or removing the most troublesome content, irrespective of whether a human or a machine generated it. This is a dangerous game from the perspective of free speech. Even if one believes that a narrow range of views—say, overt racism—ought to be banned online, removing just those will do little to stop AI-driven astroturfing. Human-like bots need not be overtly racist to wield worrying influence. They will flood the field with views about which politicians to vote for, what policies to support, and which geopolitical foes are and are not worth standing up to. And speech on such topics—even speech with which one vehemently disagrees—is at the core democratic debate.
Yet another solution could involve reforming the business model of social media. Today, major social media platforms earn most of their money from advertisements. That model involves zero-cost access, which not only allows bot accounts but also poses little to no barriers to entry. Such a model can in fact thrive on bots—engagement with bot-takes drives revenue as effectively as engagement with human ones. Platforms may even profit directly by showing advertisements to bot accounts. Subscription-based business models without advertisements—think Netflix or Spotify Premium—could change the calculus. Creating and maintaining a bot account would no longer be free. Thus, Twitter’s $8 per month “blue checks for the masses” policy might turn out to have real benefits, as a bot filter, beyond improving Elon Musk’s personal balance sheet.
Eight dollars a month may not seem like a high price tag for, say, Russia to influence a foreign election. But the cost would be higher than it first appears. First, to work well, astroturfed opinion bots need to operate at scale. Twitter has admitted it found and removed over 50,000 Russian bot accounts created just to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. There were surely many more. Granted, $400,000 a month (the cost of 50,000 bots on Elon Musk’s $8/month Twitter) is a trivial sum for a nation-state. But the price of a bot account under the subscription model is higher than the top-line dollar figure. Account holders would have to supply a method of payment, like a credit card, which would be subject to “know your customer” rules. This could operate as a weak “proof of humanity.” Indeed, Twitter and other social media sites could limit the kinds of payment that they would accept to those usually requiring some minimal identification. That is, accept credit and debit cards, but no prepaid cards or Bitcoin. They could likewise limit the number of simultaneous or consecutive accounts created using a single method of payment. While none of these measures can guarantee to keep bots out, they would significantly increase the costs of running bot accounts.
Approaches like these carry significant risks, of course. First, they exclude people from discourse who lack either the necessary funds or digital means of payment. Second, the measures, if implemented successfully, would deliver a severe blow to anonymous discourse, with unforeseeable consequences for free speech. But the alternative world where social media was dominated by bots shouting at bots appears even less appealing.
Here is another, related but slightly different, solution. Governments could impose a Pigouvian tax on bot-generated comments. Pigouvian taxes attempt to quantify the externalized social harm of an undesirable practice and force the person engaging in it to bear the cost. The classic example is a carbon tax, levied on a per-ton basis, on emitters of carbon dioxide. One of us has argued elsewhere that such a tax would be a viable approach to regulating false speech on social media. It would work something like this. Once a year or so, regulators would audit social media sites using random sampling to determine how many impressions were of posts containing complete fabrications. Each false tweet would then incur a small tax—think cents, not dollars—equal to the estimated social harm of a marginal lie. In the same way, regulators could audit social media for bot accounts and impose a tax forcing them to internalize the harms of non-human posting.
The disadvantages of this approach are obvious: It depends on a substantial regulatory apparatus making difficult estimates of social costs. But there are upsides, too. A Pigouvian tax on bots would be mandatory, sweeping in even social media companies that did not wish to switch to the subscription model. And by allowing some social media sites to remain free to users, the approach ensures that those without the ability to pay are not shut out of discourse. It likewise preserves users’ ability to speak anonymously on controversial or sensitive topics. Finally, the Pigouvian tax aligns social media companies’ incentives with the public’s. Astroturfing will cost them money, so they will try hard to prevent it. Contrast that with today’s incentives, where, as discussed above, bot-produced content can actually increase social media companies’ earnings.
Misinformation and so-called alternative facts have pushed public discourse and democracy to the brink. If untamed, pundit bots might go a step further. Regulators and social media companies should thus think carefully about how highly sophisticated bot-generated content will alter online discourse. Careful, well-balanced responses will allow society to reap the benefits of powerful new AI systems while blunting the harms.
lawfareblog.com · by petersalib · January 20, 2023
18. A college student aims to save us from a chatbot before it changes writing forever
Can this software be adapted for use by social media companies and government agencies to identify disinformation created by ChaptGPT?
A college student aims to save us from a chatbot before it changes writing forever
NPR · by Greg Rosalsky · January 20, 2023
Edward Tian, 22, used his winter break to create an app that helps teachers detect AI-generated essays. It comes at a time when schools are growing more concerned about the use of this technology.
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Many teachers worry about students using ChatGPT. That's an artificial intelligence program. If you haven't heard, it's a chat bot that can easily write students' homework for them. But one college student is developing a tool for teachers to detect AI-generated essays. Emma Peaslee and Greg Rosalsky of NPR's Planet Money bring us the story.
GREG ROSALSKY, BYLINE: While many college kids were having fun on winter break, 22-year-old Edward Tian was feverishly working on a new app.
EDWARD TIAN: I think we're absolutely at, like, an inflection point. This technology is incredible. And I do believe it is, like, the future. But at the same time, we needed safeguards to basically adopt it responsibly.
EMMA PEASLEE, BYLINE: Because ChatGPT is more user-friendly than past AI systems and it's free, it's been able to break through in a way that other AI systems haven't been able to.
TIAN: Everybody was talking about ChatGPT on campus. So there was a sense of like, oh, wow, this is everywhere.
PEASLEE: And students kind of immediately realized, this thing can do a lot of homework for us.
ROSALSKY: So yeah, the fall semester ends. And Edward travels home to Toronto for the holidays. But he couldn't stop thinking about this crazy new technology.
PEASLEE: A crazy new technology that could make it hard to figure out whether something has been written by a human or not. And Edward thinks this is a problem not just for, like, kids copying and pasting their homework, but also things like propaganda generated by nefarious actors.
TIAN: Humans deserve to know when something is written by a human or written by a machine.
PEASLEE: So on holiday break, Edward decides to create an app to try and address that.
TIAN: So I was like, wow, why don't I just code this out so the world can actually use it?
PEASLEE: On January 2, Edward released his app. He named it GPTZero. The app basically uses ChatGPT against itself. So when GPTZero analyzes a text, it can scan to see if it recognizes any of the same patterns that ChatGPT would generate.
TIAN: So we're basically taking one of these text generation models and asking it, hey, is this new piece of text, does it seem, like, pretty familiar to you? Like, would you probably generate it yourself?
PEASLEE: When Edward went to bed that night, he didn't expect much from the app. But the next morning, his phone had blown up. He had so many texts and DMs from journalists, principals, teachers, you name it.
ROSALSKY: Before all this, Edward's biggest plans were graduating from college and getting his wisdom teeth pulled. Now he's fielding calls from venture capital firms, education leaders and global media outlets.
PEASLEE: But not everyone thinks ChatGPT is a problem. Some prominent techies are even celebrating it as the end of homework. And a lot of this talk is probably hype. But it really does feel like we've entered a new world where we're being forced to reevaluate our education system and even the value of teaching kids how to write.
ROSALSKY: Edward says the excitement and the clear demand for his new app have convinced him that he should concentrate on making it better and more accurate.
TIAN: Top priority is building this out into something that teachers can use, like, day to day in their workflow. So if you're a teacher or an educator, I'd love to talk to you. Our team, which is, right now, just me and my best friend from college, who just joined, would love to talk to you.
ROSALSKY: Greg Rosalsky.
PEASLEE: Emma Peaslee, NPR News.
(SOUNDBITE OF MC BAPTISTE'S "MARILYN")
NPR · by Greg Rosalsky · January 20, 2023
19. ChatGPT is the Deepfake of Thought
ChatGPT is the Deepfake of Thought
With the birth of generative AI, we can now interact with thoughts and ideas not formed by people. But what does this mean for social health?
worth.com · by Gabrielle Doré · January 17, 2023
Photo via Shutterstock
I never thought I would question where ‘thought’ came from. All my life, there was only one source for opinion and creative thinking–the human mind. That changed with the invention of ChatGPT and other forms of generative AI. For the first time in human history, society will interact with thoughts and ideas not formed by people. So, what does this mean?
The “positives” we could focus on are its usefulness for generating reports and recaps based on technically objective information. But that is a very short-sighted view of what this AI can do. We need to understand that that’s not the end of the parameter or where the problems exist.
Ad A
Related AI, Digital Gene Editing & Fusion: What Comes Next for NFTs
In actuality, generative AIs are in the business of imitation and deception. Specifically, the imitation of human likeness through thought, thus deceiving its readers. From a social health standpoint, the implications are worrying at best.
Society’s intellectual nucleus is founded on the legacy of human thought. The information generated by AI made to imitate human thought holds the potential to corrupt an already fragile social climate as it’s not based on human experience, aka the root of the idea.
Ad B
Now, we could say that AI cannot technically create new thoughts if it’s pulling its information from sources written by human beings. And at this point–I agree. But over time, as this AI generates and publishes “thoughts” and information globally, it will begin to pull from sources not created by humans. That’s where the threat to our social sphere comes into play. Once AI starts to pull from AI, there begins a decline in the potency of human thought.
Related The Rise and Fall of NFT Art
Another point of contention is the idea that this kind of AI would be used, if not at least marketed, as a genuinely unbiased and objective fact checker. Here’s why that’s problematic: any form of AI is created by a person–meaning it comes with that person’s unconscious biases. Therefore, it is just as impossible for it to be truly neutral, no different than a human. Never mind that the idea implies that we would depend on a computer to “tell us the truth.” Furthermore, since it’s an imitation of human thought, where does ethical and moral judgment come into play? As it can’t create its judgment through its version of the experience, the concept of judgment must be programmed via the parameters of its creator. This means that an AI could be programmed to agree with any archaic ideology that would further lead to the corruption of the social sphere, especially if given the title of “fact checker.”
Unfortunately, unlike deep fakes, generative AI is easy to use and find. As far as you know, I could have co-authored this with one. This points out another way this technology is deceptive. Currently we have no way to tell if the words we ingest are the product of a human behind a keyboard. We’ve never had to ask the question before. Now that we do, we need an identifier for what is and isn’t human thought.
Simply put, ChatGPT, and other forms of generative AI, are no more than deep fakes of human thought. Except imitating and deceiving with ideas instead of a face.
This story was originally published on Techonomy.
Subscribe to our Newsletter Business & Investing
An indispensable guide to finance, investing and entrepreneurship.
See all newsletters
worth.com · by Gabrielle Doré · January 17, 2023
20. ChatGPT expected to deepen disinformation crisis, says NYT chairman
ChatGPT expected to deepen disinformation crisis, says NYT chairman
- His warning came at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, during a panel discussion on the dangers of disinformation
- Seth Moulton, a congressman, said the principles of a free press are established and accepted for traditional media but we are ‘having trouble translating those to the social media world’
arabnews.com · January 17, 2023
DAVOS: ChatGPT, the artificial intelligence-powered natural language processing tool, will exacerbate the global problem of disinformation, Arthur Gregg Sulzberger, the chairman of the New York Times, said during a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting on Tuesday.
“A lot of this will not be information that is created with the intent to mislead, but based on everything I’ve read, I suspect we are going to see huge amounts of content that is produced, none of which is particularly verified (and) the origins of which are not particularly clear,” he added.
“I think we are getting to a point where tools are going to make it harder and harder to solve this problem.
“We need to address this information crisis but we also need to rebuild an ecosystem that is weaker than ever.”
He added that to tackle the crisis, the media has “to go back to first principles, which is if you do not want bad information, you need to crowd it out with good information.”
Seth Moulton, a member of the US Congress representing Massachusetts, said he believes that “there is a hunger for the truth,” which means “the market will be even bigger for the machine that can identify disinformation than for the machine that makes it easier to write your fourth-grade history paper.”
He added that accountability should be sought and enforced to achieve “some level of public safety,” explaining that the principles of a free press have been “established for traditional media, that we have accepted for a long time, and we are just having trouble translating those to the social media world.”
The panelists, who were discussing the dangers of disinformation, agreed that, to some extent, consumers of news are aware of the existence of what Sulzberger described as a “broader mix of bad information that is corrupting the information ecosystem.”
“There is no doubt that society seems to have, at some level, accepted how much the information ecosystem has been poisoned and I think it is going to require real, sustainable efforts from the platforms, political and business leaders, and consumers themselves, to reject that,” he said.
Jeanne Bourgault, the president and CEO of media organization Internews, said that “people are also getting used to navigating (disinformation) a little bit better.” To illustrate this, she highlighted the “unbelievably complicated information environment” in the Philippines and added: “Yet, people were able to find the information they needed.”
She said one of the “most worrisome” disinformation trends is “gendered disinformation,” and that “these types of stories hit women so much worse — women politicians.”
She added: “It has been proven across the board that women online get harassed, and online harassment becomes offline harassment very, very quickly.”
Vera Jourova, the vice president of the European Commission for Values and Transparency, said: “To legislate on how the digital space should look is a pretty daring exercise.”
She explained that this is because legislating bodies must ensure that any rules that are introduced cannot be abused.
Sulzberger agreed that “terms like fake news were greedily gobbled up by autocratic regimes — and aspiring autocratic regimes — who then passed laws that they claimed were banning ‘fake news’ … but were actually banning the scrutiny and accountability provided by an independent press.”
Jourova suggested three main steps that could be taken to address the disinformation crisis, the first of which is to “make sure the disinformers do not find the feeding ground, the society which is willing to get brainwashed.” To achieve this, she stressed the need to make citizens “more resilient through education and the work of professional media.”
The second step, Jourova said, is for the representatives of democratic governments to improve communication strategies, while the third involves proper regulation.
“The content that is illegal offline has to be treated as illegal online, such as terrorism, political extremism and hate speech,” she said, adding that 90 percent of requests to Facebook for the removal of content come from government bodies.
Jourova urged citizens to be more demanding of the truth and to “look into what is promised in political campaigns” because they “are full of lies and unreachable goals.”
arabnews.com · January 17, 2023
21. Disinformation: Reliable Information is essential for democratic stability
Disinformation: Reliable Information is essential for democratic stability | George W. Bush Presidential Center
Learn more about William McKenzie.
William McKenzie
Senior Editorial Advisor
George W. Bush Institute
Learn more about Chris Walsh.
Chris Walsh
Director, Freedom and Democracy
George W. Bush Institute
bushcenter.org · by Learn more about William McKenzie.
At-A-Glance
Explained in this paper:
- Combating disinformation
- Freedom of the press
- Preserving local journalism
Global instability, including the weakening of democracies, has grown more apparent over the last few years. Events from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to understanding the facts about the latest COVID-19 developments to trusting the results of elections in the United States and elsewhere illustrate this growing concern.
Propaganda and other forms of false information have long been a means to undermine opponents, deceive publics, and prey upon emotions. What’s different today about the use of both disinformation and misinformation is the creation and rapid evolution of social media platforms and various digital tools. (Disinformation is intentionally spreading lies. Misinformation is unintentionally or unknowingly sharing falsehoods.) The growth in social media use and new platforms allows for accurate and inaccurate information alike to spread instantly across virtual global highways.
A recent strange example is how fake reports about an alleged coup in China blasted this fall across Twitter. To their credit, news organizations sniffed out the chicanery and reported the truth or did not repeat the falsehood about an overthrow of Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Another pressure point on the flow of reliable information is how autocrats, some of whom are popularly elected by their citizens, are limiting – as well as ending – the freedom of journalists in their countries. Leaders like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán continue to make it difficult for independent journalists to report and provide information to their readers and viewers. They stifle press freedoms, put independent media operations out of business, and help cronies own major news outlets – all in the name of national and cultural solidarity.
A third disturbing pressure point is how the integration of the internet into our daily lives, along with other economic changes, has upended the financial model of news organizations. Many media outlets haven’t adequately adapted to consumers accessing information online. This has led to the closure or diminution of local newspapers here and around the world. The spread of “news deserts” means communities lack access to reliable news about their cities. That includes how their governments operate.
As a result, citizens of both democracies and nondemocracies may not possess the facts they need to make informed decisions. A lack of transparency and truthfulness complicates the duty of holding leaders accountable. An interruption in the flow of reliable information can create confusion and sow mistrust. These realities undermine the stability of nations.
Combating disinformation
The Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, the Federal Communications Commission, and the National Security Agency are key to countering malevolent foreign leaders’ use of cyberattacks, the work of trolls and bots to spread false information, or the spread of disinformation through social media and other digital means.
Fortunately, cyberattacks didn’t play as big a role in the 2020 U.S. elections as expected. Still, Congress must sufficiently fund the Department of Homeland Security so it can remain vigilant against cyberattacks on the U.S. government and private sector. Iranian and Russian efforts to subvert our 2020 election through various hacking attempts serve as a warning that cyberwarfare remains a real threat to democratic stability.
Such threats may even emanate from what we believe to be reputable companies. Various outlets have reported on TikTok’s vulnerability to Beijing. Most disturbing is whether TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, can be compelled to supply user data, including on U.S. citizens, to the Chinese government. Conceivably, such data could be used in influence campaigns targeting Americans.
Relatedly, Congress must continue to adequately fund the State Department’s Global Engagement Center so it can help counter the proliferation of bots, trolls, and other disinformation sources. The State Department, and consequently the Biden Administration, must also continue refining how the center combats disinformation, as a recent internal inspection of its work indicated. This should include formally appointing a coordinator to lead this vital work. The center can play a pivotal role in combating foreign disinformation campaigns from Russia, China, and elsewhere. Beijing increasingly relies upon this tactic, including amplifying distorted Russian messages.
As China steps forward in the information realm, the White House and democratic leaders need to work diligently in global forums to make sure China and authoritarian nations like Russia and Iran don’t rewrite the rules of the internet. Authoritarians want to shape those rules so the standards protect their regimes from criticism for human rights abuses, Freedom House’s Adrian Shahbaz explained during a 2022 Bush Institute Democracy Talks interview. The United States must work with European nations and others to ensure new technologies are used to connect people, not limit their individual liberties.
Here in the United States, Facebook has taken steps to limit its platform’s spread of false information. There is more to do, but the organization’s creation of the Facebook Oversight Board is a positive, first-step response from the private sector to a public problem.
The oversight panel has final authority to restore any material that has been taken down. And the board can recommend changes in Facebook’s community standards and practices. Facebook should take these recommendations seriously and not use the board as window dressing.
Responsible action by Facebook and other private organizations is as important as any government response to the emerging complexities of the virtual world. That includes being more transparent about how social media companies moderate content, develop customer usage guidelines, and customize content for individual users.
Congress, however, should continue searching for a sweet spot that encourages the use of social media while recognizing the platforms are now a major source of information across the world. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 appropriately didn’t hold the relatively new internet to the same liability standards that guide legacy media operations. But the world of communications has changed many times since then. Finding fair, limited ways to hold social media companies responsible for the content on their website will require them to act more like traditional publishers, many of whom say the current playing field favors their new competitors.
For their part, states have been passing laws to encourage media literacy instruction in K-12classrooms. We support the continued adoption of such laws. Schools must be responsible for how they teach their students to understand the truthfulness of what they are reading. Credible organizations like the News Literacy Project have developed reliable curricula that can help students discern fact from fiction. This will help young Americans as they become leaders of our democracy.
Organizations like News Guard can also help alert consumers to false information. Using a network of trained journalists, the organization rates information that appears on social media sites and traditional news organizations for truthfulness. It’s another example of how the private sector can combat disinformation.
To be sure, social media has made the world more open by allowing people to communicate more directly with each other. And while some foreign actors promote extreme views online, some of the extremism originates with individuals acting irresponsibly. So we as individuals also have a role to play in controlling the flow of false information. The resilience of any nation depends upon the truth.
Freedom of the Press
The White House especially must speak out during international forums and diplomatic meetings about the impact violence against journalists has upon a country. The Biden Administration has done so at moments like the annual World Press Freedom Day. But looking for opportunities to explain how active media enhance democratic stability will keep this cause in the minds of international leaders. For its part, Congress should consider Global Magnitsky-like legislation that imposes financial penalties and travel restrictions on individuals and entities who have targeted or harmed journalists.
Congress also has a responsibility to fund the U.S. Agency for Global Media’s (USAGM)network of information providers, such as Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Lawmakers also must keep these news operations free from political influence so they can provide factual reports to citizens in nations where leaders distort or suppress information about their countries.
Similarly, lawmakers should adequately support organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Their democracy-building work includes growing a free press around the world. In turn, that nurtures the foundations of free expression in a nation and enhances citizens’ personal liberties.
These actions must be part of a comprehensive foreign policy that makes the United States, its citizens, and the world more secure. President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has led to many casualties, including the cause of responsible journalism in Russia. Shortly after the invasion began, Russia suspended the last remaining independent media. A major loss for Russians searching for more than their own government’s propaganda was the folding of Novaya Gazeta, the respected newspaper that Nobel Peace Prize-winning journalist Dmitry Muratov led, and the Ekho Moskvy radio station.
Autocrats also are brazenly silencing foreign journalists and even members of the media working outside these countries. One example of the former is the Burma junta’s jailing of American Danny Fenster for his reporting following the military-led coup in February 2021. He was sentenced to 11 years before the United States secured his release. A prominent example of the latter is the case of the U.S.-based columnist Jamal Khashoggi, whose ghoulish execution, orchestrated by Saudi Arabia’s leadership, was carried out in Turkey in 2018.
Disturbingly, the Committee to Protect Journalists reported that 65 journalists were killed last year, while 363 were in prison by the end of 2022, the highest number ever. In Mexico alone,13 journalists were killed in 2022.
Preserving local journalism
Congress can help bolster local news reporting in several ways. First, consider granting individuals tax deductions for their newspaper subscriptions, as is permitted for public broadcasting contributions. Second, consider granting news organizations a temporary antitrust exemption so the news industry can negotiate payment from social media platforms for the news content the latter organizations post for free. Social media organizations may need a tax break as an incentive to negotiate an arrangement. But creating this opportunity could help traditional media receive payment for their original reporting. Third, consider new tax laws that would make it easier for interested newspapers to become nonprofit institutions.
These challenges are pressing. A fifth of Americans live in a community that lacks a local news source or is at risk of losing one, according to Northwestern University’s Medill School for Journalism, Media & Integrated Marketing Communications. “News deserts” have expanded over the last few decades as the internet has become a first-stop source of information for many news consumers. An average of more than two newspapers a week close their doors.
Along with other economic pressures, many traditional news operations have struggled to stay afloat. One significant casualty is that fewer trained journalists are covering stories about their communities, statehouses, and their state’s congressional delegations.
As a result, citizens may lack sufficient information about their local, state, and Federal governments. Or they may turn to one national source of news that doesn’t cover their hometown or may only confirm their own biases.
Encouragingly, private-sector initiatives have emerged in response. The American Journalism Project, for example, is helping seed and grow local nonprofit news organizations. Similarly, new sites like the Fort Worth Report, Vermont Digger, and the Oklahoma Media Center are filling in gaps in local and state information. What’s more, private philanthropy is financing independent coverage by traditional news organizations on topics like education and affordable housing. The Solutions Journalism Network is one good example of new, privately funded reporting.
Whether combating disinformation globally or domestically, extolling freedom of the press, or strengthening local journalism, elected officials as well as private sector leaders are instrumental in providing citizens a reliable flow of information here and abroad. Individuals need this information and should push for it. Meeting this challenge can help communities and the Nation alike create a shared culture. In turn, those stronger bonds can strengthen our democracy.
bushcenter.org · by Learn more about William McKenzie.
22. A star on TikTok's BOOKTok is using the platform to improve his reading skills
Another example of what some might consider TikTok as a "public good." Young people ask how is this a bad thing? This person is inspiring people to read better and more. Most only see the good and are not convinced of the very real threats because they have never seen the results of those threats.
A star on TikTok's BOOKTok is using the platform to improve his reading skills
NPR · by January 20, 20235:11 AM ET Heard on Morning Edition
Oliver James is a TikTok star who has pledged to read a hundred books this year. He has struggled with reading all his life and is now teaching himself at age 34.
LEILA FADEL, HOST:
Oliver James is a TikTok star on its BookTok platform. At 34, inspired by his children, he's teaching himself to read on the social platform.
OLIVER JAMES: I actually learned by going to a park and just working out and deciding to add reading to my workout journey at that time. And BookTok discovered me.
FADEL: He set a goal of reading a hundred books this year. Right now you can find him reading "The Alchemist" aloud on BookTok.
(SOUNDBITE OF TIKTOK VIDEO)
JAMES: There was a small building there with a window at which people bought tickets to Africa.
FADEL: Oliver James told me that the school system failed to help with his reading disability when he was growing up. But he's gradually moving past that setback.
JAMES: Every day is a struggle. I can give you a little feedback on something that I did yesterday. I took my 10-year-old to the doctor's. And I didn't even know how to fill out his paperwork. And it made me sweat. My palms were, you know, sweating even till today. And it's weird, but I had him fill out the things that he knew because he knows more about, you know, education and reading and spelling than I do. And I actually had to give the paperwork back and tell them, hey, I don't know how to read this. And that's the struggle of my everyday life as a father, 34 years old, who struggles with reading.
FADEL: But right now you are teaching yourself?
JAMES: Yes. Every single day, I go in my van, and I go online, and I pretty much put myself out there to express to the world that, you know, reading is something that I want to get better at. And I'm willing to show the entire world that I'm not good at it, so I don't have to be scared of it anymore.
FADEL: And so one of the first books you chose to read in full was "Anne Frank," right?
JAMES: Yes.
FADEL: Why "Anne Frank?" It's an interesting choice.
JAMES: BookTok told me I should read it, and that's how I ended up picking that book.
(SOUNDBITE OF TIKTOK VIDEO)
JAMES: This book was about a young woman who journaled about the Holocaust. What I liked - how smart she was and aware she was about life at such a young age, OK? What wasn't my cup of tea?
FADEL: Was it hard?
JAMES: It was hard at first. But as I kept going, I started to get better. I started to realize this is very similar to fitness. If you do this every single day, like I did pullups every single day, you get stronger. You actually start to learn the words you're saying. It's kind of amazing. And that became my addiction, I think.
FADEL: Yeah. And what made you want to be a better reader and express publicly, hey, I can't read?
JAMES: I've had dreams of being more than I was showing myself. I always wanted to be a motivational speaker, and I would express these things to people. And, you know, people kind of would just be like, you know, you could. You can't. You could. You can't. And I knew what I could do if I had the ability to read. And I was like, If I just learn how to read, no one can tell me I can't be a speaker. I'll just go to it. I'll go take it. And that's when I said, OK, I'll start reading. And then truth - it came. I'm speaking.
(SOUNDBITE OF TIKTOK VIDEO)
JAMES: Yo, listen to me real quick. If you don't learn how to read now when it's a struggle at a young age, oh, you ain't going to escape it. You're just going to be learning at 30, 40. And it's going to be 10 times harder with so many more things piled up on top of you. Please, while you are young, read.
FADEL: Why do you think so many people are drawn to your journey on TikTok? I mean, 100,000 people - that's a lot.
JAMES: Yeah, I'm still trying to figure that out myself because it's not like I, you know, created the wheel. Most of these people know how to read. But I think what I did was I got into some people's hearts that, you know, they didn't realize could be opened up again. A lot of people didn't realize reading was, you know, a gift. You know, they treat it like if they walk. I walk every day. But there's someone out there who can't walk, and we don't think about that person. And now they're like, wow, I can read. And I never thought about that. And then there are people who can't read.
FADEL: Do you take any time personally to read by yourself, or is it always on TikTok?
JAMES: Yeah, I do read on my own. I suffer from severe OCD...
FADEL: OK.
JAMES: ...So I read a book about my own problems. My financial situation is not the best. So when I went to get a therapist and I realized it was going to be about $100 an hour for a therapist, I knew that, you know, hey, I got the problem. Can you help me? And they're like, without the money, we can't help you. I realize that, like, no one's going to be able to help me unless I actually learn it myself. So I went on BookTok and told everybody, and then they sent me a bunch of books on OCD.
FADEL: Wow.
JAMES: So I read those books on my own. Yeah. I had, you know, anxiety, PTSD. I had anger issues. You know, I had stress. I had things that built up because OCD was there, and I didn't understand what was wrong with me.
FADEL: Yeah.
JAMES: So it would just cause me to have these mood swings constantly. And now I get to sit back and say, hey, there's a book that's teaching me how to control that.
FADEL: You have access to all these worlds now.
JAMES: Yeah, it's amazing. And I advise anybody, you know, even if you don't know how to read, pick up a book. If you want, you know, answers to your problems or anything, there's a book that is out there that can help you in some shape or form.
FADEL: All right, Oliver James, thank you so much for your time.
JAMES: Thank you.
NPR · by January 20, 20235:11 AM ET Heard on Morning Edition
23. FBI Director Christopher Wray Discloses Domestic ‘Homemade IED’ Drone Attempts Investigations
The 9 page report can be downloaded HERE.
FBI Director Christopher Wray Discloses Domestic ‘Homemade IED’ Drone Attempts Investigations
cofutures.net · January 20, 2023
During Senate Homeland Security Hearing, FBI Director Christopher Wray Discloses Domestic ‘Homemade IED’ Drone Attempts Investigations
C/O Futures Terrorism Research Note Series
Robert J. Bunker and Matt Begert 20 January 2023
On 17 November 2022, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to a Senate Homeland Security Hearing on National Security Threats. During that session, he verbally provided previously unknown (and formerly sensitive) information pertaining to ongoing FBI investigations concerning “several instances within the US attempts to weaponize drones with homemade IEDs.”[2] This new and significant disclosure follows on from an earlier July 2020 incident (not reported on by media outlets until early November 2021) involving an attempted attack (using a DJI Mavic 2 drone with copper wire on a tether) targeting a Pennsylvania power substation in order to short circuit its transformers/electrical distribution lines.[3]
FBI Director Nov 2022 Homemade IED Drone Investigations
.pdf
Download PDF • 3.23MB
cofutures.net · January 20, 2023
De Oppresso Liber,
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation
Senior Advisor, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy
Editor, Small Wars Journal
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
Phone: 202-573-8647
email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com
| 
