Quotes of the Day:

“It is curious that physical courage should be so common in the world and more courage so rare.”

– Mark Twain

“Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy forget in time that men have died to win them.” 

– Franklin D. Roosevelt

​

"Start by doing what's necessary; then do what's possible; and suddenly you are doing the impossible."

– Francis of Assisi

​1. How Israel Avoided Biden’s Red Line

2. Mexicans Poised to Elect First Woman President

3. The Most Important National Security Issue Facing America, With the Least Amount of Attention’ (Mexico)

4. Donald Trump Joins TikTok Years After Trying to Ban the App

5. Pentagon Chief Says War With China Neither Imminent nor Unavoidable                              

6. Zelensky Says China Is Helping Russia Undermine a Peace Summit on Ukraine

7. Comparative Analysis of U.S. National Security Strategies (1987-2022)

8. HAS DOD FOCUSED ON THE WRONG ISLAND WAR IN INDOPACOM?

9. A lighter, high-tech Abrams tank is taking shape

10. US’ Campbell calls for stability in Strait

11. Russian disinformation sites linked to former Florida deputy sheriff, research finds

12. Biden’s cease-fire plan tightens political squeeze for Netanyahu in Israel

13. China won’t allow cold or hot war in Asia-Pacific, Chinese Defence Minister Dong Jun says

14. China’s war against Taiwan at the World Health Organization

15. Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, June 1, 2024

16. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, June 1, 2024

17. Chinese defense minister, Ukraine's Zelenskiy dominate Asian security conference

18. The leaf that helped captured British agent survive concentration camp

19. `We the People’ are bulwarks against Russian disinformation

20.  Semi Bird defrauded Army, accused of stolen valor by Green Berets

1. How Israel Avoided Biden’s Red Line

Why do we impose "red lines" on our friends and allies? Especially in public. (rhetorical question. Domestic politics).

How Israel Avoided Biden’s Red Line

The original plan for a two-division sweep through Rafah was retooled to address U.S. concerns

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/how-israel-avoided-bidens-red-line-ad715144?mod=hp_lead_pos8

By Michael R. GordonFollow

 and Dov LieberFollow

Updated June 2, 2024 12:00 am ET

Israel overhauled its military operations in Rafah following intensive discussion with American officials to avoid crossing the Biden administration’s red line and provoking a crisis in relations with its closest ally, U.S. and Israeli officials said.

Israel shelved its original plan for a two-division sweep through Rafah, an operation that the White House worried would lead to an escalation of casualties in a conflict that has already led to a soaring civilian toll. 

Instead, Israel has opted for a military campaign that focuses on sealing the border between Gaza and Egypt as well as raids into Rafah. 

The quiet retooling of Israel’s war plan has enabled the country to steer clear of President Biden’s admonition that it avoid a major ground operation in the Gazan city or risk a reduction in American military support. 

It comes as Biden attempts to place more pressure on Hamas and Israel to agree to a cease-fire as part of a three-phase road map to end the fighting in the Gaza Strip. 

But Israel’s scaled-back military operation has still extracted a toll on the civilians in Rafah. 

U.S. and other Western officials have complained that adequate preparations aren’t in place to provide for the more than 800,000 civilians who have fled Rafah during the fighting. 

New tensions have flared with Egypt, which has balked at opening the Rafah border crossing as long as the Gazan side is occupied by Israeli troops.

An Israeli attempt to use smaller munitions in its airstrikes highlighted the difficulty of conducting operations in densely populated areas. A targeted Israeli airstrike using bombs with 37 pounds of explosives still resulted in the deaths of scores of civilians, according to Palestinian officials. Israel said two senior Hamas officials were killed and suggested that the deaths of the civilians might be the result of a secondary explosion of Hamas munitions. The incident is still under investigation.

May 26

May 29

Before and after satellite images show where tents have been removed in western Rafah.

MAXAR TECHNOLOGIES/REUTERS

The uncertain diplomacy for securing a cease-fire suggests that the debate over the U.S. red line—a term Biden first used in March—is likely to reverberate in the weeks ahead. 

“There was a misperception about what Biden’s red line comment meant,” said Jonathan Panikoff, a former senior U.S. intelligence officer who is at the Atlantic Council think tank. 

“For many in the Arab world, it was interpreted as a military operation in Rafah being off limits if Israel wanted to retain U.S. support,” Panikoff said. “But for many in the administration, it was never intended to say that Israel could not conduct a military operation. It was intended to say Israel could not conduct an operation like it did in Gaza City or Khan Younis that resulted in a high toll of death and destruction.”

An Israeli military campaign focuses on sealing the border between Gaza and Egypt. PHOTO: MOHAMMED SABER/EPA/SHUTTERSTOCK

The concept of a presidential ultimatum on the scope of Israel’s military operations in Gaza became the focus of public debate when an MSNBC interviewer asked Biden on March 9 whether an Israeli “invasion of Rafah” would cross the president’s “red line” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

“It is a red line, but I’m never going to leave Israel,” the president responded, echoing the phrase. “The defense of Israel is still critical, so there’s no red line I’m going to cut off all weapons so they don’t have the Iron Dome to protect them.”

“But there’s red lines that if he crosses,” Biden continued, without completing the sentence. He then added: “Cannot have 30,000 more Palestinians dead.”

Three days after that interview, national security adviser Jake Sullivan dismissed the red line terminology as a media obsession and “a national security parlor game.” Sullivan said, however, that the president wanted Israel to defeat Hamas without needlessly endangering Palestinian civilians. 

“That path does not lie in smashing into Rafah, where there are 1.3 million people, in the absence of a credible plan to deal with the population there,” Sullivan added. “As things stand today, we have not seen what that plan is.”

Palestinians arriving with their belongings at Khan Younis after leaving Rafah. PHOTO: AHMAD SALEM/BLOOMBERG NEWS

For many U.S. officials, the red line phrase evoked the notion of a rigid ultimatum and had an unhappy history.

President Barack Obama said in 2012 that Syria’s use of chemical weapons would constitute “a red line for us.” He was later criticized when he backed away from using military force the following year after the Assad regime killed more than 1,400 people in a chemical weapons attack. 

Behind closed doors, Israel’s planning for the looming Rafah operation was discussed extensively in the Strategic Consultative Group, made up of senior U.S. and Israeli officials who convene regularly by video teleconference and in person.  

“They didn’t use ‘red line,’” an Israeli official said. “They said, ‘Do it in a different way that kind of mitigates collateral damage and the risk to the population.’ That’s the way they spoke.”

As the Israeli strategy evolved, the idea of sending two Israeli divisions into Rafah to clear a city teeming with more than one million people was put aside. A plan was developed to seize the Rafah crossing from Egypt to Israel and a strip along Gaza’s border with Egypt that Israeli has said contains numerous tunnels Hamas has used to smuggle weapons, construction materials and other supplies. 

“It’s not that we just adjusted our plan to please the Americans without achieving our goal,” the Israeli official continued. “We did not give up on the goal to defeat Hamas in Rafah.” 

An unexploded shell near a makeshift camp in the southern Gaza Strip. PHOTO: EYAD BABA/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

Another Israeli official said the military would have—based on its own values—taken care to minimize civilian casualties during the Rafah operation even if the Americans hadn’t asked for it to do so.

U.S. officials said they expect the Israeli plan will involve raids into the city in search of Hamas fighters and hostages, but not a full-scale ground assault. They also said they are monitoring the Israeli operations.

“We won’t support a major ground operation in Rafah,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Tuesday. “What a major ground operation entails, lots of units of, tens of thousands of troops, or thousands of troops, moving in a coordinated set of maneuvers against a wide variety of targets on the ground in a massive way…I think it’s very obvious what that is, and we have not seen them move in that way.”

Unless a cease-fire is negotiated in the weeks ahead, Israel’s more deliberate approach could prolong combat operations. In an interview broadcast Wednesday in Israel, Tzachi Hanegbi, the head of Israel’s National Security Council, said he expected there would be at least seven more months of fighting to destroy the military capabilities of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and their ability to govern the territory. 

Even the more limited Rafah operation has posed diplomatic challenges. Egypt balked at reopening the Rafah crossing while Israeli troops were present and for more than a week suspended the movement of international aid that has passed through the Israeli Kerem Shalom crossing. 

On May 24, Biden secured a commitment from Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi to resume the flow of United Nations-provided assistance through Kerem Shalom. 

Aid for the Gaza Strip at the Kerem Shalom crossing in southern Israel. PHOTO: AMIR COHEN/REUTERS

On Sunday, a team of U.S. officials will be in Cairo for three-way talks on how to reopen the Rafah crossing, which has been used for evacuating seriously ill or injured civilians, as well as the movement of personal and fuel deliveries. Those talks will take place in the midst of deep differences between Egypt and Israel over which Palestinians should operate the border crossing.

Before Israel’s Rafah operation began, Americans were worried that a tidal wave of civilians could flee and overwhelm humanitarian services even if Israeli forces sought to conduct more-limited operations. 

Israel has sought to open a corridor for humanitarian aid that runs from Kerem Shalom to Salah-al-Din Road. And over a five-day period late last month, more than 1,800 trucks carrying commercial goods and humanitarian aid moved through the land crossings at Kerem Shalom and Erez West, a senior U.S. aid official said. 

But international-aid officials said many Gazans can’t afford to buy the commercial goods that are being trucked in while the internal distribution of aid has been severely hampered by clogged routes, Israeli security procedures and the need to get assistance to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who have fled Rafah. 

“The United Nations and partners are having a time of struggle in bringing in humanitarian aid to supply food, water, shelter and medical needs for upwards of two million people,” said Georgios Petropoulos, the senior Gaza-based official for the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Smoke rising over Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip. PHOTO: ABDEL KAREEM HANA/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Summer Said contributed to this article.

Write to Michael R. Gordon at michael.gordon@wsj.com and Dov Lieber at dov.lieber@wsj.com

2. Mexicans Poised to Elect First Woman President

What does this hold for the future of North America?

Excerpts:

Sheinbaum, a 61-year-old energy engineer whose Jewish grandparents emigrated to Mexico fleeing persecution in Eastern Europe before World War II, is widely seen as the president’s protégée who will continue his popular social welfare programs. Sheinbaum says that she wants the state guiding the economy for the benefit of the poor and controlling the energy industry.

...

Security is top of mind for most Mexican voters. More than 200 organized crime groups have increased their control of swaths of Mexico, especially in rural areas and along the country’s border with the U.S.

The growing power of Mexico’s criminal gangs is blamed for making this election the most violent in the country’s modern history.

Mexicans Poised to Elect First Woman President

Claudia Sheinbaum of the ruling party and opposition candidate Xóchitl Gálvez vie for nation’s top office

https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/mexico-election-vote-results-af55cbce?mod=hp_lista_pos1

By José de Córdoba

Follow

, Anthony Harrup

Follow

 and Steve Fisher

June 2, 2024 5:30 am ET

Claudia Sheinbaum, presidential candidate for Mexico’s ruling Morena party, took a selfie with a supporter. PHOTO: RODRIGO OROPEZA/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

MEXICO CITY—Mexicans go to the polls Sunday as two women face off in an election that will result in the country having its first ever female head of state.

About 100 million Mexicans are eligible to cast ballots amid a public security crisis and political polarization. The vote is seen as a referendum on the government of nationalist President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who has maintained approval ratings above 60% throughout his term. Mexican law doesn’t allow for re-election.

Voters will also elect a new Congress, nine state governors and thousands of state and municipal officials.

Polls give Claudia Sheinbaum, a former mayor of Mexico City and the candidate of the ruling Movement of National Regeneration—known as Morena—around a 20-point lead over her closest rival. The ruling party was founded by López Obrador. 

Mexico’s Sen. Xóchitl Gálvez is running for president from the opposition party. PHOTO: MAURICIO PALOS/BLOOMBERG NEWS

Sheinbaum, a 61-year-old energy engineer whose Jewish grandparents emigrated to Mexico fleeing persecution in Eastern Europe before World War II, is widely seen as the president’s protégée who will continue his popular social welfare programs. Sheinbaum says that she wants the state guiding the economy for the benefit of the poor and controlling the energy industry.

Sheinbaum leads Xóchitl Gálvez, the candidate of a coalition of three opposition parties. Gálvez is a senator with indigenous roots who rose from poverty to become a successful businesswoman. Another candidate, Jorge Álvarez Máynez from the center-left Citizen Movement, is a distant third in the polls. 

Sheinbaum’s bid to become the country’s first female head of state has benefited from López Obrador’s populist appeal, high approval ratings and long political coattails, said Goldman Sachs’s chief Latin America economist Alberto Ramos. The economy is also helping, with a strong local currency, low unemployment, high wage growth and social benefits, he said.

“In the eyes of many voters, the popular López Obrador is running by proxy through Sheinbaum,” he said. 

The welfare programs helped pull José Luis Zambrano’s grandparents, parents, uncle and aunt out of severe poverty. “They had nothing,” said Zambrano, a 21-year-old private security guard at a Mexico City liquor store who says he will vote for Sheinbaum. “Thanks to that support they can now live a more normal life.”

Gálvez wants to give the private sector a larger role in Mexico’s economy, particularly in energy, and revert many of López Obrador’s leftist policies. She has, however, vowed to maintain popular social programs such as grants for students and universal pensions for the elderly, while introducing others. 

A section of the Maya Train under construction on Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula earlier this year. PHOTO: RODRIGO ABD/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Both leading candidates share one priority: to tackle the powerful criminal organizations that control U.S.-bound drug and migrant smuggling routes and extort hundreds of thousands of businesses across Mexico.

Adrián Zamudio, 26, who works at an ice-cream shop in the capital, said he plans to vote for Gálvez. He criticized one of López Obrador’s pet projects, a tourist train in the Yucatán Peninsula. “They cut down a ton of trees” even though López Obrador promised not to harm one tree, he said.

Zamudio believes Gálvez will reduce gender-related crime. “I think she truly wants to help people suffering from gender violence,” he said. “Xóchitl isn’t perfect but at least she is direct.” 

Security is top of mind for most Mexican voters. More than 200 organized crime groups have increased their control of swaths of Mexico, especially in rural areas and along the country’s border with the U.S. 

Over 200 organized crime groups control large areas of Mexico; security forces in Acapulco guarded the scene of an attack on a shop last month. PHOTO: JAVIER VERDIN/REUTERS

The growing power of Mexico’s criminal gangs is blamed for making this election the most violent in the country’s modern history.

Also closely watched is the vote for the federal Congress, where all 128 Senate seats and 500 lower-house seats are up for renewal. Polls indicate Morena and its allies will retain a simple majority in both houses, but without the two-thirds majority needed to change the constitution.

Earlier this year, López Obrador submitted constitutional amendment proposals to undo his predecessor’s opening of the energy sector to private investment, replace the electoral agency, eliminate autonomous regulators and overhaul the judicial branch. Sheinbaum has expressed support for the plans, while Gálvez would oppose them. 

López Obrador, a divisive leader who has reshaped Mexican politics, has said he would retire to his home in southern Mexico.

Write to José de Córdoba at jose.decordoba@wsj.com and Anthony Harrup at anthony.harrup@wsj.com

3. ‘The Most Important National Security Issue Facing America, With the Least Amount of Attention’ (Mexico)

Excerpts:

The present is the problem. A few months ago, the streets here were largely empty. A fight between two criminal groups — the Tlacos and the Ardillos — over control of local transport had left at least eight drivers of public vans and taxis dead. Gunmen repeatedly shot one driver, left his body in his car and set it on fire along a main highway. Two minivans were burned in April. At the peak of violence, drivers refused to work for two weeks. Schools shut.

Local government and police were useless. A local priest, José Filiberto Velazquez, reached out to gang leaders and with his bishop negotiated a truce by WhatsApp. Each of the criminal groups got its own “jurisdiction” to “operate” areas to sell drugs, control public transport and extort small businesses, according to security consultants, church officials and other locals. The city’s 700 or so taxi drivers now pay 1500 pesos a month, or around $90, in protection money, they add. Restaurant and bar owners pay 3,500 pesos in so-called derecho de piso.

...

This diversification of the narco-trafficker business model is changing Mexico in another way. The cartels are now engaged in activities that make control over territory and local authorities a business imperative. Politicians and policemen are reluctant to stand up to them or are in their pockets. That helps explain why the Catholic Church stepped in to end the violence here. And Chilpancingo is the seat of the regional government, on the surface at least with the evident trappings of state authority. In the more remote hills around here and down to the Pacific coast around Acapulco, there are places run fully by the cartels. In nine municipalities they pick the mayor and police chiefs, according to a local security consultant who, out of fear for his safety, insisted we not use his name. Resistance is dangerous. Two years ago, in San Miguel Totolapan, the mayor and 20 other people were gunned down at his house and the town hall after defying a local cartel.

...

The Mexican government is defensive about it. The popular and outgoing president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, regularly pushes back against claims by the U.S. government and media that narco-traffickers are making deep inroads in the country. America, naturally, is an ideal political piñata for the populist leader, but many Mexicans also often tell you who’s really at fault: America is by far the world’s largest drug market and greedy consumer for the cartels. In the U.S., particularly but not only on the Republican side, Mexico gets caricatured in dismissive and derisive ways as a narco-state that must be cordoned off.

This all misses the point. Mexico’s criminal networks and their ability to whittle away at state power here present a national security threat to both Mexico and the U.S. These groups are growing in sophistication, corrupting state institutions and people, arming up and seeping into communities on both sides of the border. They pose a challenge to Mexico’s still fledgling democracy, at the federal level just 24 years old, and hence the stability of America’s southern neighbor. They have enabled a record number of migrants, mostly from other countries, to get north through Mexico. They’re responsible for tens of thousands of deaths in both countries. Some 26 per 100,000 people are killed in Mexico every year, the highest homicide rate among the world’s larger countries. Fentanyl, recently the most lucrative drug that the Mexican criminal groups traffic into the U.S., is responsible for the deaths of some 70,000 Americans every year.

....

“The crisis of violence in this country is not only the cartels’ and criminals’ fault,” says Sergio Ceballos Ascencio, whose daughter Monserrat disappeared after going to the Oxxo convenience store to buy credit for her cellphone. He assumes she was taken by a gang. “We as a society are guilty as well, we too have failed, we have forgotten basic values, we all must do better and more to dig ourselves out of this hell.”

‘The Most Important National Security Issue Facing America, With the Least Amount of Attention’

By MATTHEW KAMINSKI

06/01/2024 07:00 AM EDT

Politico

It’s more than drugs and border crossings. As criminals take control of territory south of the border, the U.S. could lose its top trading partner and potentially strongest ally.

State police maintain a security checkpoint at the entrance of Chilpancingo, Mexico, on Feb. 15. | Alejandrino Gonzalez/AP

06/01/2024 07:00 AM EDT

Matthew Kaminski is editor-at-large, writing regularly for POLITICO Magazine on American and global affairs. He’s the founding editor of POLITICO Europe, which launched in 2015, and former editor-in-chief of POLITICO from 2019 t0 2023. He previously worked for the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal, based in Kyiv, Brussels, Paris and New York.

CHILPANCINGO, Mexico — The future of Mexico and its relationship with the giant neighbor to the north is going to be decided in places like the busy streets of this town of 283,000. Not in Mexico’s elections this Sunday, posters for which hang in the central square. Or on the U.S. campaign trail and its shallow debates over the migration crisis at the southern border and “the wall.”

Chilpancingo inhabits a uniquely Mexican liminal space. In the present, it’s the capital of the criminal-ridden Guerrero. A lot of Mexico is on track to become more like it. But there’s an alternate path for the future: one where the government in Mexico City establishes control over this and other lawless regions and takes the country confidently into the first world. Those are the stakes in Mexico — for Mexicans and the U.S.

The present is the problem. A few months ago, the streets here were largely empty. A fight between two criminal groups — the Tlacos and the Ardillos — over control of local transport had left at least eight drivers of public vans and taxis dead. Gunmen repeatedly shot one driver, left his body in his car and set it on fire along a main highway. Two minivans were burned in April. At the peak of violence, drivers refused to work for two weeks. Schools shut.

Local government and police were useless. A local priest, José Filiberto Velazquez, reached out to gang leaders and with his bishop negotiated a truce by WhatsApp. Each of the criminal groups got its own “jurisdiction” to “operate” areas to sell drugs, control public transport and extort small businesses, according to security consultants, church officials and other locals. The city’s 700 or so taxi drivers now pay 1500 pesos a month, or around $90, in protection money, they add. Restaurant and bar owners pay 3,500 pesos in so-called derecho de piso.

The arrangement holds, for now. Minivans, called combis, line up near the Cathedral to pick up their passengers. But the peace is fragile. The moment the gangs — offshoots of Mexico’s large organized-crime networks that grew off the drugs trade — start to disagree “you immediately feel it,” says Lenin Ocampo, a crime reporter for the local newspaper El Sur, “and people stay home and restaurants close.”

The taxi war in Chilpancingo is a familiar story of violence in Mexico. But there are new wrinkles that speak to a growing and overlooked challenge here. Mexico’s criminal groups aren’t primarily trafficking drugs anymore. That’s maybe half their business these days. They’ve moved into extortion, transport, avocado farming, mining, logging, people smuggling and much else. Falling prices for certain drugs, such as Guerrero’s staple crop of poppy, was in part what made them look for cash elsewhere. Some activities are both lucrative and less dangerous than narco-trafficking — such as getting migrants up and across the U.S. border, using the same routes as they do for drugs.

This diversification of the narco-trafficker business model is changing Mexico in another way. The cartels are now engaged in activities that make control over territory and local authorities a business imperative. Politicians and policemen are reluctant to stand up to them or are in their pockets. That helps explain why the Catholic Church stepped in to end the violence here. And Chilpancingo is the seat of the regional government, on the surface at least with the evident trappings of state authority. In the more remote hills around here and down to the Pacific coast around Acapulco, there are places run fully by the cartels. In nine municipalities they pick the mayor and police chiefs, according to a local security consultant who, out of fear for his safety, insisted we not use his name. Resistance is dangerous. Two years ago, in San Miguel Totolapan, the mayor and 20 other people were gunned down at his house and the town hall after defying a local cartel.

“The gangs love territorial control,” says Eduardo Guerrero, a former senior government security official who runs a consulting business. “You can do many kinds of business once you control territory. They seek political support. They intervene in elections aggressively. At the local level, we are losing sovereignty.”

By some counts, in nine of 32 regions Mexico’s government has ceded control over governing institutions and land. Others say a fifth to a third of territory is “ungoverned spaces,” as a U.S. general noted a couple years ago. Some prefer to list the states that are stable and safe: Mexico City, Yucatan, Guanajuato, a few more. In reality, though, criminal networks are everywhere — complex business structures like Berkshire Hathaway with criminality thrown in. “Where is there no air?” asks a diplomat in Mexico City.

The Mexican government is defensive about it. The popular and outgoing president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, regularly pushes back against claims by the U.S. government and media that narco-traffickers are making deep inroads in the country. America, naturally, is an ideal political piñata for the populist leader, but many Mexicans also often tell you who’s really at fault: America is by far the world’s largest drug market and greedy consumer for the cartels. In the U.S., particularly but not only on the Republican side, Mexico gets caricatured in dismissive and derisive ways as a narco-state that must be cordoned off.

This all misses the point. Mexico’s criminal networks and their ability to whittle away at state power here present a national security threat to both Mexico and the U.S. These groups are growing in sophistication, corrupting state institutions and people, arming up and seeping into communities on both sides of the border. They pose a challenge to Mexico’s still fledgling democracy, at the federal level just 24 years old, and hence the stability of America’s southern neighbor. They have enabled a record number of migrants, mostly from other countries, to get north through Mexico. They’re responsible for tens of thousands of deaths in both countries. Some 26 per 100,000 people are killed in Mexico every year, the highest homicide rate among the world’s larger countries. Fentanyl, recently the most lucrative drug that the Mexican criminal groups traffic into the U.S., is responsible for the deaths of some 70,000 Americans every year.

Seen through the prism of violence there and its impact on the U.S., Mexico is the rich Afghanistan next door, a place where the central authorities have lost control over key territory to armed groups. Imagine if al Qaeda were killing that many Americans? “It may be the most important national security issue facing America, with the least amount of attention,” says Hank Crumpton, who ran the CIA’s covert operations in Afghanistan after 9/11 and works in security out of Texas. “I think of [the cartels] as enemies that exhibit in structure and behavior the same characteristics of terrorist networks and of an insurgency.”

Mexico’s narco-state problem matters for larger strategic reasons. Security is the biggest hurdle to Mexico fully becoming part of North America in more than a geographic sense — an economic and demographic engine for the region, and a strong and stable American ally in the global competition against China.

This more hopeful vision of Mexico can give you whiplash. The country is a daily contradiction. But put aside preconceptions and look even more closely at Mexico. The last couple decades have brought stunning violence — and stunning economic gains.

Since Mexico joined NAFTA in 1994, a large middle class has for the first time in its history come to life: Roughly 80 million out of its 130 million people — or two Canadas — are out of poverty and part of the developed world as consumers and skilled workers. The peso is strong. High-end tech and manufacturing plants dot the country’s north, taking the investment that previously went to China. Last year, Mexico became America’s largest trading partner. Every day, more than $2 billion worth of goods change hands between the two countries. At the Laredo border crossing, some 20,000 trucks pass a day, four every minute. Mexico is now the world’s 12th largest economy, passing South Korea.

“You can’t imagine a better ally than Mexico,” says Marcel Ebrard, who served as foreign minister under Lopez Obrador.

The cultural links with the U.S. are deepening with the expanding size of the Mexican-American community in the U.S., now numbering around 37 million, more than a tenth of the U.S. population, up 80 percent since 2000. The impact on the American economy, culture and not least cuisine can be felt daily north of the border.

“There is no more consequential country for the U.S. than Mexico, bar none,” says Dan Restrepo, who was the senior director for the region in Barack Obama’s National Security Council. “But we don’t treat it like that. Not at all.”

Ahead of Sunday’s vote, the debates here sound as divorced from the security challenges and strategic opportunities as those in the U.S. over “the wall” and illegal migration. López Obrador and his handpicked successor Claudia Sheinbaum, who looks to be cruising to the office, have little incentive to make security an issue. He came into office promising “hugs not bullets,” and touts his gains in eradicating poverty over the poor security picture.

How did it get this way, and what can be done about it?

Mexican criminal groups have taken advantage of the clash between America’s laws and vices going back to Prohibition. After World War II, the growing market for marijuana up north helped the Sinaloa cartel grow into a leading producer. Mexicans aren’t big drug users. Ronald Reagan’s success in cutting off the Miami transport route pushed the cocaine trade through Mexico, where the local criminal leaders seized the economic opportunity to take over that business from the Colombians.

The homicide rate was at America’s levels until conservative Felipe Calderón’s narrow victory over López Obrador in the 2006 presidential election. Responding to U.S. pressure, Calderon launched his war on drugs. He nabbed a few big players only to spawn — as cancer can metastasize after a surgery intended to remove it — many offshoots. The murder rate tripled and has stayed high.

López Obrador promised peace when he finally gained the presidency in 2018. He brought mostly neglect. The government broke up the unpopular federal police, laying off its 300,000 officers, and created a national guard that can’t investigate or police. The public applauded the move, but the cartels did just fine. Crime went down in some places, like Mexico City, and expanded to others, like previously quiet Chiapas this year. López Obrador points to a slowly declining homicide rate, but critics say that’s because the cartels are solidifying control over more territory.

The Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels are the largest umbrella organizations that sit above a criminal structure of 72 regional mafias and 400 criminal gangs with 150,000 employees and half a million people who are associated with them, according to Guerrero. They’re not al Qaeda or an insurgency by any traditional definition: They’re driven by money and not ideology, not a thirst for political power, nor even land as such. The motives matter. But the end result is the same as that of countries with insurgencies.

“The state is as weak as 15 years ago,” says Guillermo Valdés, who served Calderón as director of Mexico’s Center of Investigation and National Security (CISEN), its answer to the FBI. “Organized crime has become more powerful, economically, socially and politically. What we have seen in the past 15 years is the incredible empowerment of organized crime and the weakening of the state.”

As drugs are only half their business now, “most violence in Mexico is associated not with drug trafficking but with illegal markets,” he adds. Imagine Gangs of New York, on a national scale in the 21st century. “They want to control authorities, like police and justice. Temporarily they will control territory so they can control the illegal markets.”

Sheinbaum, as head of government in Mexico City, implemented a crackdown on crime in the metro area of more than 22 million people. Her aides say voters should look at her record in the capital to see what she’ll do on the national level. But the capital is a different story from the rest of the country. Sheinbaum is more ideologically a leftist than the pragmatic López Obrador. Judging by her behavior in the campaign she isn’t inclined to break in any significant way from López Obrador and his “hugs not bullets” policy. He’s also likely going to retain a strong presence in the Morena movement that he founded, shadowing her in office.

If there was an easy solution, it would’ve been tried by now. The security expert Eduardo Guerrero, like some other experts on both sides of the border, says the Mexican authorities alone can’t handle the challenge from the cartels. “If we don’t stop them they will take over several key Mexican states at this rate,” he says. “We need help. We aren’t able to control these groups alone.”

Some polls in Mexico show support for U.S. help, including even the deployment of troops, which won’t be politically workable with the current government. Its critics are trying to nudge the option on the table.

What’s indisputable is that this isn’t only the Mexicans’ problem.

“There is no internal Mexican matter anymore. Everything that affects us is an American matter,” says Jorge Castañeda, who was foreign minister under former President Vicente Fox from 2000-2003 and supports the opposition candidate on Sunday.

Or as Rodrigo Villegas, a political consultant in Mexico City, put it: “Our cartel problem is your cartel problem. Whatever happens on one side of border has echoes on the other side.”

Once upon a century, Acapulco was a playground for Hollywood royalty. Bill and Hillary Clinton honeymooned there. The Love Boat made a regular stop. Those are barely even memories. Violence in Guerrero has scared foreign tourists and cruise boats away. Hurricane Otis last fall left gaping scars in the buildings along the coast and left three-quarters of its hotel rooms unusable to this day. The town is shabby and tense. The airport empty.

Over breakfast near the strip of beachfront hotels, a colleague and I meet with three people who work with the families of the desaparecidos, the missing people of Mexico. A father lost his 15-year-old daughter, snatched off the street one night in 2015. Her remains were identified years later. A mother’s son was kidnapped and never seen again. A sister lost her brother, gone one day from his hotel job.

This is a relatively recent addition to Mexico’s menu of horribles. About 110,000 people are classified as “missing” in Mexico. On top of the tens of thousands murdered. Most serious crimes go unsolved and unprosecuted.

Besides their grief, these three share a frustration with a state that might as well not exist. “The police was so disrespectful, they treated us so bad and humiliated me and … did almost nothing to try to get to the bottom of the truth,” says Elba Janet Galeana Campos, who lost her brother. “Everyone in Mexico has a missing loved one. It’s just our collective tragedy.”

The trio belong to a group called the Families of Acapulco in Search of their Missing Ones. Once a month since 2015, they organize field searches. They say they have found at least 171 bodies, sometimes in underground mass graves where authorities have already searched or even recovered other remains.

“The crisis of violence in this country is not only the cartels’ and criminals’ fault,” says Sergio Ceballos Ascencio, whose daughter Monserrat disappeared after going to the Oxxo convenience store to buy credit for her cellphone. He assumes she was taken by a gang. “We as a society are guilty as well, we too have failed, we have forgotten basic values, we all must do better and more to dig ourselves out of this hell.”

Acapulco’s police chief, Luis Enrique Vázquez Rodriguez, pleads lack of resources. He says his forces are built to keep order and arrest drunks. “We are supposed to prevent crimes,” he says. Organized criminals are too much for them. He says López Obrador’s decision to close the national police left the country without 17,000 investigators who weren’t replaced. “It was a loss,” he says. “They had the highest capabilities in the police force. We need investigative units and don’t have that now.”

He grows visibly nervous when I ask about the cartels. He insists that homicide and petty crime are both falling. The city’s young deputy mayor, José Juan Ayala Villaseñor, tells me the city authorities are talking to cruise lines about stopping in again. “Acapulco is by far the safest city in Guerrero,” he says.

A few days after I see him, 10 people are found murdered across Acapulco.

Three days later, there are five more.

POLITICO

Politico

4. Donald Trump Joins TikTok Years After Trying to Ban the App

We surrender. China wins. Now we have both the Biden and Trump campaigns on TikTok.  

They have to go where the voters are and 170 million of them are on TikTok.

Both campaigns appear to be hypocritical.

Some national security threat.

Donald Trump Joins TikTok Years After Trying to Ban the App

More than 170 million Americans use the short video platform, according the company

https://www.wsj.com/tech/donald-trump-joins-tiktok-years-after-trying-to-ban-the-app-431b5cad?mod=hp_listb_pos2

By Ginger Adams Otis

June 2, 2024 8:43 am ET

The likely Republican presidential nominee previously has said he believes the app is a national-security threat. PHOTO: SPENCER PLATT/GETTY IMAGES

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who once tried to ban TikTok, has joined the social-media platform in the run-up to U.S. presidential election in November.

Trump’s first foray on the Chinese-backed video app was a 13-second clip of himself at an Ultimate Fighting Championship event in Newark, N.J., Saturday night. It was posted on @realDonaldTrump, a verified account that had more than 800,000 followers early Sunday. 

UFC President Dana White introduces Trump in the video, saying “The president is now on TikTok.” The clip cuts to the former president greeting fans in the arena. 

“That was a good walk-on, right?” Trump says as the clip ends. 

The Trump campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment Sunday. 

President Biden in April signed a bill into law that will ban TikTok in the U.S. if its Chinese owner, ByteDance, can’t or won’t find a buyer within a year. Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress supported the TikTok measure.

Biden’s campaign team joined the app in February, during the Super Bowl. The 26-second clip showed Biden answering questions about which team he was rooting for and if he preferred the game or the halftime show. He has over 330,000 followers. 

The app is one of the best ways for both campaigns to reach young American voters. More than 170 million Americans use TikTok, the company has said, and many of them are young people. 

Trump had tried to ban the app four years ago as president with an executive order, an effort that was derailed by legal issues. The likely Republican presidential nominee has said he believes the app is a national-security threat. 

TikTok has said that it would fight the looming U.S. ban of its app in court, aiming to ease the anxiety of an industry that has largely overlooked lawmakers’ data security concerns in its bid to reach consumers online. The company has repeatedly said it doesn’t share user data with the Chinese government.

The company didn’t respond to a request for comment Sunday. 

Write to Ginger Adams Otis at Ginger.AdamsOtis@wsj.com

5. Pentagon Chief Says War With China Neither Imminent nor Unavoidable

Unless China makes it so.

Pentagon Chief Says War With China Neither Imminent nor Unavoidable

Even as Washington and Beijing seek to cool tensions, Lloyd Austin’s remarks about Chinese activity in the Indo-Pacific drew a rebuke from China

By Feliz SolomonFollow

 and Chun Han WongFollow

June 1, 2024 3:36 am ET

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-chief-says-war-with-china-neither-imminent-nor-unavoidable-7f5c4b44?mod=Searchresults_pos1&page=1

SINGAPORE—Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said that a war with China is neither imminent nor unavoidable, striking a nonconfrontational tone a day after his first face-to-face meeting with his Chinese counterpart.

Speaking at a security summit in Singapore on Saturday, Austin signaled that the Biden administration is seeking to cool tensions with China, despite an increase in friction following military activities by both countries around Taiwan and in the disputed South China Sea.

“Our goal is to make sure that we don’t allow things to spiral out of control unnecessarily,” Austin said at the Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual gathering of defense officials organized by the London-based think tank the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

“A fight with China is neither imminent, in my view, or unavoidable,” he said.

The speech followed a 75-minute meeting Austin held Friday with Chinese Defense Minister Adm. Dong Jun. The pair reaffirmed plans to reopen direct lines of communication, part of efforts to reduce U.S.-China friction and preserve a delicate rapprochement between the two powers.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spoke Saturday at a security summit in Singapore.  PHOTO: EPA-EFE/SHUTTERSTOCK

A U.S. official said it was “clear and candid,” while a spokesman for China’s Defense Ministry described the talks as “positive.”

At the same time, in his Saturday speech, Austin emphasized continued support for U.S. allies and partners who are more and more concerned by increased Chinese military activity in the Indo-Pacific—a statement that drew a rebuke from a top Chinese official Saturday.

The defense secretary said that, even as the U.S. devotes considerable effort to conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, Asia remains America’s “priority theater of operations.”

Austin detailed Washington’s efforts to better integrate the militaries and defense industries of “like-minded” nations committed to a “a free and open Indo-Pacific.” The U.S., South Korea and Japan have deepened security relations to counter rising threats from China and North Korea.

Chinese Defense Minister Adm. Dong Jun has reaffirmed plans to improve communication between the U.S. and Chinese militaries. PHOTO: ROSLAN RAHMAN/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

Tensions have risen recently as both China and the U.S. object to each other’s military activities around Taiwan and in the South China Sea. China claims most of the sea as its own, including areas claimed by several other countries such as the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally.

Chinese vessels have become increasingly aggressive in disrupting missions to supply a detachment of marines the Philippines keeps stationed on a disputed reef called Second Thomas Shoal. The U.S. has repeatedly warned that an “armed attack” on Philippine vessels would invoke their mutual defense pact. 

“The harassment that the Philippines has faced is dangerous—pure and simple,” Austin said Saturday. “And we all share an interest in ensuring that the South China Sea remains open and free.”

China has steadily pressed its claims in the South China Sea, through which trillions of dollars in trade passes each year. It has built fortified artificial islands in part aimed at denying the U.S. Navy freedom of navigation in the area.

Austin outlined Saturday what he called “historic progress” made over the past three years with allies and partners across the Asia Pacific.

He noted advances in ventures to co-produce jet-fighter engines and armored vehicles with India, and major expansions of joint military exercises with the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia. The U.S. is also working with Japan to counter threats from hypersonic weapons.

Without naming China, Austin said critics will invariably oppose these efforts. “They will continue to reject the rule of law, and they will try to impose their will through coercion and aggression,” he said. 

Members of the Philippine Coast Guard—which has contended with aggression from Chinese vessels in disputed waters—set off from Manila. PHOTO: FRANCIS R. MALASIG/SHUTTERSTOCK

A senior Chinese delegate at the Shangri-La Dialogue issued a stern response to Austin’s remarks.

The U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy claims to promote cooperation but in reality builds exclusive clubs that sow divisions, Lt. Gen. Jing Jianfeng, deputy chief of the Chinese military’s Joint Staff Department, told reporters. “The true motive,” he said, “is to converge various small circles into a big circle that is an Asia-Pacific version of NATO, to maintain American hegemony.”

“The U.S. strengthens its military presence to force other countries to choose sides and advances the eastward expansion of NATO,” Jing said, adding that these maneuvers create chaos and “bind regional countries with the American war chariot.”

Jing accused Austin of implicitly criticizing “China’s legitimate operations to protect our rights” around Second Thomas Shoal. He said Austin’s remarks were “completely unreasonable,” adding that the Philippines and the U.S. were colluding to provoke confrontation and crisis.

Earlier, in a question-and-answer session following Austin’s speech, Senior Col. Cao Yanzhong, a research fellow at China’s Academy of Military Sciences, asked the defense secretary if the U.S. was pursuing a NATO-like alliance in Asia. 

Chinese coast guard vessels conduct training near Scarborough Shoal, where tensions with the Philippines have been running high. PHOTO: WANG YUGUO/ZUMA PRESS

He suggested that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was prompted by an expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization—a claim often advanced by Russian President Vladimir Putin to justify his decision in 2022 to invade his smaller neighbor. 

“I respectfully disagree with your point that the expansion of NATO caused the Ukraine crisis,” Austin said, drawing applause from the audience. 

“The Ukraine crisis obviously was caused because Mr. Putin made a decision to unlawfully invade his neighbor, who had an inferior military at that point in time,” he said. “He assumed he could very quickly roll over his neighbor and annex the country. That was two-plus years ago. He has not achieved any of his strategic objectives to this point.”

Write to Feliz Solomon at feliz.solomon@wsj.com and Chun Han Wong at chunhan.wong@wsj.com

6. Zelensky Says China Is Helping Russia Undermine a Peace Summit on Ukraine

Excerpts:

Russia hasn’t been invited to the conference in Switzerland and has denounced the event as an effort to isolate it. China’s Foreign Ministry said Friday that Beijing wouldn’t participate in the Swiss gathering because any peace conference “should be endorsed by both Russia and Ukraine, with the equal participation of all countries.”

There is little chance the peace conference brings about an end to the war in the near term, given that Moscow has shown no tangible signs it is willing to stop the fight and Ukraine is still hopeful of expelling Russian troops from the nearly one-fifth of its territory that remains occupied.

Its organizers instead largely hope to hammer out a common position that could provide a basis for talks in the future, and to tackle immediate issues such as the security of the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, food exports and the future of thousands of Ukrainian children taken to Russia.

Ukraine also seeks to use the talks to rally support from the developing world, where outrage has grown over the West’s perceived double standards during the Israeli military campaign that has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza. Ukraine invited Israel and Palestine, which it recognizes as a state, to the conference in Switzerland, and Zelensky in Singapore reiterated his support for a two-state solution in the Middle East.

China’s participation in any successful peace talks is considered crucial, because Russia has grown increasingly dependent on its giant neighbor economically, politically and technologically—especially as U.S.-led sanctions imposed in 2022 cut it off from the global financial system. 

Zelensky Says China Is Helping Russia Undermine a Peace Summit on Ukraine

Chinese assistance to Russia will only prolong the war, Ukraine’s leader says on visit to Singapore

https://www.wsj.com/world/zelensky-says-china-is-helping-russia-undermine-a-peace-summit-on-ukraine-100eedae?mod=latest_headlines

By Yaroslav Trofimov

Follow

June 2, 2024 7:51 am ET

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky addresses the Shangri-La Dialogue, a security summit in Singapore. PHOTO: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGE

SINGAPORE—Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accused China of pressuring countries to boycott a peace conference he’s promoting in Switzerland later this month and warned that Beijing’s support for Russian President Vladimir Putin will only prolong the war.

“Using Chinese influence, using Chinese diplomats, Russia is doing everything to disrupt the summit. Regrettably, such a big, independent country as China has become an instrument in Putin’s hands,” Zelensky said Sunday in Singapore.

The Ukrainian leader, who is trying to rally international support behind his demands that Russia withdraw from occupied areas of Ukraine, visited the island-state over the weekend to attend the Shangri-La Dialogue security conference.

Representatives of more than 100 nations are expected to attend the peace summit in the city of Lucerne on June 15-16. They include heads of states and governments from most Western nations, though it isn’t clear whether President Biden—who will be in Italy for a meeting of Group of Seven leaders just before—will come.

Russia hasn’t been invited to the conference in Switzerland and has denounced the event as an effort to isolate it. China’s Foreign Ministry said Friday that Beijing wouldn’t participate in the Swiss gathering because any peace conference “should be endorsed by both Russia and Ukraine, with the equal participation of all countries.”

There is little chance the peace conference brings about an end to the war in the near term, given that Moscow has shown no tangible signs it is willing to stop the fight and Ukraine is still hopeful of expelling Russian troops from the nearly one-fifth of its territory that remains occupied.

Its organizers instead largely hope to hammer out a common position that could provide a basis for talks in the future, and to tackle immediate issues such as the security of the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, food exports and the future of thousands of Ukrainian children taken to Russia.

The Ukraine summit is due to take place this month in Lucerne, Switzerland. PHOTO: DENIS BALIBOUSE/REUTERS

Ukraine also seeks to use the talks to rally support from the developing world, where outrage has grown over the West’s perceived double standards during the Israeli military campaign that has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza. Ukraine invited Israel and Palestine, which it recognizes as a state, to the conference in Switzerland, and Zelensky in Singapore reiterated his support for a two-state solution in the Middle East.

China’s participation in any successful peace talks is considered crucial, because Russia has grown increasingly dependent on its giant neighbor economically, politically and technologically—especially as U.S.-led sanctions imposed in 2022 cut it off from the global financial system. 

Unlike at the Shangri-La conference last year, where Chinese and Ukrainian defense ministers met for bilateral talks, there were no official contacts between Ukraine and the large Chinese delegation that participated in this weekend’s event.

Uniformed Chinese representatives who attended in large numbers other speeches at Shangri-La were absent during Zelensky’s address to the conference Sunday.

Chinese delegates made an effort to avoid even an accidental encounter with the Ukrainian team at the Shangri-La venue, and told their Singaporean hosts that they would not attend a Saturday dinner for delegates should Zelensky be there, according to a person familiar with the event.

Calls to the Chinese Defense Ministry outside of business hours went unanswered. China’s Foreign Ministry didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Ukraine’s president had no plans to attend the dinner and instead spent the evening in bilateral talks with the presidents of Indonesia and Timor Leste, as well as a U.S. congressional delegation. He also discussed U.S. military assistance in Sunday’s meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

All in all, Zelensky said Sunday, there have been no substantive contacts between his government and Beijing since he held a phone call with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in April 2023. Putin visited China on a two-day trip last month, a move meant to highlight the expanding cooperation between the two powers and their joint opposition to the American-dominated world order.

China’s Defense Minister Dong Jun, who spoke in Singapore earlier Sunday, reiterated that Beijing doesn’t provide weapons to either party of the war in Ukraine. 

“On the Ukraine crisis, China has been promoting peace talks with a responsible attitude,” he said. “We have put strict controls on the export of dual-use items, and have never done anything to fan the flames. We stand firmly on the side of peace and dialogue.”

Zelensky said that, though Xi had promised during their conversation not to sell weapons to Russia, Russia’s military has benefited from components that come from China.

“We have received signals from many intelligence services, including the Ukrainian one, that some things, somehow, end up in the Russian Federation market via China,” Zelensky said. Russian missiles and other weapons, however, also include parts from other countries, including those in the West, he added.

“Chinese support for Russia would make the war longer,” the Ukrainian president cautioned, “and that is bad for the entire world.”

Chun Han Wong contributed to this article.

Write to Yaroslav Trofimov at yaroslav.trofimov@wsj.com

7. Comparative Analysis of U.S. National Security Strategies (1987-2022)

From Strategy Central: Home of Stratbot AI.

 Ai can make life easier. I recall doing this "manually" some years ago. Of course I had to read all the NSS to derive the summaries so I had a better understanding of the multiple NSS which I think make analysis and compare and contest better. But AI has provided a useful summary here. This is time period focused rather than each specific NSS. I do think the "predictions" are most interesting and useful and just viewing the "pattern" pf NSS with the predictions for the future provides useful food for thought.

Comparative Analysis of U.S. National Security Strategies (1987-2022)

https://www.strategycentral.io/post/comparative-analysis-of-u-s-national-security-strategies-1987-2022?utm

strategycentral.io · June 1, 2024

The collective U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS) documents from 1987 through 2022 reveal a dynamic evolution in focus areas and themes, reflecting the changing geopolitical landscape and emerging threats. The Strategy Central staff put StratBot to the test to compare and contrast the major themes and focus areas of these strategies, along with a challenge to critique their strategic strengths, focus areas, omissions, and oversights. Finally, we asked StratBot to look into its crystal ball of strategic futures and provide predictions of the next era of US National Security Strategy.

1987-1991: Cold War Era

• Focus: Containment of the Soviet Union.
• Themes: Military strength, deterrence, and alliances.
• Key Features: Emphasis on nuclear deterrence, NATO's role, and economic measures like the Marshall Plan.
• Critique: The strategies of this era were robust in their clear focus on deterring Soviet aggression, leveraging strong alliances, and maintaining military superiority. However, they often overlooked the potential for non-military threats and the importance of economic and cultural diplomacy in fostering long-term stability.
• Influential Theorist: George Kennan. Ambassador Kennan advocated for the containment strategy, emphasizing the need to prevent the spread of Soviet influence through a combination of military, economic, and diplomatic efforts.

1991-2001: Post-Cold War Transition

• Focus: Addressing regional conflicts and promoting democracy.
• Themes: Peacekeeping, economic stability, and human rights.
• Key Features: Interventions in the Balkans, support for democratic transitions, and economic globalization.
• Critique: This period's strategies were commendable for their emphasis on peacekeeping and democratic promotion, which were crucial in the post-Cold War vacuum. Nonetheless, they sometimes underestimated the complexity of regional conflicts and the challenges of nation-building, leading to prolonged engagements without clear exit strategies.
• Influential Theorist: Francis Fukuyama. Known for his "End of History" thesis, Professor Fukuyama posited that the spread of liberal democracies might signal the endpoint of humanity's sociocultural evolution.

2001-2009: Post-9/11 Era

• Focus: Counterterrorism and homeland security.
• Themes: War on Terror, preemptive strikes, and homeland defense.
• Key Features: Invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, and the Patriot Act.
• Critique: The strategies post-9/11 were effective in rapidly addressing immediate threats and enhancing homeland security. However, the focus on preemptive strikes and unilateral actions often strained international alliances and overlooked the long-term consequences of military interventions, such as regional instability and the rise of insurgent groups.
• Influential Theorist: Samuel P. Huntington. His "Clash of Civilizations" theory suggested that future conflicts would be between cultural and religious identities, influencing the perception of global threats.

2009-2017: Rebalancing and Multilateralism

• Focus: Rebalancing towards Asia and multilateral cooperation.
• Themes: Global partnerships, economic recovery, and climate change.
• Key Features: Pivot to Asia, Paris Climate Agreement, and emphasis on international institutions.
• Critique: The strategic pivot towards Asia and emphasis on multilateralism were forward-thinking, recognizing the shifting global power dynamics. However, these strategies sometimes lacked decisive action in conflict zones like Syria and Ukraine, and the focus on climate change, while crucial, occasionally overshadowed immediate security concerns.
• Influential Theorist: Joseph Nye. Professor Nye developed the concept of "soft power," emphasizing the importance of cultural influence and diplomacy in international relations.

2017-2022: Great Power Competition

• Focus: Strategic competition with China and Russia.
• Themes: Economic security, military modernization, and technological innovation.
• Key Features: 2018 National Defense Strategy, emphasis on cyber and space domains, and trade policies targeting China.
• Critique: The recent focus on great power competition is apt given the resurgence of China and Russia as strategic rivals. The emphasis on technological innovation and economic security is particularly relevant. However, these strategies sometimes underplay the importance of soft power and diplomatic engagement, which are essential for comprehensive global influence and stability.
• Influential Theorist: John Mearsheimer. A proponent of offensive realism, Professor Mearsheimer argued that great powers are inherently driven to dominate the international system to ensure their security.

Predictions for the Focus Areas of the Next Era of U.S. National Security Strategy

Given the evolving geopolitical landscape and emerging global challenges, the next era of U.S. National Security Strategy is likely to focus on several key areas:

• Technological Dominance:
• Artificial Intelligence and Cybersecurity: Ensuring the U.S. maintains a competitive edge in AI and robust cybersecurity measures to protect critical infrastructure and data.
• Quantum Computing: Investing in quantum technologies to secure communications and enhance computational capabilities.

• Climate Security:
• Climate Change Mitigation: Addressing climate change as a core national security issue, with strategies to mitigate its impacts on global stability and resource scarcity.
• Sustainable Energy: Promoting renewable energy sources to reduce dependency on fossil fuels and enhance energy security.

• Global Health Security:
• Pandemic Preparedness: Strengthening global health systems and cooperation to prevent and respond to pandemics, recognizing their potential to disrupt global stability.
• Biotechnology: Advancing biotechnology for health security, including vaccine development and bio-defense mechanisms.

• Economic Resilience:
• Supply Chain Security: Ensuring resilient and secure supply chains for critical goods, reducing vulnerabilities exposed by global disruptions.
• Economic Alliances: Building economic partnerships to counterbalance adversarial economic practices and promote fair trade.

• Strategic Alliances and Multilateralism:
• Strengthening Alliances: Reinforcing traditional alliances (e.g., NATO) and building new partnerships to address shared security challenges.
• Multilateral Institutions: Engaging with international institutions to shape global norms and address transnational issues collaboratively.

• Great Power Competition:
• China and Russia: Continuing to address the strategic competition with China and Russia, focusing on countering their influence while engaging in selective cooperation on global issues.

Conclusion

The U.S. National Security Strategies from 1987 to 2022 illustrate a shift from Cold War containment to addressing diverse global threats, with recent strategies focusing on great power competition. Each era's strategy reflects the prevailing geopolitical challenges and the U.S.'s adaptive approach to maintaining national security.

In the ever-evolving chess game of global strategy, the next move is always the most critical. As the U.S. gears up for the future, it’s clear that the board is set, the pieces are in motion, and the stakes are higher than ever. So, whether it’s outsmarting quantum computers, outpacing climate change, or outmaneuvering geopolitical rivals, one thing’s for sure: the U.S. National Security Strategy is ready to play the long game. And remember, in the grand strategy of life, it’s not just about winning the game—it’s about making sure the other guy doesn’t even know what game you’re playing!

strategycentral.io · June 1, 2024

8. HAS DOD FOCUSED ON THE WRONG ISLAND WAR IN INDOPACOM?

Again, from Strategy Central: Home of Stratbot AI.

A weekly news rollup from AI.

In regards to the headline I am reminded this quote:

“The West Philippine Sea, not Taiwan, is the real flashpoint for an armed conflict,”

 – Ambassador Jose Manuel Romualdez February 28, 2024

​I do believe our myopic focus on Taiwan may get us into trouble (or prevent us from addressing trouble elsewhere which may be China's intention).

HAS DOD FOCUSED ON THE WRONG ISLAND WAR IN INDOPACOM?

strategycentral.io · June 2, 2024

CHINA AND THE PHILIPPINES HEAT UP

THE WEEK IN STRATEGY

Summaries and Links to This Week’s Curated Strategy Articles

May 27 – June 2, 2024

Depiction: High Above the US-China War in the Philippines.

THE BIG PICTURE

INDO PACIFIC: Escalating tensions in the South China Sea highlight Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.'s strong stance at the Shangri-La Dialogue, warning that any fatal incident would be akin to an act of war. Despite U.S. support, Chinese coercion continues, risking a military crisis. China’s defense minister has acknowledged the importance of newly renewed military-to-military communications with the United States as tensions escalate in the Asia-Pacific, while at the same time accusing Washington of causing friction with its support for Taiwan and the Philippines. China's efforts to control these waters contrast with responses from neighboring countries. The strategic challenges include China's gray-zone tactics and assertive actions against Philippine vessels, risking broader conflict due to mutual defense treaties. Concurrently, China's maneuvers towards Taiwan underscore the fragile balance of power in the region. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for managing and preventing escalation.

USA: Tentative improvement in U.S.-China relations is highlighted by the planned establishment of new military communication channels, aiming to stabilize the strained relationship and prevent potential conflicts, especially concerning Taiwan. The upcoming meeting between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his Chinese counterpart, Dong Jun, at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore marks a significant step. While these channels may not resolve all issues, they represent a hopeful sign amid deteriorating relations. Despite skepticism due to China's history of canceling such channels, this development is seen as positive. Meanwhile, President Biden is urged to abandon the proposed U.S.-Saudi defense deal, criticized for potentially destabilizing the Middle East and harming Biden’s political standing. Additionally, the upcoming 80th anniversary of D-Day offers a critical moment for Western leaders to reaffirm unity and commitment to democracy amidst current global tensions. These events underscore the importance of strategic communication and historical reflection in managing international relations and conflicts.

MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA: President Biden has proposed a temporary six-week cease-fire to halt the ongoing conflict in Gaza, facilitating humanitarian aid and paving the way for permanent peace negotiations and reconstruction. Despite the urgent need for diplomacy amid significant casualties, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected the idea, insisting that military operations will continue until Hamas is dismantled. Concurrently, Iran's political landscape is shifting following President Raisi's death, with upcoming elections exposing societal divisions. In South Africa, the 2024 election could reshape the political landscape as the ANC faces dissatisfaction and potential coalition formation. The central point is that these developments underscore the complexities and challenges in achieving stability and reform amid ongoing conflicts and political shifts.

GLOBAL ECONOMICS & TECH

In "Costs of Economic Fragmentation Include Moving to Hard-to-Work Places," published by Bloomberg and authored by Brendan Murray, the article discusses how the realignment of global supply chains to geopolitically neutral economies increases operational complexity and red tape, impacting productivity and efficiency. (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-30/supply-chain-latest-costs-of-economic-fragmentation)

In "Southeast Asian Exports Seen Surging Through 2030," published by Bloomberg News, the article highlights a report from Nomura predicting that exports from Southeast Asia will significantly increase as companies shift production to avoid tariffs and trade barriers, with nations like India, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Mexico being major beneficiaries. This production diversification is driven by intensifying US-China trade tensions, leading firms to reduce reliance on China. Despite these shifts, the dependence on Chinese intermediate goods will persist, posing challenges to completely severing ties. [Read more](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-29/southeast-asian-exports-seen-surging-through-2030).

How We’ll Reach a 1 Trillion Transistor GPU: Advances in semiconductors are feeding the AI boom.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/trillion-transistor-gpu

Blink to Generate Power for Smart Contact Lenses: A dual-mode power pack harvests energy from light and from tears.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/power-smart-contact-lenses

Interlune Aims to Mine the Moon for Helium-3: The rare isotope can be used in fusion, quantum computing, medicine and more.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/moon-mining

A New Alliance Is Advancing Augmented Reality: The group tackles issues hindering the technology’s widespread adoption.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ieee-alliance-advancing-augmented-reality

THE USA

“Can a U.S.-China Military Hotline Stop the Downward Spiral? New communications channels between the superpowers are a hopeful sign.” Foreign Policy. James Crabtree’s article discusses the tentative improvement in U.S.-China relations, highlighted by the planned establishment of new military communication channels. This initiative aims to stabilize the strained relationship and prevent potential conflicts, particularly concerning Taiwan. The upcoming meeting between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his Chinese counterpart, Dong Jun, at the IISS Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore marks a significant step towards this goal. The article emphasizes that while these communication channels may not solve all issues, they represent a hopeful sign in the broader context of deteriorating Sino-U.S. relations. Additionally, it highlights the structural challenges and skepticism surrounding the effectiveness of such hotlines, given China's history of canceling them during diplomatic tensions. Despite these challenges, the development of these channels is viewed as a positive move towards reducing misunderstandings and managing military dynamics more effectively.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/27/us-china-hotline-talks-military-communication-xi-biden-diplomacy-detente/

In "The U.S.-Saudi Agreement Is a Fool’s Errand," published by Foreign Policy and authored by David M. Wight, the article argues that President Joe Biden should abandon the proposed U.S.-Saudi defense deal. The agreement, which includes U.S. security guarantees and support for Saudi Arabia’s civilian nuclear program, is criticized for undermining U.S. strategic goals and potentially destabilizing the Middle East. Wight asserts that the deal would embolden Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s reckless behavior, increase the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Persian Gulf, and fail to significantly deter Iranian aggression. Additionally, the deal could harm Biden’s political standing domestically by deepening divisions within the Democratic Party and alienating key voter blocs. The author concludes that for the sake of the international order and U.S. interests, Biden must abandon this misguided agreement. (https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/29/us-saudi-defense-deal-biden-mbs-nuclear-security-iran-election/)

In "The 80th Anniversary of D-Day: An Opportunity to Seize," published by War on the Rocks and authored by Sam Edwards, the article discusses the significance of the upcoming 80th anniversary of D-Day amidst current global tensions, particularly the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Edwards draws parallels between past D-Day commemorations during the Cold War and today's geopolitical climate, suggesting that the anniversary offers a critical moment for Western leaders to reaffirm their unity and commitment to democracy. The article emphasizes that President Joe Biden has a unique opportunity to deliver a powerful message that underscores the importance of transatlantic solidarity and the ongoing struggle against authoritarianism. The author also reflects on how D-Day anniversaries have historically been used to address contemporary political concerns and rally public support.

CHINA

“The South China Sea Risks a Military Crisis” by Sarang Shidore, published by Foreign Policy, discusses the escalating tensions in the South China Sea, highlighting Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.'s strong stance at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. He declared that any fatal incident involving Philippine citizens in the ongoing standoff with China would be nearly tantamount to an act of war. Despite U.S. support and the strengthening of alliances, incidents of Chinese coercion and military assertiveness continue, raising the risk of a military crisis. The article suggests that mutual restraint and strategic patience are necessary to avoid further escalation and manage the territorial disputes. (https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/31/philippines-south-china-sea-shangri-la/).

In "The East and South China Seas: One Sea, Near Seas, Whose Seas?" published by War on the Rocks and authored by April A. Herlevi and Brian Waidelich, the article examines the strategic and geopolitical complexities of the East and South China Seas. It highlights China's efforts to assert control over these waters, regarded by Beijing as its "near seas," and contrasts this with the diverse and evolving responses of neighboring countries like Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia. The authors argue that understanding the distinct dynamics of each sea is crucial for addressing the challenges posed by China's territorial ambitions. They advocate for U.S. policymakers to push for Senate ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea and to support regional allies in maintaining access to these critical maritime regions. (https://warontherocks.com/2024/05/the-east-and-south-china-seas-one-sea-near-seas-whose-seas/)

“Are China and the Philippines on a Collision Course?” by Dean Cheng, Carla Freeman, Ph.D., Brian Harding, and Andrew Scobell, Ph.D., published by the United States Institute of Peace, examines the escalating tensions between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. The article highlights China's aggressive actions, such as the use of water cannons and maritime militias, against Philippine vessels, which raise the risk of conflict involving the United States due to their mutual defense treaty. This situation underscores the strategic challenges and potential for a broader regional conflict.

The article details how China's gray zone tactics and territorial claims have heightened tensions, pushing the Philippines to strengthen alliances with the U.S. and other regional partners. The authors argue that China's assertiveness in the South China Sea is not just about regional dominance but also reflects broader strategic ambitions that challenge U.S. influence. The potential for miscalculation and conflict remains high, necessitating careful management of the situation to avoid escalation. (https://www.usip.org/publications/2024/03/are-china-and-philippines-collision-course)

In "As China Tests the US-Philippines Alliance, Here's How to Respond," published by Foreign Policy and authored by Derek Grossman, the article explores China's aggressive maritime tactics against the Philippines and the increasing likelihood of armed conflict in the South China Sea. Grossman highlights how China's gray-zone tactics, such as using water cannons and military-grade lasers against Philippine vessels, challenge the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty. He argues for a revised treaty to address modern threats, enhanced US-Philippines military cooperation, and potentially leveraging technological advancements like drones to counter Chinese aggression. (https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/29/as-china-tests-the-us-philippines-alliance-heres-how-to-respond)

In "China-Taiwan: A Reality Check for Taipei and Its Western Allies," published by Bloomberg and authored by Jenni Marsh, the article details the immediate challenges faced by Taiwan's new President Lai Ching-te, who is contending with China's aggressive military maneuvers and internal political strife. Following Lai's inauguration, Beijing criticized his speech as a declaration of Taiwanese independence and responded with its largest military drills in a year. Concurrently, Taiwan's parliament, influenced by opposition groups favoring closer ties with China, passed legislation reducing Lai's presidential powers, which sparked significant protests. These developments highlight the fragile balance of power and the difficulties Taiwan and its allies, including the United States, face in countering China's assertive tactics.

In "China’s Role in Ukraine," published by The New York Times and authored by German Lopez, the article examines how China is indirectly supporting Russia's war efforts in Ukraine by purchasing Russian oil and expanding trade, thus bolstering Russia’s economy despite international sanctions. China’s provision of essential components, such as microelectronics used in Russian military equipment, further underscores its strategic partnership with Moscow. The article also discusses the broader implications of this support, suggesting that it represents a new phase of superpower competition reminiscent of a Cold War dynamic, as the U.S. and its allies continue to aid Ukraine. The outcome of this conflict could significantly influence China's future actions regarding its own territorial ambitions, particularly concerning Taiwan. (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/world/europe/china-ukraine-russia-support.html)

MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA

“Israel-Hamas War Briefing: Biden outlines cease-fire proposal to end war” by The New York Times details President Biden's proposal for a temporary six-week cease-fire aimed at ending the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The cease-fire is intended to pave the way for negotiations that would ultimately lead to a permanent resolution and the reconstruction of Gaza. The proposal highlights the urgent need for a pause in hostilities to facilitate humanitarian aid and rebuild war-torn areas.

Biden's plan comes amid ongoing violence and significant casualties, emphasizing the importance of diplomatic efforts to achieve lasting peace. The initiative is part of broader international efforts to stabilize the region and address the root causes of the conflict. The proposed cease-fire would involve close cooperation with international partners to ensure its success and create a framework for sustained peace talks. (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/31/world/israel-gaza-war-hamas-rafah)

“After Biden’s Push for Truce, Netanyahu Calls Israel’s War Plans Unchanged” by Aaron Boxerman, published by The New York Times, discusses the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's response to President Biden's call for a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. Netanyahu emphasized that Israel would not agree to a permanent cease-fire as long as Hamas retains military and governing power. His statement, aimed at domestic supporters, counters Biden's proposal for a temporary six-week cease-fire, which seeks to halt hostilities and facilitate negotiations for a lasting peace. (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/06/01/world/israel-gaza-war-hamas-rafah)

“Israel Pushes Deeper Into Rafah, but Gaza Exit Plan Remains Unclear” by Aaron Boxerman, Raja Abdulrahim, and Thomas Fuller, published by The New York Times, describes the Israeli military's deepening incursion into Rafah, southern Gaza, amid international calls for a cease-fire. Despite the intensifying offensive and resulting devastation, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu maintains that the military campaign will continue until Hamas's capabilities are dismantled and all hostages are returned. The article highlights the lack of a clear exit strategy for Gaza, leaving the region in prolonged conflict. (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/06/01/world/israel-gaza-war-hamas-rafah).

“Israel-Gaza War: Updates” by The New York Times. Protests in Tel Aviv and other cities call for an end to the conflict. Israeli, Egyptian, and U.S. officials plan to meet in Cairo to discuss reopening the Rafah crossing for humanitarian aid. (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/06/01/world/israel-gaza-war-hamas-rafah)

“Iran Readies for Presidential Elections After Raisi’s Deadly Helicopter Crash” by Stefanie Glinski, published by Foreign Policy, explores the political landscape in Iran following the death of President Ebrahim Raisi in a helicopter crash. The upcoming presidential election on June 28 aims to select his successor, with notable contenders like Saeed Jalili and Mohammad Mokhber. The crash has exposed societal divisions, with millions mourning while others view Raisi's death as a chance for change. The election is expected to highlight these divisions and potential for reform. (https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/30/iran-readies-for-presidential-elections-after-raisis-deadly-helicopter-crash)

“South African Election: A Weakened ANC May Shake Up the Country” by Arijit Ghosh, published by Bloomberg, explores the implications of the 2024 election for South Africa's political landscape. Despite voter dissatisfaction due to an energy crisis, corruption, and unemployment, the African National Congress (ANC) is expected to remain the largest party, though not with a majority. This will force the ANC to form coalitions, possibly with business-friendly parties, allowing for reforms in power supply, transportation, and public services, potentially addressing long-standing issues. (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-29/south-african-election-a-weakened-anc-may-shake-up-the-country)

RUSSIA

“Developing an Economic Security Agenda for NATO” by Anna Dowd and Dominik Jankowski, published by War on the Rocks, argues for a renewed focus on economic security within NATO to counter threats from Russia and China. The article suggests launching a NATO Economic Deterrence Initiative to enhance economic resilience, intelligence sharing, and policy coordination. The alliance can better address the complex global challenges by reintegrating economic security into NATO's strategic considerations and ensure a more comprehensive deterrent posture. (https://warontherocks.com/2024/05/developing-an-economic-security-agenda-for-nato)

“Russian Missiles Hit Ukraine’s Energy System, Again” by Constant Méheut, published by The New York Times, reports on a large-scale air assault by Russian forces targeting Ukraine's energy infrastructure. The attack involved 53 missiles, with a third hitting their targets, including critical infrastructure in western Ukraine near NATO borders. The strikes have significantly damaged the energy sector, leading to rolling blackouts and further straining Ukraine's air defense systems. President Zelensky has urged NATO allies to intercept Russian missiles near their borders to alleviate pressure on Ukrainian defenses. (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/01/world/europe/russia-ukraine-missile-strikes.html)

strategycentral.io · June 2, 2024

9. A lighter, high-tech Abrams tank is taking shape

A lighter, high-tech Abrams tank is taking shape

Defense News · by Jen Judson · May 31, 2024

The U.S. Army awarded the manufacturer of Abrams tanks a contract this month to begin the preliminary design of its new tank variant expected to be lighter and feature high-tech capabilities so it’s more survivable in battle, the service’s head of combat vehicle modernization told Defense News.

The contract allows the Army to work closely with General Dynamics Land Systems on shaping requirements for the new M1E3 Abrams tank. The hope, according to Brig. Gen. Geoffrey Norman, is to be able to bring the new variant into the force at a similar timeline to the M30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle, which is under development.

“I think that there would be real goodness for the Army if M30 combat vehicles and M1E3 tanks could be fielded simultaneously to an [armored brigade combat team],” Norman said. “I think the Army senior leaders are going to push us to try to align those schedules, and whether that can be done is an open question right now.”

Norman said factors like technology maturation budgets will likely dictate whether that is achievable.

The Army is running a competition between two American Rheinmetall Vehicles and General Dynamics Land Systems to build the XM30 vehicle that will replace the Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. The service plans to select a winner in late fiscal 2027 or early fiscal 2028, Norman said.

The schedule for the M1E3′s preliminary design and what follows is under review within the Army’s acquisition branch, Norman said. In the meantime, the Army and GDLS will begin working through what the service wants in and can achieve with a new Abrams variant. A firmer timeline will likely take shape by the fall, he added.

The Army last fall decided to scrap its upgrade plans for the Abrams tank and instead pursue a more significant modernization effort to increase the tank’s mobility and survivability on the battlefield. As part of the decision, the Army ended its M1A2 System Enhancement Package version 4 program.

The M1E3 “from a requirement standpoint is an engineering change proposal,” Norman said, but with “a different design approach to meeting existing requirements. It’s going to be a very differently configured Abrams than what we currently have.”

Over the next 18 months, Norman said the Army will work through a series of technology maturation efforts to include autoloader capabilities, aides “to enable a crew to operate fully buttoned up [inside the tank],” alternate power trains, and active protection systems.

“Those are the types of things where different systems are being competed to pick the best of the breed that then will be integrated into an [engineering change proposal] prototype,” he added.

The Army plans to bring the weight of Abrams under 60 tons. The current variant is roughly 73 tons, according to Norman.

“That might be a little aggressive, but we’re pretty ambitious,” he said of the goal. “In order to do that, we anticipate having to change the crew configuration, potentially looking at opportunities to go to a remote turret or an optionally manned turret in order to save the space under armor.”

Power trains that include hybrid capability will also undergo examiniation in order to achieve both reduced fuel consumption as well as the desirable silent watch and silent drive capabilities to better avoid detection. The power train must still be able to reach high dash speeds, Norman noted.

The M1E3 will also have an integrated active protection system “that’s part and parcel to the vehicle survivability, profile and design. That’s one of the things that we know absolutely will be integral to the program,” Norman said.

About Jen Judson

Jen Judson is an award-winning journalist covering land warfare for Defense News. She has also worked for Politico and Inside Defense. She holds a Master of Science degree in journalism from Boston University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from Kenyon College.

10. US’ Campbell calls for stability in Strait

Sun, Jun 02, 2024 page1

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2024/06/02/2003818736

US’ Campbell calls for stability in Strait

SPEAKING OUT: Campbell and his Japanese and South Korean counterparts said they were committed to bolstering security and maintaining peace in the region

• Staff writer
• 
  
•  
•  
• US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell on Thursday voiced the US’ strong concern over China’s “destabilizing actions” around Taiwan and in the Taiwan Strait in a meeting with a Chinese official, saying that they “erode the status quo that has maintained regional peace and stability for decades.”
• The US State Department described Campbell’s discussion with Chinese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Ma Zhaoxu (馬朝旭) in Washington as “candid and constructive,” and “part of ongoing efforts to maintain open lines of communication between the United States and PRC” (the People’s Republic of China).
• The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) held large-scale military exercises in areas surrounding Taiwan on Thursday and Friday last week, three days after the inauguration of President William Lai (賴清德).
• 
  

US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, center, speaks to reporters before a meeting with Japanese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Masataka Okano, left, and South Korean Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Kim Hong-kyun at Iron Bell Farm in Washington, Virginia, on Friday.

• Photo: EPA-EFE
• Beijing has also increased its number of military incursions, including crossing the unofficial maritime border, the median line of the Taiwan Strait, and entering Taiwan’s southwestern air defense identification zone.
• During their meeting, Campbell also raised the US’ “serious concerns about PRC support to Russia’s defense industrial base undermining European security, and the PRC’s destabilizing actions in the East China Sea and South China Sea, including at Second Thomas Shoal” (Renai Shoal, 仁愛暗沙), the US State Department said in a statement.
• “The Deputy Secretary emphasized that although the United States and PRC are in competition, both countries need to prevent miscalculation that could veer into conflict or confrontation,” the statement said, adding that both sides reaffirmed “the importance of maintaining open channels of communication at all times and committed to continue diplomacy and consultations.”
• Separately, Campbell on Friday hosted a meeting attended by Japanese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Masataka Okano and South Korean Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Kim Hong-kyun.
• “We reaffirmed the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element of security and prosperity in the international community,” said a joint statement issued after the meeting, which also called for the peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues.
• The joint statement also “strongly condemned North Korea’s recent launches using ballistic missile technology.”
• “We reaffirm our commitment to use our collective capacity to strengthen security and maintain peace and stability across the Indo-Pacific region,” it said, adding that the US, Japan and South Korea “strongly oppose any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in the waters of the Indo-Pacific.”
• In other news, Canadian Minister of National Defence Bill Blair yesterday said he had also expressed concern about Chinese military action around Taiwan since the Taiwanese presidential election in January during his meeting with Chinese Minister of National Defense Dong Jun (董軍), held on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue defense summit in Singapore.
• Canada would increase its presence in Asia, Blair said.
• Additional reporting by Reuters
• 
  

11. Russian disinformation sites linked to former Florida deputy sheriff, research finds

Pogo. We have met the enemy and he is.....(or was once one of us)

Remember that Russian influence is a hoax (according to the Russians and those who believe them)

Russian disinformation sites linked to former Florida deputy sheriff, research finds

A new report from a media watchdog connects John Mark Dougan, who now lives in Russia, to scores of fake news sites.

May 29, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT

By Brandy Zadrozny

NBC News · by Brandy Zadrozny

More than 150 fake local news websites pushing Russian propaganda to U.S. audiences are connected to John Mark Dougan, an American former law enforcement officer living in Moscow, according to a research report published Wednesday by NewsGuard, a firm that monitors misinformation.

The websites, with names like DC Weekly, New York News Daily and Boston Times, look similar to those of legitimate local news outlets and have already succeeded in spreading a number of false stories surrounding the war in Ukraine. Experts warn they could be used to launder disinformation about the 2024 election.

In an interview over WhatsApp, Dougan denied involvement with the websites. “Never heard of them,” he said.

Dougan, a former Marine and police officer, fled his home in Florida in 2016 to evade criminal charges related to a massive doxxing campaign he was accused of launching against public officials and was given asylum by the Russian government. Most recently, Dougan has posed as a journalist in Ukraine’s Donbas region, testifying at Russian public hearings and making frequent appearances on Russian state TV.

He’s now part of a small club of Western expats who have become purveyors of English-language propaganda for Russia. Researchers and cybersecurity companies had previously linked Dougan to the sites. The NewsGuard report published Wednesday is the latest to implicate him in the fake news ring.

Academic research from Clemson University linked Dougan to the network of fake news websites last year after one of them was found to share an IP address with other sites he ran, including his personal website.

In an interview, Darren Linvill, co-director of the Watt Family Innovation Center Media Forensics Hub at Clemson, called Dougan “a tool of the broader Russian disinformation machine” whose websites “are just one of several mechanisms by which these narratives are distributed.”

Linvill noted the fake news websites had lately veered away from the narrow focus of undermining support for Ukraine. Recent fake articles include the false claims that the FBI wiretapped former President Donald Trump’s office at Mar-a-Lago, his estate in Florida, and that the CIA backed a Ukrainian plot to rig the election against Trump.

“There is no question we are beginning to see a shift in focus toward the U.S. election,” Linvill said.

Posing as local news, the sites host articles about crime, politics and sports, most of which seem to have been generated with artificial intelligence tools and are attributed to journalists who do not exist. Interspersed within the general news are articles that disparage the U.S., exalt Russia and spread disinformation about topics from the wars in Ukraine and Gaza to Covid vaccines.

Researchers say sites attributed to Dougan are marred with telltale signs of his signature, including early website registration records, IP addresses, similar image headers and layouts, being built with WordPress software, seemingly AI-generated prompts mistakenly left in copy and error messages at the ends of articles.

The reach of the campaigns varies. Some of the sites remained active for just weeks with little to no pickup in the wider media. But some fake news stories have gained traction, including several recent posts using forged documents that falsely claimed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was improperly using foreign aid to enrich himself. Last month, a story on the fake news site The London Crier said Zelenskyy had spent 20 million pounds on a mansion previously owned by King Charles III.

It followed a story posted to DC Weekly in November that falsely claimed Zelenskyy had used American aid money to buy two yachts.

Both rumors relied, as the network often does, on videos posted to YouTube by newly created accounts. A site like DC Weekly will publish fake news stories using videos of seemingly AI-generated “leaks” or examples of whistleblowing, and Russian influencers and bot networks will then spread those articles, according to the Clemson researchers. Ultimately, the fake articles are reported as fact by pro-Kremlin media outlets and, in some of the most successful cases, by Western politicos and pundits.

The rumor about Zelenskyy’s buying yachts was later promoted by Republican members of Congress, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Sen. JD Vance of Ohio.

The author of the new report, McKenzie Sadeghi, NewsGuard’s editor, pointed to the network’s sophisticated use of AI to produce content and make narratives seem credible.

“In the wrong hands, this technology can be used to spread disinformation at scale,” Sadeghi said. “With this network, we’re seeing that play out exactly.”

What specific support Dougan receives from Russia is unclear. In May, the cybersecurity company Recorded Future reported a “realistic possibility” that the network receives strategic guidance, support or oversight from the Russian government. In March, The New York Times reported that the fake local news ring “appears to involve remnants” of the Internet Research Agency, the troll factory created by the late Putin associate Yevgeny Prigozhin to influence the 2016 presidential election. Previous reporting on Dougan and his more dubious claims — including that he was in possession of leaked documents from murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich and secret tapes belonging to Jeffrey Epstein — suggests Dougan may be pursuing wealth, clout or operating from some other motive in addition to a state-sanctioned political agenda.

Dougan was an early creator of fake websites. After he resigned from his job as a sheriff’s deputy in Palm Beach County, Florida, and was fired months later from a subsequent one in Windham, Maine, over sexual harassment claims, he built a network of websites that focused on what he claimed was widespread corruption in Windham, naming local police and town officials in articles. He also reportedly launched a campaign doxxing thousands of federal agents, judges and law enforcement officers, posting their home addresses and salacious allegations online. By 2015 he was operating several websites with official-sounding names like DCWeekly.com and DCPost.org, which hosted made-up articles. In 2016, he fled to Russia following an FBI raid of his home to evade charges linked to his doxxing efforts.

YouTube banned Dougan last year. On Telegram, he attributed the ban to videos he uploaded alleging a Russian mission to destroy U.S.-run bioweapons labs in Ukraine, a false narrative that would take hold as a justification for Russia’s invasion. Dougan’s ban came on the heels of a report from NewsGuard that highlighted the pro-Russian propaganda on his channel.

According to co-CEO Steven Brill, NewsGuard’s earlier report and Dougan’s subsequent ban led to a harassment campaign against him. Brill says in a coming book that Dougan impersonated an FBI officer in phone calls to him, left threatening messages and posted YouTube videos showing aerial shots of Brill’s home.

Over WhatsApp, Dougan defended his videos about Brill, citing NewsGuard’s “partnership with the US government” to have his content removed.

There is no evidence NewsGuard acted in concert with or on behalf of the U.S. government when it investigated Dougan. Asked for proof of such a partnership, Dougan sent a link to his own video, a 31-minute monologue laden with conspiracy theories. He’d reposted it to YouTube.

NBC News · by Brandy Zadrozny

12. Biden’s cease-fire plan tightens political squeeze for Netanyahu in Israel

Biden’s cease-fire plan tightens political squeeze for Netanyahu in Israel

Benjamin Netanyahu faces calls from hostage families, who want the cease-fire deal, and far-right politicians, who threaten to collapse his government if it’s accepted.

By Shira Rubin, Lior Soroka and Sarah Dadouch

June 2, 2024 at 9:37 a.m. EDT

The Washington Post · by Shira Rubin · June 2, 2024

TEL AVIV — As more than 100,000 Israelis flooded the streets of this city on Saturday night demanding that Israel accept a U.S.-brokered deal to return Hamas-held hostages and eventually finish the war in Gaza, members of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right coalition threatened to collapse the government if the proposal were to be implemented.

The dueling bids were directed at Netanyahu, whose office said Friday that it “authorized” the text of the three-phased deal that President Biden announced on Friday. But on Saturday, it added that “Israel’s conditions for ending the war have not changed,” and that any deal that does not condition a permanent cease-fire on the destruction of Hamas military and governing capabilities was a “non-starter.”

The proposal includes the halt of fighting for six weeks to swap the hostages in Hamas captivity for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and a significant boost in aid shipments into the enclave. At least 36,439 people have been killed and 82,627 injured in Gaza since the war began, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants but says the majority of the dead are women and children. Israel estimates that about 1,200 people were killed in Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack, mostly civilians, and 253 were taken hostages. It says 293 soldiers have been killed since the launch of its military operation in Gaza.

Hamas said Friday that it viewed Biden’s speech on the deal “positively,” and that it “affirms its position of readiness to deal positively and constructively with any proposal based on a permanent ceasefire, complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, reconstruction, the return of the displaced to all their places of residence, and the completion of a serious prisoner exchange deal.”

Biden’s televised speech came after sundown on Friday, as some far-right members of Netanyahu’s coalition were observing the Jewish Sabbath, during which they abstain from work or using their phones.

When the Sabbath ended on Saturday night, the far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, tweeted that the deal “is not absolute victory, but rather absolute defeat.” If Netanyahu goes ahead with it, he said, his party would “dismantle the government.”

Bezalel Smotrich, another ultranationalist member of Netanyahu’s coalition, tweeted that he told Netanyahu he would also quit the government if the deal went through.

“We demand the continuation of the fighting until the destruction of Hamas and the return of all the hostages, the creation of a completely different security reality in Gaza and Lebanon, the return of all residents to their homes in the north and south and a massive investment in the accelerated development of these areas of the country,” he said.

For weeks, Netanyahu has been under competing pressures: from moderate members of his war cabinet, who have been pushing for a deal, and the less influential, more hard-line partners in his coalition and his base, who have continuously insisted on “absolute victory” in Gaza.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid said that the government would not necessarily collapse without Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and that he would be willing to provide a “safety net” that would enable it to see through the cease-fire deal and hostage releases.

“The threats from Ben Gvir and Smotrich are [an act of] abandoning national security, the hostages and residents of the north and the south,” Lapid tweeted Saturday night. “This is the worst, most reckless government in the history of the country. From their perspective, let there be war here forever.”

The tweet exchanges coincided with several demonstrations across Tel Aviv on Saturday night, in which more than 120,000 people took to the streets, according to organizers. They chanted calls for the government to implement the deal, saying they viewed Biden’s announcement as a turning point after eight months of agonizing limbo.

“We will continue to fight until the destruction government says yes to Netanyahu’s deal,” said Ayala Metzger, whose father-in-law, Yoram Metzger, 80, is being held in Gaza. She spoke near the Israeli military headquarters in Tel Aviv, where police clashed with thousands of protesters chanting for the immediate overthrow of the government. Her leg was injured by police cavalry, according to videos that circulated on social media.

“I hope that Biden’s speech will pressure whoever needs to be pressured in order for there to be a deal,” said Mor Kornigold, whose brother Tal Shoham is being held in Gaza.

f the hostages do not return, he said, “we will never have victory.”

“Our trust, as citizens, in the government collapsed on Oct. 7, and nothing has been done to repair it,” said Gil Dickman, whose cousin Carmel Gat is a hostage.

“Biden is showing himself as the responsible adult in the room, saying, ‘I will tell you the situation, so that no one can retreat afterward because of some political reason or another,’” Dickman said. Addressing Netanyahu, he added: “Biden is saying that this train has already left the station. Now the question is, will you get on it and get the hostages home or stay with your head to the wall, as if you want to continue the war forever.”

Hostage families have intensified efforts to pressure the government into reviving negotiations, attempting to convince officials that the Israeli public would support a deal that would return all the hostages.

“Family representatives called on all government ministers and coalition members to publicly commit to supporting the deal, to do everything possible to ensure it is implemented immediately, and to block any attempt to torpedo it,” said a statement Saturday by the Hostage Families Forum, an umbrella organization representing most of the relatives of those held inside Gaza.

“It’s now or never,” Dickman said.

He said that on Thursday, National Security Council chief Tzachi Hanegbi told him and several other hostage relatives that if the current cease-fire proposal is not implemented, “there is no plan B.”

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, whose position is mostly ceremonial, said on Sunday that he had thanked Biden for his speech and that he pledged to Netanyahu his full support a hostage deal.

“We must not forget that according to Jewish tradition, there is no greater commandment than redeeming captives and hostages, especially when it comes to Israeli citizens who the State of Israel was not able to defend,” he said during an address to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

A statement by the United States, Egypt and Qatar — three countries that have attempted for months to broker an agreement between Israel and Hamas — said on Saturday: “These principles brought the demands of all parties together in a deal that serves multiple interests and will bring immediate relief both to the long-suffering people of Gaza as well as the long-suffering hostages and their families.”

“This deal offers a roadmap for a permanent ceasefire and ending the crisis,” it said.

Here’s what else to know

Officials from the United States, Israel and Egypt are meeting in Cairo on Sunday to discuss the reopening of the Rafah border crossing to let much needed aid into Gaza, a former Egyptian official familiar with the negotiations told The Washington Post. The proposal on the table would be temporary to handle the aid crisis, the official added, saying it would come into effect during a six-week time frame “set by Joe Biden to stop fighting.”

All 36 shelters in Rafah belonging to the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) are “empty now,” said Philippe Lazzarini, the agency’s commissioner-general. The recent escalation in Israeli operations in the area had triggered an exodus of more than 1 million from Rafah — most of whom had already been displaced several times, Lazzarini said on Saturday night. “All eyes are on the proposal to reach an end to this war through a ceasefire, the release of all hostages + substantial & safe flow of urgently needed supplies into Gaza,” he wrote. The Israel Defense Forces said Sunday it was continuing operations in the area, killing militants and locating weapons.

The IDF said Israeli Air Force jets struck a military compound used by Hezbollah operatives in Lebanon’s Beqaa valley in response to a Hezbollah surface-to-air missile that was fired Saturday at an IDF drone operating in Lebanese airspace. Hezbollah had claimed the attack on the unmanned vehicle on Saturday.

Yemen’s Houthi militant group said Saturday night that it had targeted the U.S. aircraft carrier Eisenhower — the second such attack on the vessel this week. The group said it carried out five other operations, including the targeting of an American destroyer in the Red Sea. The Houthis said the attacks were in response to IDF “crimes against the displaced in Rafah” and the expansion of military operations in this stage of war, as well as in response to American-British strikes on Yemen earlier in the week.

Dadouch reported from Beirut. Heba Farouk Mahfouz contributed to this report.

The Washington Post · by Shira Rubin · June 2, 2024

13. China won’t allow cold or hot war in Asia-Pacific, Chinese Defence Minister Dong Jun says

Should be pretty easy to prevent both. Just act as a responsible member of the rules based international order.

China won’t allow cold or hot war in Asia-Pacific, Chinese Defence Minister Dong Jun says

• In address to Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, Dong says his country stands firm against ‘war or chaos’ in region
• Beijing committed to ‘peaceful reunification’ with Taiwan, but ‘Taiwan separatists and external forces’ are undermining that prospect

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3265038/china-wont-allow-cold-or-hot-war-asia-pacific-chinese-defence-minister-dong-jun-says

Amber Wang

in Singapore

and

Seong Hyeon Choi

in Singapore

Published: 9:23am, 2 Jun 2024

China will not allow any country to ignite wars – cold or hot – in the Asia-Pacific region, Chinese Defence Minister Dong Jun told an international security conference in Singapore on Sunday.

“We will not allow hegemony and power politics to harm the Asia-Pacific. Nor will we allow geopolitical conflicts, cold wars or hot wars to be introduced into the Asia-Pacific. Nor will we allow any country or any force to create war and chaos here,” Dong said in an address to the Shangri-La Dialogue.

He added that countries in the region had the ability and confidence to solve regional problems​.

A day earlier, Dong’s US counterpart, Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin, told the forum that the United States was committed to improving partnerships and alliances in the region.

Dong and Austin met on the event’s sidelines on Friday in the first face-to-face meeting between the two countries’ defence chiefs since November 2022.

In terms of China-US military relations, Dong said China had always been open to exchanges and cooperation with the US military.

“We believe that it is precisely because of the differences between the two militaries that more exchanges are needed. Even if the paths are different, we should not seek confrontation,” Dong said.

Taiwan

He also said Beijing was committed to “peaceful reunification” with Taiwan, but the prospect was being “undermined by Taiwan separatists and external forces”.

The People’s Liberation Army will resolutely fight against Taiwan independence forces and “whoever dares to split Taiwan from China will be crushed to pieces and invite their own destruction”.

Asked if PLA drills around the island showed that Beijing was truly interested in peaceful reunification with Taiwan, Dong said Taiwan independence forces were “unilaterally changing the status quo of the Taiwan Strait”.

He said the inauguration speech on May 20 of the island’s new leader, William Lai Ching-te, “exposed their ambition to seek Taiwan independence”.

Without mentioning the US, Dong accused some countries of “hollowing out” the one-China principle, selling weapons to Taiwan and attempting to “use Taiwan to contain China”.

“These sinister intentions are leading Taiwan into danger,” he said.

Beijing sees Taiwan as part of China to be reunited by force if necessary. Most countries, including the US, do not recognise Taiwan as an independent state, but Washington is opposed to any attempt to take the self-governed island by force and is committed to arm Taiwan.

South China Sea

Dong said in the speech that some countries had “provoked incidents” in the South China Sea at the instigation of external forces.

He said “external forces” had deployed mid-range missiles in the region, seriously undermining regional security and stability – an apparent reference to the US’ deployment of an intermediate missile system for the first time in the northern Philippines during a drill in April.

The South China Sea was the busiest area for international trade, accounting for over half of all global shipping, and there had “never been one incident [in which] civilian ships have had their freedom of navigation being compromised”.

“So why has this always become an issue? Why is it always brought up? Because this place is prosperous, some big powers are increasing their military presence in this region, deploying more military force. So what is their purpose? Are you coming here for peace or stirring up trouble?”

Second Thomas Shoal

Dong also did not refer directly to the Philippines, but on recent clashes near the Second Thomas Shoal, known in China as Renai Jiao, he said the adversary was “deliberately” playing the victim to create disputes.

“I think this is blackmail ... I think this isn’t even morally right,” Dong said.

“China’s law enforcement has been restrained and in accordance with our law. Our policy has been very consistent for the past many decades.

“We are committed to peaceful resolution of the dispute. I just want to say our tolerance for deliberate provocation will have a limit.”

CONVERSATIONS (88)

+ FOLLOW

Amber Wang

Amber Wang is a reporter for the China desk, and focuses on Chinese politics and diplomacy. She joined the Post in 2021, and previously worked for The New York Times and Southern Metropolis Daily.

+ FOLLOW

Seong Hyeon Choi

Seong Hyeon joined the SCMP in 2022. He is from South Korea and graduated with a bachelor of journalism and master of international and public affairs from the University of Hong Kong. He worked as a research intern for Korea Chair at US foreign policy think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and as a news trainee for NK news.

14. China’s war against Taiwan at the World Health Organization

The PRC claims to be a founding member of the WHO which I believe was founded in 1948 before the PRC was established. The Republic of China was a founding member but the PRC uses the One China policy to further its propaganda.

China’s war against Taiwan at the World Health Organization

The outgoing Taiwanese premier tells The Counteroffensive why exclusion from bodies like WHO hurts global health. And in reporter's notebook, Elaine visits the prestigious Academia Sinica labs.

https://www.counteroffensive.news/p/chinas-war-against-taiwan-at-the?utm

ELAINE LIN

JUN 02, 2024

40

4

7

Share

Editor’s Note: This is our monthly supplemental issue on Taiwan! Today’s issue is sponsored by the STUF United Fund, an American non-profit focused on international charity work, especially public health.

We believe that empathy and authoritarianism can’t mix – that when we tell deeply-reported human stories of people threatened by dictators, it compels people to act against injustice. Agree with us? Upgrade now to support our work. 

Upgrade now!

Dr. Chen Chien-Jen was leading Taiwan’s health department when a strange respiratory infectious disease broke out in Taiwan in 2003.

Later known as SARS, the unknown illness killed 137 people in just four months, marking a dark period in Taiwanese history.

The Counteroffensive with Tim Mak is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribed

“When we first got imported SARS cases on March 17th, we asked the WHO to provide SARS virus DNA, because we heard there were cases from other countries a few months prior,” said Dr. Chen, who until earlier this month was the premier of Taiwan. “But they refused. Instead, they told us we should get it from China, our ‘motherland.’” 

Dr. Chen, former Minister of the Health Department of Taiwan, as well as former President of the Executive Yuan.

When Taiwan asked China for help, China ignored the request. Without the virus culture, the Taiwanese government couldn’t make rapid tests, letting the first asymptomatic local cases develop and spread. 

Due to China’s opposition, Taiwan has been excluded from almost all international organizations – such as U.N.'s convention on climate change, Interpol, and the World Health Organization. 

This week, when the World Health Assembly (WHA) met in Geneva, Switzerland, Taiwan wasn’t invited as a member. Nor was it allowed to attend as even an observer, as urged by diplomats from the United States, the United Kingdom, and several other countries. 

Taiwanese professionals were excluded from joining the technical and expert committees at the WHA to share valuable experience and updated worldwide information. Nor were they permitted to take part in training by the WHO’s top experts. 

Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen, a Distinguished Professor at the College of Public Health at National Taiwan University, explained why this hurts Taiwan: “Not being part of the WHO excludes Taiwan from getting updated information about any outbreak disease,” he said.

The WHO hasn’t accepted Taiwan’s membership for over five decades, not because of Taiwan’s qualifications, but for political reasons. This has cost both Taiwan and the world a heavy price, causing irreversible damage and the loss of countless innocent lives. 

Masked hospital staff work outside Kaohsiung University Memorial Hospital in Kaohsiung, southern Taiwan during the SARS pandemic, May 21, 2003. (Photo by SAM YEH/AFP via Getty Images)

The first SARS local case infected numerous doctors and nurses from the first SARS-treating hospital, Taipei City Hospital Heping Branch. Eventually, it led to 31 people dying in the hospital. 

“If WHO had given us the virus culture, we could’ve had a chance to stop the disease from the very beginning,” said Dr. Chen. 

When Chen first took the job during the SARS pandemic, he felt honored, yet nervous – and cursed his luck at the responsibility. However, he was soon reminded of his Catholic faith. 

He pointed at the wall where the script of the Bible was written and told The Counteroffensive, “It’s my destiny. Someone has to wash the feet,” referring to a Biblical quotation in the Gospel of John, referring to Christ’s instruction to his disciples.

A calligrapher, knowing Dr. Chen is a devoted Catholic, wrote a quotation from the First Epistle to the Corinthians for him. 

Taiwan was experiencing a pandemic that could have spread around the world, yet the WHO hesitated to send professionals to Taiwan to assist with guidance for disease control. 

With limited outside help, Dr. Chen and his team had to rely on themselves. They quickly developed groundbreaking health policies, including mandatory masking, the measurement of body temperature, and a process to track contact histories – which helped Taiwan to survive in a tough time.

Dr. Chen proudly showed the Counteroffensive a print in his office, which he got from a church friend in 2004. The bottom two are the local god’s gatekeepers, using thermometers as their weapons to counter SARS. 

Later, the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provided a virus culture, and visited Taiwan in April 2003. But the WHO didn’t visit Taiwan until the end of May, when the peak wave was almost over. 

The WHO essentially removed Taiwan from its Infected Areas list in July 2003. In the years since, Taiwan has developed one of the world’s top healthcare systems.

The fight against one disease was over, but another with the Chinese government began around the same time. In May 2003, Taiwan applied to attend the annual World Health Assembly as an observer for the seventh time. The former Deputy Premier of China, Wu Yi, argued strongly against inviting Taiwan.

The former Chinese ambassador to the United Nations Office at Geneva, Sha Zukang, was at the assembly. He was asked whether he heard the Taiwanese people’s demands, and impertinently replied to the Taiwanese press, “Who cares about you?” 

“WHO should help every country learn from each other to improve global health,” said Dr. Chen. “We’ve cooperated with Asian Pacific countries to build good healthcare systems as good as ours… Taiwan can help. And Taiwan has been helping.” 

Taiwan was invited to the World Health Assembly from 2008 to 2015 using the name Chinese Taipei. However, Taiwan was officially marked in the records as “a Province of China.” 

The ruling party – the Kuomintang at the time – turned a blind eye. 

Things changed in 2016. The DPP, a party pursuing a separate identity from China, became the ruling party and Dr. Chen became Taiwan’s vice president. That upset China, and Taiwan has been excluded from joining the WHA ever since. 

China’s political attitude to international health bodies doesn’t only hurt Taiwan. The Chinese government hid the truth about COVID-19, hurting millions of people around the world. 

In December 2019, a Chinese ophthalmologist Li Wenliang issued emergency warnings to local hospitals about a mysterious disease outbreak in Wuhan, making him the first whistleblower. The Chinese government didn’t appreciate Li’s actions and threatened him.

China silenced Li, but didn’t silence Taiwan. A post about Li and the disease started spreading on PTT, a forum social network in Taiwan, and was discovered by Taiwan’s health department officials. 

A deputy director general at the department, Lo Yi-Chun, read it on December 31, 2019, and was alarmed. He called for an emergency meeting and reported his concerns to the WHO in less than 24 hours. 

At the same time, Taiwan called for the international community to put a stop to flights from Wuhan, but the WHO took no action. 

Dr. Chen believes that if China had acted responsibly over COVID, there could have been a chance to save Wuhan from lockdown, or even to prevent the virus from traveling around the world. 

Dr. Chen explained what spike protein is and how the vaccine attacks it on the virus. 

According to a research report published on PLOS Pathogens in June 2021, SARS-CoV-2 emerged in China from early October to mid-November. But China didn’t confirm to the WHO that the disease involved human-to-human transmission until January 2020.

By September 2023, the Taiwanese COVID death toll was 17,668, out of a population of 23 million. 

Dr. Chen believes early precautions could have saved lives.

As a lung cancer survivor, Dr. Chen researched non-smokers with cancer, and believes there are connections between cancer and air pollution, especially smoke in the kitchen. He has particular insights that could help people around the world. However, the WHO excludes Taiwan from all their cancer workshops.

After May 20th, Dr. Chen stepped down as the President of the Executive Yuan, essentially the head of Taiwan’s cabinet. He’s now back to Academia Sinica, where he will be continuing his research about Cancer prevention and chronic arsenic poisoning. 

When Dr. Chen was asked about the thing he wanted to do the most after leaving the Cabinet. During the past eight years serving his country, the only places he could travel were the countries that had diplomatic relationships with Taiwan. “I’d like to climb the Alps,” said Dr. Chen. 

The Counteroffensive found Dr. Chen to be a particularly humble person to speak with.

“I believe there is something about everyone I can learn from,” said Dr. Chen. 

“What about President Xi?” we asked. 

Dr. Chen stopped for a second, before laughing: “I’m still trying.” 

The entirety of this newsletter is open to all subscribers, thanks to the kind sponsorship of the STUF United Fund — an American NGO based in Flushing, NY and set up to promote charitable causes in the fields of disaster relief, culture and education, public health, and environmental protection.

Please read on to see what paid subscriber’s usually get with their subscription: the News of the Day section, and an immersive Reporter’s Notebook!

NEWS OF THE DAY: 

Taiwan asks for WHA inclusion under the name of Taiwan or ROC: Taiwan Health Minister Chiu Tai-yuan (邱泰源) led a delegation to Geneva and called for Taiwan's participation in the World Health Assembly (WHA), but this request was declined amid China’s opposition. Chen Xu (陳旭), China's permanent representative to the U.N., claimed that Taiwan and China can communicate freely between themselves, and that’s sufficient. 

President Lai Ching-te meets with 1st U.S. congressional delegation since inauguration: The first United States congressional delegation to visit Taiwan President William Lai reiterated Washington's long-term support for Taiwan on Monday. Michael McCaul, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who is leading a six-member bipartisan delegation to Taiwan, claimed China warned him “not to visit Taiwan” against the One China policy. 

Fabricated social media posts about Taiwan Air Force found to be part of the “Chinese cognition war”: A few social media posts were posted following Chinese military drills, complaining to the Taiwanese president that Air Force members were suffering from overwhelming work. An investigation found that these posts weren’t from any members of the Air Force or their families. The National Security Department announced it was part of Chinese psychological warfare and disinformation. 

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: 

Hi, it’s Elaine here.

This month, I visited Academia Sinica, which the Taiwan government funds to educate and develop our most talented scientists. Academia Sinica provides policy advice based on their research. It’s also the place where Dr. Chen used to work. 

Many scientists at Academia Sinica worked to counter the SARS epidemic in 2003, including Dr. Wong Chi-Huey, who used his expertise in biochemistry to invent drugs and vaccines. 

Dr. Wong Chi-Huey, former President of Academia Sinica.

Dr. Wong, a professor of chemistry at Scripps Research, was the president of Academia Sinica from 2006 to 2016. His research about the synthesis of complex carbohydrates and glycoproteins has been used to create new drugs for treating multiple diseases, which has won numerous chemical awards.

Dr. Wong believes that the only thing stopping Taiwan from attending the annual WHA is political pressure: “We can neither share our successful experience with the world nor get the correct information from the WHO. Neither side benefits. It doesn't make sense.” said Wong. 

Instead, Taiwan has had to stand on its own. “Taiwan did an excellent job during the COVID pandemic. Our economy didn’t stop and kept the production of the semiconductors running. We need to have faith in ourselves.”

Dr. Wong received the 2021 Welch Award in Chemistry.

SARS gave Dr. Wong and Taiwanese officials a hard lesson, “the worst thing to me is that we didn’t prepare for this and we had nothing. I realized that we need to be ready for the pandemic always. We can’t wait until it breaks out to react,” said Dr. Wong.

SARS didn’t give scientists enough time to create a cure. However, Dr. Wong kept the anti-SARS research running, hoping we’d never need to use it. 

In 2009, Dr. Wong led a group in Academia Sinica to start a new concept of vaccination. It targets the proteins on the virus surface covered with sugar molecules. Using this they created the low-sugar vaccination strategy, and first applied it to influenza, becoming a Universal Flu Vaccine. 

When COVID hit in 2020, the first generation of the vaccine lost efficacy slowly when stronger variants came up. Dr. Wong and other researchers had a better idea: to use the low-sugar vaccination strategy to create a universal COVID vaccine. 

“It was the first one in the world,” explained Dr. Wong. “The low-sugar vaccination strategy was designed to create a broader immune response against COVID variants.”

My question is, how does it work? 

I told Dr. Wong I failed chemistry in high school. 

So he used a better metaphor to explain how the vaccination works: “Viruses wear sugar-coating ‘clothes,’ which are made with the sugar molecules by the host, to pretend they are part of our body, and avoid being attacked by the immune system.“

The low-sugar vaccination removes the sugar-coat on the spike protein. The epitopes underneath the sugar-coat clothes are often the same in variants and less susceptible to mutation, making the antibodies easier to identify and attack the virus and variants. 

The low-sugar vaccinations can be applied to many diseases. It has been used on trial for COVID-19, flu, HIV, and cancer. It was selected as one of IUPAC 2023 Top Ten Emerging Technologies (ChatGPT was another of the selected).

I had to talk to Dr. Wong via Zoom because he was in California. But I wanted to understand him better, so I asked to have a tour of Dr. Wong’s lab at Academia Sinica. 

It’s a massive building with so many pieces of equipment in the hallway that aren’t allowed to touch. Caution signs are everywhere, with measuring cups, injectors, and loads of paperwork on the desk showing that the workload is heavy. 

I was told that there are more than 2,000 staff working in Academia Sinica, but it didn't look like a typical busy workplace to me because people were all hiding in their offices or labs working. 

Dr. Wong’s assistant researchers showed me how all the magic works in the lab. Though they don’t work with Wong often, they schedule meetings with him every few weeks to follow up on the ongoing research projects. 

Assistant researcher Ms. Chung was too shy to take a picture, but she showed me an experiment that tested sugar molecules' reaction to the antibodies. She used a spotting robot to put hundreds of different sugar molecules on the sample board and later used them to react with proteins. 

The protein was added with fluorescent agents. When the protein reacts with molecules, it will show like those pink spots you see on the screen. 

They use the same method to test antibodies countering cancer cells. Assistant researcher Chiang showed me how to read the graph. The first step is to inject the antibodies into the immunocytes, if it works, the immunocytes should produce more antibodies that are capable of killing more cancer cells. 

The blue dots on the top right photo are the cancer cells. If an immunocyte (on the bottom left photo) is covered with blue cells, that means it’s killing the cancer cells, showing the antibody is effective. 

Researchers here share just as much passion for science as Dr. Wong. These people didn’t work at the frontline of the pandemic, but their contributions are underrated.

Today’s cat of peace is this napping cutie on the moped. The moped is the most common transportation in Taiwan. Strays are very comfortable with it!

Stay safe out there. 

Best,

Elaine

The Counteroffensive with Tim Mak is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribed

15. Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, June 1, 2024

Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, June 1, 2024

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-june-1-2024

Key Takeaways:

• Gaza Strip: The IDF Air Force has killed three Hamas officials in the central Gaza Strip over the past week. Israeli forces continued clearing operations in Rafah.
• West Bank: Israeli forces engaged Palestinian fighters in five locations in the West Bank.
• Southern Lebanon and Golan Heights: Lebanese Hezbollah conducted nine attacks from southern Lebanon into northern Israel.
• Yemen: The Houthis launched one drone from Houthi-controlled Yemen into the Red Sea.

16. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, June 1, 2024

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, June 1, 2024

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-1-2024

Key Takeaways:

• Russian forces conducted a large-scale drone and missile strike mainly targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure on the night of May 31 to June 1.
• The current lack of clarity about US restrictions on Ukraine's use of US-provided weapons to strike military targets in Russian territory misses an opportunity to deter further Russian offensive efforts across the border into northern Ukraine.
• Individual Western governments are stipulating disparate policies about Ukraine's future use of Western-supplied F-16 fighter jets.
• Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged that some Ukrainian reserve brigades remain understrength and stated that the slow arrival of US security assistance is complicating Ukrainian efforts to effectively commit reserves to ongoing defensive operations.
• Russian forces recently marginally advanced near Kupyansk, Chasiv Yar, and Avdiivka.
• The Russian Ministry of Justice designated the "Way Home" social movement, a movement of relatives of mobilized Russian servicemembers that has been calling for their relatives' demobilization, as a "foreign agent" on June 1.

17. Chinese defense minister, Ukraine's Zelenskiy dominate Asian security conference

Chinese defense minister, Ukraine's Zelenskiy dominate Asian security conference

rappler.com · by Bonz Magsambol · June 2, 2024

SUMMARY

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

DIALOGUE. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy arrives at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore June 1, 2024.

Edgar Su/REUTERS

Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelenskiy is expected to try to drum up support for a Ukraine peace conference to be hosted by Switzerland in mid-June

SINGAPORE – China’s defense chief Dong Jun slammed “separatists” in Taiwan in an acerbic address on Sunday, June 2, at the Shangri-La Dialogue, hours before Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelenskiy was due to speak at the conference.

Wearing the uniform of an admiral in the People’s Liberation Army Navy, Dong warned that prospects of a peaceful “reunification” of Taiwan were being eroded, and promised to ensure the island would never gain independence.

China views democratically governed Taiwan as its own territory, over the strong objections of the government in Taipei, and last month staged war games around the island in anger at inauguration of President Lai Ching-te who Beijing calls a “separatist”.

“Those separatists recently made fanatical statements that show their betrayal of the Chinese nation and their ancestors. They will be nailed to the pillar of shame in history,” Dong said.

A US official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said Dong’s speech covered little new ground.

“Every year for three years, a new Chinese defence minister has come to Shangri-La,” the official said. “And every year, they’ve given a speech at complete odds with the reality of the PLA’s coercive activity across the region. This year was no different.”

Dong’s speech comes a day after US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told delegates the Indo-Pacific region remained a key focus for the United States, even as it grappled with security assistance for Ukraine and the war in Gaza.

“Let me be clear: The United States can be secure only if Asia is secure,” Austin said. “That’s why the United States has long maintained our presence in this region.”

Dong and Austin met for more than an hour earlier in the conference.

In response to Austin’s speech, Chinese Lieutenant General Jing Jianfeng said the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy was intended “to create division, provoke confrontation and undermine stability.”

Some US officials say Beijing has become more emboldened in recent years, recently launching what it described as “punishment” drills around Taiwan, sending heavily armed warplanes and staging mock attacks after Lai Ching-te was inaugurated as Taiwan’s president.

Zelenskiy, who arrived on Saturday, is scheduled to speak in a forum called “Reimagining Solutions for Global Peace and Regional Stability” on Sunday morning.

He is expected to try to drum up support for a Ukraine peace conference to be hosted by Switzerland in mid-June. Russia has not been invited and China has confirmed it will not attend. Zelenskiy has urged US President Joe Biden to attend, but Washington has not confirmed who it will send.

In a post on the social media platform X early on Sunday, Zelenskiy said he had met Timor-Leste President Jose Ramos-Horta and confirmed his country’s attendance at the summit.

“I appreciate his support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as important UN resolutions condemning Russian aggression,” Zelenskiy said.

He said he also met a US congressional delegation and Indonesia’s president-elect, Prabowo Subianto. His plans to visit Singapore were first reported by Reuters on Friday.

Russia has not sent a delegation to the Shangri-La Dialogue since it invaded Ukraine in 2022.

Other bilateral meetings are expected on Sunday, the final day of the security summit organised by the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies. – Rappler.com

Summarize this article with AI

Facebook Copy URL

Copied

How does this make you feel?

Loading

Download the Rappler App!

Related Topics

rappler.com · by Bonz Magsambol · June 2, 2024

​18. The leaf that helped captured British agent survive concentration camp

It is amazing to continue to learn of these stories from World War II.

This leaf saved my spy grandmother from the Nazis: It kept her alive in a concentration camp, now it's the most precious possession of her granddaughter - who reveals her extraordinary story

By MADDY FLETCHER FOR YOU MAGAZINE

PUBLISHED: 07:01 EDT, 1 June 2024 | UPDATED: 07:22 EDT, 2 June 2024

Daily Mail · by Maddy Fletcher For You Magazine · June 1, 2024

In 2019, Sophie Parker was at home in Surrey, going through a book that had belonged to her grandmother. Tucked inside the pages she discovered a leaf. It was small; no larger than a little finger. Parker, now 57, was stunned. Quickly, she told her elder sister, Nicole Miller-Hard, 61, who was living in New Zealand.

When Miller-Hard flew back to the UK, Parker met her and they drove to present the leaf to the Imperial War Museum. In the car, Parker placed the leaf in her sister’s hand. ‘I couldn’t believe it,’ says Miller-Hard.

‘This little veined piece of green possibly saved my grandmother’s life.’

Parker and Miller-Hard’s grandmother was Odette Hallowes – a Frenchwoman who was part of the British Special Operations Executive in the Second World War. The SOE, as the organisation was known, was formed in 1940. Its agents were trained to conduct reconnaissance and sabotage in Nazi-occupied Europe and to work with local resistance armies. Members of the SOE were also required to be fluent in the language of the country they were infiltrating.

Hallowes joined the SOE almost by accident: in 1942, the UK government asked British citizens to send any holiday photographs they had of the North French coast.

The idea was to analyse the coastline, through as many images as possible, ahead of the D-Day landings. Hallowes – 30 at the time and living in Somerset with three daughters, all ten and under, and a British husband in the Army – submitted a selection and a letter. The SOE found her response and must have been impressed: inviting her to London, they asked her to join.

Odette in 1947

She despaired for occupied France but did not want to leave her children. Until then, she been a mother and housewife and had zero experience of working as a secret agent – or, as the SOE called it, conducting ‘ungentlemanly warfare’.

But eventually she agreed. The children were enrolled in a boarding school and Hallowes wrote them pre-dated letters, to open week by week. ‘Things like “I hope you’re doing your homework”, or “I hope you’re not biting your fingernails,” says Miller-Hard.

What convinced Hallowes to join? ‘She had this very strong sense of duty,’ says Parker. ‘Her own father was killed in the First World War and her grandfather used to take her and her brother to visit their father’s grave every Sunday. He would say to them, “There is going to be another world war. I know it’s coming. And when it does, it will be your turn to do your duty, just as your father did his.” I think those words became engraved across her heart.’

SOE training was rigorous. Hallowes learned self-defence, how to parachute, use explosives, read Morse code and resist interrogation. When she arrived in France she joined a fellow SOE agent, Peter Churchill, and they worked closely with a radio operator, Adolphe Rabinovitch, who coded and decoded messages.

Hallowes was also sent on solo missions and coordinated aerial drop-offs of weapons and equipment. On one mission, she missed the last train home and had to spend a night in a brothel in Marseilles that was frequented by Nazis; on another assignment she hid from German forces at night in a freezing river.

But in 1943, Churchill and Hallowes were betrayed by a double agent and arrested by the Gestapo. Thinking quickly, Hallowes told the officer that she and Churchill were married, and that he was Winston Churchill’s nephew. This was a lie – the shared surname was purely coincidence. She reckoned a fake connection to the Prime Minister might spare them both execution.

Odette (bottom right) at the 25th Anniversary of the George Cross at Guards Chapel, London, 1965

Hallowes was sent to occupied Paris, where she endured interrogation and torture. She was burned on her back with a red-hot poker; her toenails were pulled out one by one. The Gestapo wanted to extract information from her about the SOE, but Hallowes kept quiet. ‘She said it was as simple as making the decision, “I am not going to speak”,’ says Parker.

‘She said once she had made that decision, it was easy to stick to it.’

Odette (far left) at a family function with granddaughters Sophie (second right) and Nicole (middle), 1980s

Also, Parker adds, ‘They made one fundamental mistake when they were torturing her: they placed her in a chair that was facing a window.’ The Gestapo building in which Hallowes was being interrogated was on Avenue Foch – an enormous street in an expensive area of the capital. It was lined with trees and ended at the Arc de Triomphe.

Hallowes was in a room several floors up and, from the window, she could see the tops of the trees. ‘She said, “I just decided I had to transport myself away from where I was and put myself in those trees.” I suppose it was what we would think of today as going into some sort of meditative state.’

Hallowes was incarcerated in the Paris prison, Fresnes, and kept in solitary confinement. The Nazis condemned her to death on two counts: for being a British spy and for working with the French Resistance. Hallowes’s response was typically defiant: ‘Gentleman, you must take your pick of the counts because I can only die once.’

And so, exactly 80 years ago this month, in June 1944, Hallowes was sent to Ravensbrück in Germany, an all-female concentration camp with more than 50,000 prisoners. She was again placed in solitary confinement, in an underground cell with no light.

Hallowes sat alone in total darkness for three months and 11 days. She was next door to a punishment cell and could often hear prisoners being tortured; she had no concept of whether it was night or day. According to Miller-Hard, Hallowes found a tiny piece of wood in the cell and would polish the floor with it: ‘That kept her sane.’

As the winter of 1944 approached, Hallowes was moved to a cell on the ground floor of the camp, which had a small window. One morning, she was sent to the Ravensbrück hospital and on her way back, crossing the compound, she saw something on the ground: a small leaf. The leaf was unusual – there were no trees overhanging the fences of the camp. Hallowes picked it up and guards seemed not to mind. ‘A leaf was not one of the things a prisoner [was] forbidden to have,’ she wrote in a later memoir.

‘They were totally unconscious of the significance of the treasure I had acquired. They did not know, as they slammed the door of my cell, that I held in my fingers a most potent link with the forces of life and of freedom.’

The leaf Odette found in Ravensbrück

Day after day in her cell, Hallowes would examine the leaf, tracing its veins and spine with her fingertips. The act connected her with the outside world from which she had been removed. ‘It seemed to me,’ she wrote, ‘that I touched not a leaf but a tree.’

By early 1945 it was becoming clear that Germany was losing the war and the commandant of Ravensbrück was growing anxious. Still believing Hallowes was related to Winston Churchill, he decided to hand-deliver her to the Americans.

Parker thinks he hoped it might grant him some clemency. Instead, the Americans arrested the commandant on Hallowes’s instruction and confiscated his gun. Hallowes herself kept the weapon in secret for the rest of her life; her family only discovered it decades later, after her death.

On the night of her release, the Americans offered Hallowes a warm place to sleep, but she declined. After so many months trapped in a cell she said she wanted to feel the fresh air. She was reunited with her children – according to Parker, ‘she was so thin they barely recognised her’ – and settled back in Britain.

She divorced her first husband, Roy, and, making good on the lie she told the Gestapo, she married her SOE partner Peter Churchill in 1947. The couple divorced in 1956. Hallowes then married another former SOE member, Geoffrey, and they were together until she died in 1995, aged 82, at home in Surrey.

Her postwar life, it seems, was a happy and well-decorated one. There was a film, Odette, made about her in 1950, and Hallowes was awarded an MBE, the George Cross and the French equivalent, the Légion d’Honneur.

She kept her medals at her mother’s house in Kensington – until they were stolen in a burglary. Hallowes’s mother appealed to the press, and the thief, obligingly, posted the medals back with a note. He apologised for the robbery, promised he was ‘not all that bad – it’s just circumstances’, and signed off under the name ‘A Bad Egg’.

Still, for all Hallowes’s accolades, Parker and Miller-Hard do not remember her discussing her SOE work often – and when she did it was to acknowledge her female SOE colleagues who did not survive. Instead, their grandmother’s work was revealed in unspoken signs: her ongoing cough, cases of bronchitis, frequent visits from the doctor to tend to her wounded feet.

Hallowes was frank and unromantic about the war and its consequences. In the final paragraph of her memoir she wrote about Ravensbrück, saying, ‘Military victory was won and I was one of the few who returned to tell the tale… But now I ask myself the extent of the victory. With great sadness I believe that the choice made between liberty and slavery has still to be made. We used to believe in Ravensbrück that those of us who survived could enter a more tolerant and tranquil world whose leaders would have learnt the age-old lesson that man is made in God’s image and must bear God’s dignity.

In the war we fought a human enemy; one who had been infected with the germ of inhumanity. Although we defeated the enemy we failed to defeat the parasite. That same parasite of inhumanity is about the world today and, unless it is destroyed completely, the camp of Ravensbrück will only be the shadow and the symbol of a greater darkness to come.’

Today, Hallowes’s leaf is kept in Parker’s home. It is 80 years old, slightly shrivelled and curling at the ends. But somehow it has remained tinged a soft green.

‘It’s extraordinary,’ says Parker. ‘There are still life forces in that leaf.’

Daily Mail · by Maddy Fletcher For You Magazine · June 1, 2024

​19. `We the People’ are bulwarks against Russian disinformation

Conclusion:

When our leaders get fooled into arguing otherwise by Putin and his ilk, we as citizens should use critical thinking to stand as bulwarks against that propaganda.

`We the People’ are bulwarks against Russian disinformation | George W. Bush Presidential Center

bushcenter.org · by Learn more about Chris Walsh.

Chris Walsh

Director, Global Policy

George W. Bush Institute

Read May 31, 2024

Chris Walsh

Director, Global Policy

George W. Bush Institute

Share

Explore our Work

• Confronting Authoritarian Regimes

Americans don’t like to think that we can be easily manipulated, but foreign adversaries have grown adept at it through disinformation campaigns.

The prevalence and endurance of Russian (and other authoritarian) propaganda in the United States is dangerous. And no one is immune from its influence; these lies can even be amplified by members of Congress. No one in the United States is immune from the prevalence and endurance of Russian (and other authoritarian) propaganda. Even members of Congress have amplified their lies.

Accepting disinformation as truth represents yet another threat to already declining trust in our national leadership. Part of the solution is for Americans to strengthen their personal resilience against these tactics – which in turn would make propaganda less effective and buttress our democracy.

It’s laudable that Republican Representatives Michael McCaul of Texas, and Mike Turner of Ohio, have called out fellow members of Congress for parroting Russian disinformation on Ukraine. As Turner warned, “Now, to the extent that this propaganda takes hold, it makes it more difficult for us to really see this as an authoritarian versus democracy battle, which is what it is.”

A recent hearing of the House Oversight Committee on “Defending America from the Chinese Communist Party’s Political Warfare” provides a case in point.

During one exchange, Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia chastised Yale University historian Timothy Snyder, who had provided testimony to the committee, for spreading “misinformation.” She took issue with his opening statement, in which he described the claim of “neo-Nazis” within the Ukrainian military as a “disinformation trope.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin, of course, has stated that “de-Nazification” is a major objective of his Ukrainian invasion.

Representative Greene offered several articles referencing Ukraine’s Azov Battalion – a former militia unit with far-right roots, now integrated into Ukraine’s military – as evidence that Snyder’s remarks were untrue.

Snyder’s response is worth paying attention to and learning from. In doing so, we make ourselves more resilient to disinformation.

He acknowledged that there are “bad people” in every country but disputed the idea that Nazism has a strong or even disproportionate influence over Ukraine, calling it a “small phenomenon” by any comparative standard.

A little further digging clarifies that claims to the contrary don’t stand up to common sense scrutiny.

The website Factcheck.org, a project of the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, provides analysis supporting Snyder’s assessment on the fecklessness of Ukraine’s far-right movement, such as it is. They report that in the past two parliamentary elections, 2014 and 2019, far-right parties won 6% and 2% of the vote respectively.

Also noteworthy, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is Jewish with family who were victims of the Holocaust, and Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov is Muslim. It seems unlikely at best that a country controlled by Nazis would allow these men to reach and maintain high-level leadership positions.

The proposition that Nazis wield significant influence over Ukraine becomes flimsier when confronted with their political weakness in the country.

Snyder further explained that if there is sincere concern over neo-Nazi elements in the Ukrainian conflict, the spotlight should turn to Vladimir Putin’s Russia. He pointed to Moscow’s Rusich unit – a brutal neo-Nazi paramilitary group deployed in Ukraine – as an example. Furthermore, he described the character of the Russian government as fascist, pointing to a war that has seen the “mass deportation of [Ukrainian] children by the tens of thousands, the open intention of destroying a state, as well as mass torture.”

This assessment is shared by Freedom House’s comprehensive analysis of Russian political rights and civil liberties. Its studies reveal a dearth of independent media, nearly nonexistent political competition, and a battered civil society ecosystem.

It’s clear that Putin firmly controls Russian society with little regard for the welfare of his people. As the Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov observed, “A country that does not respect the rights of its own people will not respect the rights of its neighbors.”

The Russian government’s domestic record should rightfully attract scrutiny and skepticism of its dealings with neighboring countries.

Finally, Moscow and Beijing practice political warfare by manipulating American citizens with disinformation, “to convince us that our system is no better than theirs, there’s no point in voting,” Snyder said in response to a question from Democratic Representative Mark Frost of Florida.

Foreign adversaries use disinformation campaigns as weapons that undermine personal confidence in American democracy and global engagement. This phenomenon has been tracked extensively by the Alliance for Securing Democracy through their Hamilton 2.0 Dashboard.

According to one report, Russia is currently exploiting the Israel-Palestine conflict to further divide Americans, exacerbate tensions in the United States, and distract public opinion from its ongoing war in Ukraine.

Considering these elements together provides a more complete picture of the clear threat Vladimir Putin’s government poses to Ukrainians, Russians, and Americans, as well as regional and global security.

When our leaders get fooled into arguing otherwise by Putin and his ilk, we as citizens should use critical thinking to stand as bulwarks against that propaganda.

bushcenter.org · by Learn more about Chris Walsh.

​20. Semi Bird defrauded Army, accused of stolen valor by Green Berets

Seems like a no brainer. If you read his response to the BG Pagan's GMOR he admits his wrong doing. (https://mynorthwest.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Semi-Bird-military-documents-0524.pdf)

Semi Bird defrauded Army, accused of stolen valor by Green Berets

mynorthwest.com · May 29, 2024

The candidate for governor the Washington State Republican Party endorsed was reprimanded by the Department of Defense (DOD), with a commanding officer saying he perpetuated “fraud” against the United States government in an effort to advance his career over more deserving candidates. The investigation followed accusations from the U.S. Army Special Forces, the Green Berets, that Republican gubernatorial hopeful Semi Bird engaged in stolen valor by misrepresenting his actions during Operation Iraqi Freedom and claiming unearned experience.

Bird was awarded a Bronze Star Medal with Valor for “exceptionally valorous conduct in the face of the enemy” on July 9, 2006. He was serving as a Special Forces Engineer during Operation Iraqi Freedom at the time. He was also awarded the Army Commendation Medal for “exceptionally meritorious service” as an Area Support Team Member. Both awards are highlighted on Bird’s campaign website and have been noted in speeches and on social media to bolster his candidacy.

However, documentation obtained exclusively by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH includes a 2009 letter of reprimand against Bird. The letter, signed by then-Brigadier General Hector Pagan, details several instances of misconduct, including that Bird wore awards and badges he did not earn, falsified documents and sought career advancement by deceiving the U.S. Army. (A PDF of the documents can be seen here.)

What did Semi Bird say he did to earn commendation?

Bird was awarded the Bronze Star and a Commendation Medal for heroic work on the battlefield. A narrative accompanying the Bronze Star, obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, said he helped neutralize an ambush attack “with total disregard for his personal safety.”

Additionally, two Green Beret operators who were on the ground on July 9, 2006, including one who he says was responsible for conduct which Bird (and Bird’s major) claimed credit for, spoke exclusively to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, describing Bird as a “fraud.”

Bird has responded to the allegations by asserting they are an attempt “to dishonor a veteran.” He denies any acts of stolen valor, while downplaying the significance of the reprimand.

Why did the U.S. Army reprimand Semi Bird?

As outlined in the reprimand letter, Pagan told Bird the investigation found he “wore awards and badges that you had not earned.” Additionally, Pagan said Bird knowingly “submitted false documents for the sole purpose of gaining an unfair advantage against other individuals” seeking entry into the Warrant Officer Corps. Entry into this program would have afforded Bird a significant increase in pay and responsibilities.

Pagan also discovered Bird “manipulate(d) the system for your personal gain by aiding in the drafting of NCOERs (non-commissioned officer evaluation reports) which you knew to be false” and “enlisted the help of senior NCOs and Officers to perpetuate this fraud against the government.” He said Bird was seeking “personal gain” at the expense of the “good order and discipline of the armed forces.”

“The submission of false information to gain a promotion amounts to fraud against the United States Government,” Pagan wrote.

Pagan began investigating after members of the Special Forces community raised questions about the veracity of many of Bird’s claims. Some heard him claim he was from a unit they knew he was never with. Others said he attended schools that they had been to, but Bird was never able to confirm his attendance.

“Your actions represent a serious departure from the high standards of integrity and professionalism expected of a Special Forces Solider in this Command. Your conduct in this matter causes me to seriously consider your suitability for continued service as a Solider in the United States Army,” Pagan added.

Bird responded to the reprimand within seven days as required, writing that he “first and foremost accept full responsibility for my actions.”

Bird accompanied Green Berets as part of a Tactical Psychological Operation Team on the evening of July 9, 2006. He was in the trail vehicle in the convoy alongside his major.

In the narrative, then-Staff Sergeant Bird is said to have killed an enemy combatant who threatened soldiers with rocket-propelled grenades (RPG). He then helped secure the perimeter around a disabled American military vehicle while still under heavy attack.

The narrative says that at least four enemy personnel engaged the convoy in an ambush, which included two RPGs. Bird exited and “without hesitation, dismounted the vehicle in order to effectively return fire,” according to the narrative.

After reportedly suffering a concussion from the RPG blast approximately twenty feet away, he “immediately regained his composure, got accountability of his security element, and returned fire.” A second RPG reportedly struck Bird “in the helmet with a piece of fragmentation.”

After a third RPG severely wounded an Iraqi Special Operations Force soldier embedded with the Americans, the narrative says Bird “was able to neutralize the threat.”

But, according to operators on the ground during the ambush, Bird did not engage the enemy as the narrative claimed.

Semi Bird accused of stolen valor

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH spoke with two Green Berets who engaged the enemy on July 9, 2006. Both Special Forces operators, requesting anonymity to avoid personal gain from their service, provided a stark contrast to the narrative surrounding the commendation awarded to Bird.

“I shot the guy. I shot the RPG gunner. So, it was a bit of a surprise to me many, many years later to read a copy of the award where apparently that was claimed by Sergeant Bird, or whoever wrote the actual write-up for him,” the Green Beret disclosed.

Amidst the chaos of battle, where “everybody’s firing in all directions,” the Green Beret acknowledged that some details could be mistaken. However, he characterized Bird’s claim as “a stretch,” expressing doubt over whether Bird even exited his vehicle during the engagement.

“Yes, he was firing off if he was outside of his vehicle firing at all, which I have no knowledge of. He surely wasn’t doing any of that in the direction that I was engaged in. He definitely didn’t get the RPG gunner, which was one of the bits of the write-up in the actual award, which again, I didn’t see until years later,” the Green Beret said.

‘There was immediate pushback’ from stolen valor claims against Semi Bird

While recovering from an injury sustained during the battle, the Green Beret heard Bird and his major had “written each other valor awards” for their supposed conduct.

“I got a good laugh at it at the time. That’s just a s*** show. That’s never gonna go anywhere because nobody ever saw them do anything,” he explained. “And then it just kind of disappeared off into the darkness, right? Didn’t hear anything else about it. Didn’t really care. But I was never asked or interviewed about any of the stuff because I’d been medevacked.”

The Green Beret says when Bird and the major’s awards were submitted, “There was immediate pushback in-house.”

He and others didn’t make too big a deal after the initial pushback because, he said, “We were in the middle of a war.”

‘Stolen Valor isn’t just some idiot at the mall wearing a combat award that he didn’t earn’

About five months later, the Green Beret says there was an awards ceremony that honored Bird’s major. He said he remembers Birds’ narrative to closely mirror what was submitted for his major.

He called the ceremony “bittersweet” because he had been jumping through hoops to get two other Special Forces recognized for their valorous conduct. He said he had to repeatedly nominate them before they were finally awarded Bronze Star medals.

“I finally got them approved. And in the same ceremony, there is this field grade who is having a valor award read for his actions during this same deployment. It was comical because of how long it took me to get guys who actually, really deserved something recognized. Two years, submitting over and over again” he said.

The Green Beret said there were other parts of the narrative that he knew other Special Forces were responsible, yet Bird and the major were taking the credit.

“That was probably the most unique and egregious type of aspect of this,” he said. “Stolen valor isn’t just some idiot at the mall wearing a combat award that he didn’t earn or whatever. But somebody who actually took credit for stuff that other people around him did. This is the first time I’ve ever seen or heard of that.”

A second Green Beret backs ‘Stolen Valor’ claims against Semi Bird

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH spoke with a second Green Beret and senior operator who took part in the firefight. He also said Bird was not responsible for what earned him the commendations.

“(The other Green Beret) killed one of the RPG firers. So that part where Misipati (Semi) Bird says that he shot and engaged and neutralized the guy that was shooting RPGs — that’s a blatant lie,” the second Green Beret told “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

He said this RPG enemy was the one directly in front of, and closest to, the truck Bird was in. He does not believe he could have been talking about another enemy fighter.

This second Green Beret also said he did not see Bird exit the disabled vehicle to help get it towed out. According to this Green Beret, who saw the operational summary report, no enemy KIA (“killed in action”) was attributed to Bird.

“(The other Green Beret) facilitated that hookup, not Misipati Bird. Bird didn’t get out of the truck and pull security, all those (are) complete lies,” he said.

He also questioned Bird’s concussion, calling it “an embellishment of bulls***.”

“What I will tell you is that Misipati Bird and this whole process, you know, he used this to gain favor and empower his career after that particular point, all the way up to now, including being the nominee for the Republican Party for the governorship of the state of Washington. And it’s all been built on a fabrication of lies,” he concluded.

‘This is personal. It’s very personal.”

When he saw that Bird and the major were up for a valor award, the second Green Beret says he remembers thinking, “This is such bulls**t.” But he also acknowledges that, at the time, the awards process for Special Forces “was absolutely broken.”

“This is personal. It’s very personal,” he explained. “And I’ll tell you, the biggest regret that I have about my time is not fighting hard enough for my teammates. Because they should have been — each one of them — should have had multiple awards recognizing, (and) acknowledging their valorous activities, the gallantry, that inconspicuous valor that they put their asses in harm’s way for, over and over.”

A fear of his is to see Bird’s stolen valor discredit the Green Berets — the “quiet professionals,” which is how Green Berets prefer to behave — and be used to advance a political career. He hoped Bird would quietly go away after this news was revealed. He says this is an example of Green Berets trying to police themselves.

But this is not the only claim of “stolen valor” made against Bird.

The ‘scuba’ claim

The second Green Beret said Bird initially submitted a photo to the Army where he was wearing Scuba Diver Insignia on his uniform (it’s commonly referred to as a “scuba bubble”). It is earned after qualifying as a Special Forces combat diver. The Green Beret said Bird falsified this history as well.

When asked about his scuba bubble, the Green Beret said Bird could not recall basic and key facts about the scuba combat diver school in Key West, Florida. He initially told someone he thought the school was in “Key West, California,” according to a third military source.

“It is a very memorable experience. It will be one of the most physically challenging and exhausting activities you will participate in your life,” the Green Beret said.

He said that because Bird couldn’t explain his experiences particularly well, it led to the Pagan investigation. He called Bird “a snake slithering through the National Guard processing system.”

A third military source, who requested anonymity, confirmed this account.

Bird accepted the reprimand’s findings at the time

In a Dec. 9, 2010 memorandum in response to the letter of reprimand, obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH, Bird wrote, “I first and foremost accept full responsibility for my actions.” Bird incorrectly dated the letter 2010 instead of 2009.

“The intent of this memorandum is to acknowledge the fact that I submitted false and inaccurate information in my Warrant Officer (WO) packet to include false NCOER’s in order to compensate for unrated time and meet the requirements for the WO program. My actions constitute nothing less than a fraud against the United States Army plain and simple,” Bird wrote.

He admitted that he “took advantage of the senior NCO’s and Officers in my chain of command” by betraying their trust and offered that “this incident has served as a wakeup call for me as a senior NCO.” He said he has submitted new forms, corrected records, and offered a new official photo “to correct the wrong I have perpetrated against the United States Army.”

Prior to this reprimand, Bird had been court-martialed for assaulting a sergeant while serving in the U.S. Marine Corps. He said it was the result of the sergeant using a racial slur against him.

Bird pushes back on stolen valor concerns

Bird defended his record during a 67-minute phone interview May 24. He lamented that “it’s amazing how on Memorial Day we lost ourselves once again to try to discredit a veteran” and called the claims made against him “evil.”

The gubernatorial hopeful flatly denied taking credit for the actions of others. He pointed to documentation from the award narrative and his major’s witness account as proof.

Bird also alleged that, at the time, a senior noncommissioned officer from his unit “had a problem with me” and had been out to get him. He would not name the individual.

“This individual went so far as to a Judge Advocate General telling him, ‘If you continue to push this, we will file charges on you. I don’t know why you’re going after Bird so hard. But if you continue to do this, we will file charges on you. We verified his stuff. Why are you doing this?'” Bird recalled.

What “awards and badges” did Bird wear that he didn’t earn?

Bird also addressed the reprimand finding that he wore awards and badges that he did not earn.

Initially, Bird said he could only think of the scuba bubble badge. He denied telling anyone he said he trained in Key West and this resulted from a paperwork problem that prevented him from verifying that he attended training school.

Bird said there was an allegation made about an Aviator Badge he was wearing from his time as a flight medic. But he said that the National Guard “verified all of my awards and medals” when they “scrubbed” through his personnel form and the Aviator Badge “was verified.”

“That was it. So, when they (Pagan) say ‘awards and badges,’ that’s the terminology,” he said.

But that doesn’t appear to be the case.

Washington Republican gubernatorial candidate Semi Bird has addressed the reprimand finding that he wore awards and badges that he did not earn. (Photos obtained by “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH)

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH obtained two official Army photos: one taken before the reprimand, and one after. According to an independent third party expert who reviewed the photos for this story, between the photos, Bird appears to have removed the German Jump Wings, an oak leaf cluster on his Army Commendation Medal, and a star device on his National Defense Service Medal, in addition to the Special Forces Combat Divers Badge.

Promises of access to files were unfulfilled

Bird explained that he had documents on his computer in a folder titled “Slander” that would dispute claims made against him. During the interview, he promised to provide them to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

“I’m gonna give you everything, OK? I’m gonna give you so much more. Because at this point in time, I am sitting here with my wife … we signed up to try to do something good for our state … this is going to be good because I want everyone to know …,” he explained.

Hours after the call, attorney Matthew Taylor with Boise-based Taylor Law Offices emailed “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH. He said he would assist Bird in providing “additional answers or comments regarding your discussion about his military history” and that future requests should go through him, to be taken “under consideration.”

Initially, Taylor did not respond to multiple emails asking for the files and for clarification on what awards and badges were referenced in the reprimand to put better context to the photos. We had set a noon deadline for receiving these files. However, at 3:54 p.m. on Tuesday, May 28, Bird representatives contacted “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH requesting a meeting the following day, Wednesday, May 29. But he did not provide the promised documents. After careful consideration, we have decided to publish the story at 5 p.m. on May 28. Any new information or context provided by Bird’s representatives will be included in future updates.

Bird claimed confusion over the reprimand

When first asked about the reprimand, Bird went into detail about a rule violation, explaining what, why, and how everything happened. He said the reprimand was not supposed to be public, claiming it was “a reprimand that … happens all the time in the military. And my reprimand, again, was supposed to be buried.”

But he was talking about a separate incident unrelated to the Pagan reprimand.

Bird said he falsely attested on an evaluation sheet for a soldier in his unit, to help that soldier advance in his training. This incident had not been previously reported.

Bird explained that he merely confused this new incident with what Pagan found because this happened so long ago. He then said this incident didn’t lead to a reprimand. But he also claimed it was “the only reprimand I ever had” and claimed this incident “was supposed to be sealed.” This leaves an open question as to whether or not Bird actually did face a second reprimand tied to the incident he revealed.

“This is a duress moment for me. And I’m not trying to make excuses for it. I’m just being very, blatantly honest with you. There is truth in what I’m saying. But there’s a lot of confusion because I don’t recollect much of what you’re saying. I do recollect that firefight,” Bird said.

Former JAG breaks down the severity of Semi Bird stolen valor claims

“The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH shared the DOD documents and Bird interview with attorney Jeffrey Lustick for his review and expertise.

Lustick served in the U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General Corps and was the director of Military Justice for the 1st Special Operation Wing and the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command. He’s also a former Washington Air National Guard member and currently has a civilian legal practice with offices in Bellingham and Las Vegas.

“When you wear a badge, a ribbon, or medal on your uniform, and it’s something that you did not earn, it is potentially a criminal offense under Article 106(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and could result in brig (jail) time, (rank) reduction to Private, forfeitures of pay, and a bad conduct discharge,” Lustick explained to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

It’s also a crime under the UCMJ to make a false official statement under Article 107. Lustick says it has a maximum punishment of five years in prison, a reduction to E-1, and a possible dishonorable discharge.

Lustick explained that, “this can also be termed ‘stolen valor’ under civilian law and military law, and it’s a complete slap in the face when valor is stolen by a military member.”

In 2005, Congress passed the Stolen Valor Act to prohibit falsely representing oneself as having been awarded any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for the Armed Forces or any service medals or badges. However, in 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional. In response, Congress enacted a more limited version of the Stolen Valor Act in 2013. This revised act makes it illegal to falsely claim to have earned the top four valor awards, the Purple Heart, or combat-related qualification badges for financial gain or any tangible benefit.

Is this stolen valor under the law?

When asked if Bird’s case was one of stolen valor, Lustick said “it depends.”

“If his German Jump Wings and the ‘scuba bubble badge’ and a cluster on his ribbon rack are all fake, it’s probably a minor case, except it’s even more aggravated when done by a Special Operations soldier who tells lies like this and get others involved in telling the lies,” he said.

If Bird’s Bronze Star with Valor device wasn’t actually earned, then Lustick calls it “a clear case of stolen valor and it’s no wonder why members of Bird’s Green Beret Team are still talking about this several years later. It’s not an axe to grind. It would be about trying to get Bird to stop stretching the truth.”

“There is a professional culture within the Special Operations Community, which is made up of Army Green Berets and Rangers, Navy Seals, Marine Raiders, Air Force Pararescue and Combat Controllers, and other not so publicly well known operators,” Lustick explained. “They describe themselves as being ‘silent professionals’ who often shrug off individual accomplishments as a simple fulfillment of their difficult duties. This is their personal ethos that they live by all throughout their careers.”

Why did this only earn a reprimand?

After reading the General Officer Letter of Reprimand given to Bird for the 2009 incident, Lustick said that was “surprised that he being such a senior NCO with 17 years of experience, that it didn’t result in at least non-judicial punishment, which is when a commanding officer calls out the misconduct and the soldier agrees to accept punishment.”

Lustick speculates Bird only faced a letter of reprimand because there’s “a gray area” involving members of the Army National Guard regarding whether they serve in a federal or state status.

“But National Guardsmen also serve sometimes in positions with the Department of the Army or the Department of the Air Force, where they change status day by day. They become federalized for special duties or when receiving federal training and then revert back to state status,” Lustick noted.

The ‘gray area’ explained

When a National Guard member is not in a federal status, they do not automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ.

“A senior NCO who is a Special Operator and who wears badges and ribbons he didn’t earn to embellish his record is not tolerated within the SOF community. Plus, as the letter of reprimand also says, this NCO got others to help him carry out the fraud submit a fraudulent special selection application. That’s almost always going to result in a court-martial if the person doing it is on active duty in a federal status.” Lustick explained.

It is unclear if Bird was on federal orders and, therefore, in a federal status when he received the Letter or Reprimand. If Bird had been in the National Guard in Washington at the time, then jurisdiction would have fallen to the Washington State Adjutant General, who at the time was Air Force Lt. General Frank Scoggins.

A group of people in attendance at the Washington State Republican Party 2024 Convention hold up signs supporting Semi Bird as the gubernatorial candidate they wish to endorse. (Photo provided by the Semi Bird for Governor campaign)

Lustick was one of a few military prosecutors for the Washington Guard until late 2008 and says, “Bird’s name never came up. When the SOCSOUTH JAGs handled this, they apparently never reported what had happened to us.”

Political implications with Semi Bird stolen valor claims and official reprimand

Bird, a former Richland School Board Director, earned the Washington State Republican endorsement after a somewhat contentious party convention in April.

Delegates endorsed Bird over his Republican opponent, former King County Sheriff and U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert. It was an early endorsement for the party, intended to help keep Republicans focused on backing the candidate with the best chance of winning in the general.

The endorsement vote was initially called off at the convention. Party leadership said Bird “was not forthcoming” during the vetting process. It was a reference to a 1993 conviction on a federal misdemeanor charge of bank larceny. The Seattle Times reported it was connected to falsifying a credit application “with intent to steal and purloin” funds from U.S. Bank. Bird used the name and social security number of his father on the application. He said he takes full responsibility for the incident.

Delegates overturned the decision to nix the endorsement and voted to back Bird.

Will a reprimand and claims of stolen valor end the Semi Bird campaign?

It’s hard to imagine that stolen valor claims, and an admission of falsifying records to defraud the Army, won’t leave even the Semi Bird campaign supporters with questions about his conduct.

For Lustick, the letter of reprimand and Bird’s response make it clear: he can’t be trusted.

“I think it calls into question a lot of claims that he’s made about his military service. I think it calls into question about his ability to be truthful and honest. And this is not the type of person that you should trust moving forward,” Lustick said. “Because if you will put yourself in front of soldiers who have died, who have been permanently injured, who have given their lives for military service, and you’re trying to claim that you did the same thing when in reality you didn’t, that is despicable, and certainly should not be something that we overlook.”

But Bird contends he will not allow this “slander” to stop him his gubernatorial campaign.

“But here’s what’s not going to happen. I’m not going to quit. I’m not getting off the ballot. They’ve already tried to character assassinate me. So now, here’s this,” Bird said to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

Listen to “The Jason Rantz Show” on weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz

Share

mynorthwest.com · May 29, 2024

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com