1 September 2019

US Imperatives to Respect India’s Strategic Sensitivities-2019

By Dr Subhash Kapila
Source Link

The United States policy establishment long used for decades to view South Asia with Cold War mindsets which predicated according strategic equivalence to Pakistan with India despite India’s asymmetrical predominance finds the United States in 2019 inadequate in realistic appraisal of strategic imperatives for respecting India’s strategic sensitivities.

India being treated with ‘Strategic Equivalence’ with Pakistan is an era long past having been overtaken by India’s geopolitical in ascendance and its strategic weight in global military calculuses having been magnified. Past US Administrations recognising this reality endowed India with the appellation of an ‘Emerged Power’.

Contextually, India needs to be accorded by India the respect and the respect of its strategic sensitivities not only in South Asia and the Indo Pacific but also in global context. To a great measure this was being done by past US Administrations, and initially by current US President Trump.

Regrettably, however in July 2019, US President Trump in a much ill-advised and misperceived utterances of presidential meditation on Kashmir made at the White House meeting with Pakistan PM Imran Khan and Pakistan Army Chief General Bajwa seems to have endangered the laboriously evolved US-India Strategic Partnership over two decades under two different political dispensations both in United States and India.

In Afghanistan and Kashmir, It’s the 1980s All Over Again

Source Link

While a superpower negotiates an exit from Afghanistan, India stirs up a hornet’s nest in Kashmir. It is the 1980s, and the world is at an inflection point that led to a major insurgency in Kashmir, the Afghan civil war, the rise of the Taliban, and the attacks of 9/11.

Again today, the world is facing no less an important transition period as the United States is set to conclude a preliminary peace agreement with the Taliban and India’s Hindu nationalist government continues its communications and media blackout in Kashmir after having revoked the region’s nominal autonomy this month.

Back in the 1980s, the absence of a comprehensive political settlement in Afghanistan paved the way for the Afghan civil war and the emergence of the Taliban, which hosted al Qaeda, a transnational terrorist network. Meanwhile, Kashmiri refugees poured into Pakistan and the indigenous insurgency in Kashmir was eventually commandeered by Pakistan (and some alumni of the Afghan jihad), continuing the cycle of India-Pakistan proxy wars.

Is the Afghanistan Deal a Good One?

By Michael O'Hanlon 

According to teases leaked by the American negotiating team, it appears that an interim Afghanistan peace deal may be in the works between Washington and the Taliban. Details are far from clear to date. But the main contours of any agreement seem to be a renouncing of extremists by the Taliban, the withdrawal of several thousand American and NATO troops, together with an indefinite partial ceasefire, or at least a sustained reduction in violence by all parties. If that is indeed the deal—it’s not yet clear if the ceasefire would happen early on, as it must for the idea to make any sense from a U.S. and Afghan government perspective—there may be promise to the concept, provided that not only the Taliban but the Pakistani government support it as well. These initial steps would be followed by negotiations between the Taliban and the Afghan government over some future type of power-sharing, after which the preponderance of the remaining U.S. and other foreign forces would leave the country as well. It is crucial that the remaining U.S. forces not withdraw until a power-sharing arrangement has been well-established.

The Taliban's dilemma

By Gary Anderson 
Source Link

Afghanistan has a foreign military presence that represents an existential threat to the Taliban — an organization that purports to guard the country against all foreign influence. That threat is not the American-led NATO coalition. The Islamic State (ISIS) is a transnational organization with the objective of making Afghanistan one more province (their word is emirate) in a worldwide caliphate. 

That imperial vision has the same plan to subordinate Afghanistan to its imperial aspirations as did Alexander, Genghis Khan, the British Empire and the old Soviet Union. That part of the Taliban which is currently negotiating with the United States for an eventual U.S.-NATO withdrawal fails to officially recognize that the real foreign force that is threatening to take over the country remains virtually ignored in the talks. That elephant in the room should become a key part of any final agreement.

Trump: US to Keep 8,600 Troops in Afghanistan After Deal With Taliban

By Ankit Panda

Speaking on a radio show on Thursday, U.S. President Donald J. Trump suggested that the United States planned to maintain a force presence of several thousand troops in Afghanistan following any agreement with the Taliban this year.

“We’re going down to 8,600 and then we make a determination from there as to what happens … we’re bringing it down,” Trump told Fox News Radio.

Repeating a remark he’d made during a July meeting with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in Washington, D.C., Trump added that he “could win that war so fast if I wanted to kill ten million people there … which I don’t.”

Though exact numbers are not public, the Trump administration increased the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan to around 14,000. The Obama administration, when it left office in January 2017, had maintained 8,400 troops in Afghanistan in a limited role. That number did not include contractors and civilians assisting the U.S. mission in the country.

China’s Grand Plans for Shenzhen

By Eleanor Albert

China’s State Council and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China issued a new guideline earlier this week outlining an ambitious plan for the future of Shenzhen, a major city in southeast China’s Guangzhou province that links Hong Kong to the mainland.

The plan sets out plans to transform Shenzhen into a pilot area demonstrating “socialism with Chinese characteristics” by making it a leading city in the world in terms of economic might and development quality, specifically focusing on research and development, industrial innovation, emerging industries, public services, and ecological environment.

South Korea and Japan Have More in Common Than They Think (Like the China Challenge)

by Jung H. Pak Ethan Jewell

With South Korea’s decision to scrap the 2016 military intelligence sharing agreement with Japan, the two sides have dramatically aggravated their fraught relationship. Bilateral ties had never been great, but in the past several weeks, a trade spat has snowballed into a confrontation that apparently has yet to reach rock bottom. Earlier this month, Tokyo removed South Korea from its list of favored trading partners, which includes the United States, Germany, France, and two dozen other countries, placing export curbs on industrial and high-tech products. This sparked a reciprocal move from Seoul, sending ripples of fear about the potentially destabilizing and detrimental effect of these moves.

The rhetoric from the leadership in the two capitals has exacerbated the degraded relationship, whipping up nationalist fervor among the populace, leaving little space for compromise. Of the 1965 treaty that established diplomatic relations, Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe stated that South Korea has unilaterally “violated the treaty that served as the basis for us to normalize ties,” and South Korean president Moon Jae-indeclared, “We will never again lose to Japan,” invoking Japan’s colonization of the Korean Peninsula from 1910–1945. Of the General Security of Military Information Agreement that Seoul recently decided to exit, the Blue House said that the pact did not comport with Seoul’s national interest, while protesters outside the Japanese Embassy cheered when the news was announced.

Rodrigo Duterte Strikes Back

by Richard Javad Heydarian

In an early-August speech before the powerful Filipino-Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte made a startling announcement. Ahead of his upcoming visit to China, the fifth in less than three years, the Beijing-leaning Filipino leader promised to raise the 2016 Arbitral Tribunal ruling against China’s claims in the South China Sea. This marked a remarkable shift from his earlier position. Duterte had previously dismissed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) arbitration award as an exercise in futility. His stance was aligned with the one taken by China, which has categorically rejectedUNCLOS as “null and void” and a “piece of trash paper.” If anything, Duterte earlier suggested that confronting China over the disputes risks nothing short of war and asuicidal conflict.

China Rotates New Troops Into Hong Kong Amid Mass Protests

By Ken Moritsugu and Yanan Wang

China’s military deployed fresh troops to Hong Kong on Thursday in what it called a routine rotation amid speculation that it might intervene in the city’s pro-democracy protests.

Video broadcast on China Central Television showed a long convoy of armored personnel carriers and trucks crossing the border at night and troops in formation disembarking from a ship. Earlier, scores of soldiers ran in unison onto trucks, which the state broadcaster said were bound for ports and entry points into Hong Kong. A handover ceremony was held before dawn.

“This time the task has a glorious mission. The responsibility is great. The job is difficult,” an unnamed major said to troops before they departed. “The time for a true test has arrived!”

The official Xinhua News Agency said it was the 22nd rotation of the People’s Liberation Army’s garrison in Hong Kong. The previous one was in August 2018.

China’s Cross-Border Campaign to Terrorize Uyghur Americans

By Omer Kanat

“I wear a hat, get glasses, I cover my face. I’m in a free country but when I go to my people’s office, I cover my face. I didn’t even cover my face in China, but I cover my face here.” These are the words of a Uyghur, resident in the United States, earlier this year. The man, a carpenter back in his hometown, told Uyghur Human Rights Project (UHRP) researchers he was scared he would be noticed by the Chinese authorities when visiting our office in Washington, DC.

A new UHRP report, “Repression Across Borders,” documents how the Chinese government routinely carries out surveillance, threats and coercion on American soil to control the speech and actions of the estimated 1,500 to 5,000 Uyghur people living in the United States. This is an ambitious and well-resourced campaign affecting all Uyghur Americans, especially the many brave journalists, activists, and students engaged in raising awareness about the crisis of repression in their homeland.

The One Word That Could Foretell Catastrophe in Hong Kong

Howard W. French

One of the first things that clinched my interest in China—and this will inevitably date myself—was its fierce and utterly unique political language, the stuff of endless campaigns of denunciation and ideological warfare. Think the bloodcurdling epithets used to attack enemies during the late Mao period, like “running dog of imperialism” or “capitalist roader,” and, when that long era finally wound to a close, “gang of four.”

Language like this has almost entirely disappeared from the rhetorical lexicon of the Chinese state. But there is one important form of it that has remained on the shelf, in two words found only in China: “splittism” and “splittist.” The first is for any movement that seeks to break away from China; the second is used to label and thereby castigate any adherent of such a movement and target him or her for destruction.

For most of its existence as a peculiarly Chinese political term, “splittism” was about the threat, real or contrived, posed by people who were labeled as separatists, usually meaning members of ethnic minorities lurking somewhere along the country’s vast periphery. To designate an individual or a group of people “splittists” was almost always to announce the start of an implacable campaign of suppression against them.

The Old World and the Middle Kingdom

By Julianne Smith And Torrey Taussig 

Europe is beginning to face up to the challenges posed by a rising China. From the political debates roiling European capitals over the Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei’s involvement in building 5G mobile networks to the tense EU-China summit earlier this year, recent events have shown that European leaders are growing uneasy in a relationship that until recently both sides saw as immensely beneficial. They worry about the political influence China has gained, especially over the EU’s smaller members, and its growing economic clout and technological prowess. They are starting, tentatively, to push back.

Will the Iran Conflict Break the West?


After months of both the United States and Iran taking a harder line against each other, Europe finds itself stuck between a rock and a hard place. If Iran pursues further brinkmanship in response to US provocation, European Union member states may decide they have no choice but to embrace the Trump administration's containment strategy.

BERLIN – Before the G7 summit in Biarritz, France, this month, it was a toss-up whether the greater disruption would come from US President Donald Trump or British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Yet the attendee who had the biggest impact was someone who was not expected to be there at all: Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.

Although media coverage of the summit focused on trade wars, fires in the Amazon, and the looming danger of a “no-deal” Brexit, the discussions about Iran were probably the most consequential. The fate of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal could determine not only whether the world’s most combustible region descends into a nuclear-arms race, but also whether the Western political alliance can survive.

How Russia and Iran Dominated the G7 Summit

Hunter DeRensis 

Monday concluded the three-day summit held in Biarritz, France, by the Group of Seven (G7), which is composed of the most advanced economies in the world: France, Canada, Germany, Japan, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. European Union Council President Donald Tusk was also present, along with a litany of heads of state who were each invited by a participating G7 member.

This year’s meeting comes at a precarious time for all of the key participants. The host, French president Emmanuel Macron, has approval ratings that hover in the low thirties after his response to the yellow vests movement. Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau is being dragged down by a corruption scandal. Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe is in the middle of a trade war with South Korea. German chancellor Angela Merkel has announced this will be her last term in office, as she tries to cobble together a successor. Italian prime minister Giuseppe Conte resigned days before the summit and attended only as a caretaker role. British prime minister Boris Johnson has been in office only a month and is staring down a no-deal Brexit come October. And President Donald Trump brings his own repertoire to wherever he visits.

A Japan-South Korea Dispute Hundreds of Years in the Making

by Harry J. Kazianis 
Source Link

Tensions between Japan and South Korea spiked once more last Thursday when the Blue House announced their intention to step out of the General Security Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA)—a military information-sharing pact that allows Japan and South Korea to share intelligence on matters of mutual security concerns, such as North Korean missile launches. 

The Japan-South Korea dispute initially began to escalate in July, when Japan imposed export controls on Seoul for three chemicals crucial to semiconductors and displays—key components of the South Korean electronics industry. Shortly afterward, Tokyo removed South Korea from its “white-list” of trading partners, ending both preferential treatment and eased trade restrictions with Japan. Seoul responded in turn, slashingJapan from its own preferred trading list and placing the nation in a newly-formulated “third category” trade status.

Influence Operations Kill Chain

Influence operations are elusive to define. The Rand Corp.'s definition is as good as any: "the collection of tactical information about an adversary as well as the dissemination of propaganda in pursuit of a competitive advantage over an opponent." Basically, we know it when we see it, from bots controlled by the Russian Internet Research Agency to Saudi attempts to plant fake stories and manipulate political debate. These operations have been run by Iran against the United States, Russia against Ukraine, China against Taiwan, and probably lots more besides.

Since the 2016 US presidential election, there have been an endless series of ideas about how countries can defend themselves. It's time to pull those together into a comprehensive approach to defending the public sphere and the institutions of democracy.

Influence operations don't come out of nowhere. They exploit a series of predictable weaknesses -- and fixing those holes should be the first step in fighting them. In cybersecurity, this is known as a "kill chain." That can work in fighting influence operations, too­ -- laying out the steps of an attack and building the taxonomy of countermeasures.

Why the world should be watching the diplomatic crisis between Japan and South Korea

A geopolitical crisis is unfolding in Asia. It is not one which comes immediately to mind: the confrontation with Iran in the Gulf, India’s abolition of Kashmiristatehood, the continuing protests in Hong Kong, America’s trade war with China, or North Korea’s latest missiles launch. It is, instead, one which is unexpected and surprising between two states; democracies which should be natural, intrinsic allies against totalitarian neighbours: Japan and South Korea.

The confrontation, which is escalating, has had only sporadic coverage in the west. The consequences, however, are serious, with the strategic balance being shifted and bringing instability to the region. Neither side seemingly wants to be seen to be backing down, and the pace of diplomatic and economic sanctions against each other have risen in tempo along with combative rhetoric.

From trade issues to security pacts, what is unfolding at present is part of a bitter harvest of the past – but more on that later. The latest diplomatic salvo came from Seoul on Thursday, terminating an intelligence deal between the nations because of an earlier decision by Tokyo to downgrade South Korea’s preferential trade status.

Germany’s Far-Right Is Creeping Ever Closer to Power


International media will likely hail the Sept. 1 German state elections in Saxony and Brandenburg as major victories for the Alternative for Germany (AfD). Understandably so. The AfD’s tally of the vote in Saxony will swell from 9.7 percent to perhaps as high as 24 percent. In Brandenburg, where the AfD received 12.2 percent of the vote in 2014 and is currently polling around 22 percent, less pronounced but still sizable gains are expected.

But the most profound changes await Chancellor Angela Merkel’s center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU). The two state elections are likely to bring long-simmering tensions in the party to a head about its future direction. The moderate and conservative wings of the CDU, long at odds about a populist challenger to the right, could square off in the aftermaths of the Saxony and Brandenburg ballots. The fallout could accelerate Merkel’s departure from German politics and spell trouble for her chosen successor, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer.

Boris Johnson Is Suspending Parliament. What’s Next for Brexit?

Source Link

With two months to go before Britain is due to exit the European Union, the country is mired in political dysfunction; its political leaders agree on little, if anything; and the terms on which Britain will leave the EU are yet to be agreed on.

Now, then, seems like the perfect time for Boris Johnson to up the stakes even further.

The prime minister went to the queen today to request that Parliament be suspended, a rare move that tightens the political calendar, reducing the number of days lawmakers have to debate Brexit and other measures. The House of Commons returns from its summer recess next week, and Johnson has effectively dared his opponents to unite against him in a matter of days—or cede control of the Brexit timetable to him.

Johnson says he is willing to see Britain leave the EU without a deal entirely, a scenario that his government’s own analysis states would lead to interruptions in food and medicine supply chains. His opponents have raised the possibility of a temporary national-unity government to postpone the October 31 deadline for Britain to withdraw from the bloc. Both are willing to face another election, Britain’s third in four years.

Bad News

By Jacob Weisberg 

In 2004—an ordinary, healthy year for the newspaper business—The Washington Post earned $143 million in profit. Five years later, in 2009, the paper lost $164 million amid a shift from paid print to free digital consumption, the erosion of its classified and local advertising businesses, and the global financial crisis. The collapse of its business model forced round after round of cutbacks, staff buyouts, and layoffs. That year, the Post shut all its domestic reporting bureaus outside the Washington area, including those in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.

The Post’s position was typical of the country’s healthiest papers. That same year, The New York Times, facing possible bankruptcy, sold most of the new headquarters building into which it had just moved and arranged a $250 million high-interest loan from the Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim. Around the country, more vulnerable papers closed down or put themselves up for sale. With few exceptions, the great family-owned franchises were being gobbled up by private equity firms with little sense of civic obligation and even less understanding of journalism. 

The Future of Northeast Syria

Author Aaron Stein
Source Link

Given eight years of civil war, the divergent interests of local and powerful external actors and the international intervention against the Islamic State, what may the future hold for Syria’s northeast? Is a permanent ceasefire possible? In April, the Atlantic Council, the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung and the Foreign Policy Research Institute held a conference to address these questions. Aaron Stein and Emily Burchfield here provide an overview of the conference and build upon its findings, suggesting that any solution will require greater clarity on a direction for Syria from Russia and the US.

Billionaire Entrepreneur Elon Musk Claims That Humans Will Be ‘Far, Far Surpassed In Every Single Way’ By Computer; And, Says That Moment Will Come Much Sooner Than We Think/Expect

Tim Collins posted an August 29, 2019 article in the DailyMail.com with the title above. Billionaire entrepreneur and founder of Tesla and SpaceX, Elon Musk, is once again forecasting that humankind will soon be ‘far, far, surpassed in every single way,’ by computers empowered by artificial intelligence (AI). Mr. Collins wrote that Mr. Musk made these comments at the World Artificial Intelligence Conference that is being held in Shanghai, China this week. Mr. Musk made the remarks during a debate about the future of AI, with billionaire and former Alibaba founder, Jac Ma.

“We are hopelessly inadequate,” Mr. Musk said. “We will be far, far surpassed in every single way. I guarantee it,” Mr. Musk said. Mr. Musk also said that his firm, Neuralink, a company he founded in July 2016, could help level the playing field with intelligent machines.” Mr, Collins notes that “Neuralink is working to link the human brain with machines by creating tiny implants that would let people download information from their computers,” into their brains.

“The biggest mistake I see artificial intelligence researchers making is assuming their intelligent. They’re not, compared to AI,” Mr. Musk said. “A lot of them cannot imagine something smarter than themselves; but, AI will be vastly smarter, vastly.”

How Quantum Radar Could Completely Change Warfare

By Kyle Mizokami

A new high definition radar system that could change the nature of warfare has been demonstrated for the first time. The result, quantum radar, is a high definition detection system that provides a much more detailed image of targets while itself remaining difficult to detect. Quantum radars could provide users with enough detail to identify aircraft, missiles, and other aerial targets by specific model.

According to the MIT Technology Review, researchers at Austria’s Institute of Science and Technology used entangled microwaves to create the world’s first quantum radar system.

Under a principle known as quantum entanglement, two particles can be linked together regardless of distance, forming what scientists call a quantum entangled pair. When something happens to one particle it can be noticed in the other particle. This in turn leads to a process called quantum illumination, where information about one particle’s environment can be inferred by studying the other particle.

The Role of Data in Algorithmic Decision-Making: A Primer

Lydia Kostopoulos contends that discussions on the military applications of machine learning have focused more on algorithmic decision-making than on data. However, an algorithm requires data in its processing to make decisions. To help fill this gap regarding military decision-support tools and autonomous weapons systems, Kostopoulos here responds by adressing 1) the data chain, referring to the creation, collection, organization and use of data; 2) ways an adversary can target and undermine data; and 3) key data-related questions those considering the military application of artificial intelligence (AI) may wish to consider.

Army wants a more secure dev environment for cyber tools

By: Mark Pomerleau   

The Office of the Secretary of Defense follows a methodology called DevSecOps, which ingrains security into the development process. One of the primary programs associated with the effort is U.S. Cyber Command’s Unified Platform. The Army’s Big Data Platform, essentially a hybrid cloud environment that allows for storage, computation and analytics across a variety of networked sensors, is expected to be folded into the program.

As a result, the Army began participating in the Unified Platform software factory, which puts various software containers together. Software containers are a way to replicate databases and services in various environments allowing them to be scaled on demand.

“What that will do is give us a common developmental infrastructure or an environment that we can lay metrics, we can bring multiple industry partners come in, we’ll have the exact same environment across the board that will be available inside the FORGE,” Joe Kobsar, director of applied cyber technologies within the defensive cyber operations program at PEO Enterprise Information Systems told Fifth Domain, Aug. 23.

“The ‘Sec’ part, we’re not there yet. We’re working on that. That’s why we’re jumping on board with [Unified Platform] and OSD’s program.”

The Czech Government Avoided Collapse by Surrendering to a ‘Presidential Coup’

Tim Gosling 

PRAGUE—A long political drama ended in the Czech Republic this week with the government narrowly averting collapse, but only by surrendering to what amounts to a presidential coup. When President Milos Zeman formally appointed Lubomir Zaoralek as culture minister on Aug. 27, it brought an end to more than 100 days of crisis. Zaoralek, a former foreign minister, was parachuted in after Zeman refused to confirm the previous nominee put forward by the left-leaning Social Democrats, the junior partner in the coalition government led by Prime Minister Andrej Babis and his populist Ano party.

Now is the time to double down on artificial intelligence

By: Jamie Milne 
Source Link

Across the Department of Defense, organizations are exploring the role of artificial intelligence in revamping how they carry out their daily work and accelerating how they deliver on missions. While these grassroots efforts have created pockets of innovation, defense organizations should now look to take a more systematic approach to leveraging AI in their operations.

One approach is to create an internal research and development team that looks across an organization and identifies areas in which AI might address existing pain-points and provide an operational edge. The goal of such a group is to bring together stakeholders — program managers, data scientists, engineers — who understand those pain-points and who can help drive programs forward.

For defense organizations, the time is right. AI has garnered top-level support at the Department, with an AI strategy that “directs DoD to accelerate the adoption of AI and the creation of a force fit for our time," according to a summary released earlier this year. Its goal is to make any technical, organizational and operational changes needed to “enable DoD to take advantage of AI systematically at enterprise scale.”

Suspension of parliament: MPs react with fury and Davidson set to quit after Johnson move – as it happened

Frances Perraudin 
Source Link

The Press Association is reporting that a group of Church of England bishops has issued an open letter outlining their particular concerns over the prospect of a no-deal Brexit.

Twenty-five bishops signed the letter warning of the potential cost of a no-deal Brexit to “those least resilient to economic shocks”.

“The sovereignty of parliament is not just an empty term, it is based on institutions to be honoured and respected: our democracy is endangered by cavalier disregard for these,” they said.

The archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, said on Tuesday he would be willing to chair a citizens’ forum on Brexit “in principle” after being approached by senior MPs.

“The archbishop of Canterbury has conditionally agreed to chair a citizens forum in Coventry and, without prejudice for any particular outcome, we support this move to have all voices in the current Brexit debate heard,” said the bishops.

The age of cyber warfare

by Alex Dean

Warfare has always evolved. As weapons change so does the reality of conflict: spears gave way to swords, then to rifles and machine guns. Horses gave way to tanks and then fighter jets and now drones. Each had destructive new implications. The speed at which you can develop new technology puts you on the winning or losing side.

We are now into the next phase: cyber warfare. Nation states have a new weapon in their armoury. The internet provides for entirely new modes of conflict, and it is ubiquitous. So what will this new chapter look like, and what can Britain do to prepare? Having spoken to leading military and cyber experts, my view is that cyber resilience must be a first-order strategic priority.

Certainly, the challenge is unlike what came before. For Malcolm Rifkind, former foreign and defence secretary, “wars of the future will not just involve the armed forces of the combatants fighting each other. They will include economic warfare, propaganda, armed militias, terrorists and, most especially, cyber warfare.”

The Army wants these new defensive cyber tools

By: Mark Pomerleau
Col. John Transue, capability manager for cyber at the Cyber Center of Excellence at TechNet Augusta described several capabilities that the Army has already approved requirements for. These include, a garrison defensive cyber platform, a deployable defensive cyber system, cyber analytics, a defensive cyber tools suite, defensive cyber planning, a tactical defensive cyber infrastructure, a tool for insider threats and a tool for forensics and malware.

Many of these tools are suited more for the mobile and expeditionary force, though they can be used for larger installations. For example, on the tactical infrastructure side, Transue noted that commanders are often using mission command platforms that are susceptible to cyber intrusions and need to be protected.

But because the cyber landscape is evolving quickly, the equipping community wants to get tools to the force in real time.