2 July 2024

India-Iran Makeover Dovetails Into Iran’s Ties With Russia – OpEd

M.K. Bhadrakumar

There is enormous appreciation among Iranian intellectuals, diplomats and politicians regarding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s stellar support for their country’s membership of the BRICS grouping. Modi played a key role to navigate Iran’s membership purposively at the BRICS Summit in Johannesburg last August.

The Russian President Vladimir Putin couldn’t be present at Johannesburg. But Prime Minister Narendra Modi attended the summit in person, rubbishing the malicious rumours and canards to the contrary orchestrated by the western media. The Anglo-Saxon game plan was to somehow get Iran’s membership question deferred to an indefinite future.

The defining moment was a phone call from the Iranian President late Ibrahim Raisi to Modi in the week before the summit meeting. However, the ground for the last-minute flurry of diplomatic activity was prepared in the preceding weeks by the National Security Advisor Ajit Doval when he attended the meeting of BRICS national security advisors in Johannesburg in late July, just weeks prior to the summit to review security and economic cooperation.

Doval held separate “working meetings” with his Russian and Iranian counterparts — Nikolai Patrushev and Ali-Akbar Ahmadian respectively. The NSAs discussed Iran’s BRICS membership issue as a core vector of the Johannesburg summit.

Outrage is not a policy: Coming to terms with Myanmar’s fragmented state

Morten B. Pedersen


The 2021 military coup in Myanmar ended a decade of liberal political and economic reforms but sparked a revolution that many hope will ultimately produce much needed, more radical change.

The Myanmar people are no strangers to military rule. However, the latest coup hit the country like an earthquake, shattering the hopes of millions of people who, after a decade of growing civil, political, and economic freedoms, had finally come to believe that tomorrow would be better than today. What the coup leaders had seemingly envisioned as a relatively simple “course correction” instead sparked a popular uprising, which soon evolved into an armed mass insurrection and civil war.

Three years after the coup, the new junta — the State Administration Council — is fighting a battle for survival against scores of new people’s militias and more established ethnic armed organisations (EAOs) demanding an end to the military’s role in politics and the establishment of a “genuine federal democracy”. Fresh elections originally scheduled for August 2023 have been repeatedly postponed, seemingly squashing any hope the coup-makers had of sneaking a new iteration of more tightly controlled “disciplined democracy” in through the backdoor.


Nis Grünberg, Grzegorz Stec


The latest Global Go To Think Tank Report (2021)1 identifies a worldwide total of 11,175 think tanks, suggesting that China-based organizations make up nearly 17 percent of them. The China Think Tank Directory 2022 (中国智库名录) lists 1,928 active ones.2 However, numbers are not everything. More important is to understand the regulatory conditions and degree of political integration that China’s think tanks operate under in order to assess their value as interlocutors and the context shaping their research.

Think tanks play an increasingly important role in official policy formulation. The output of official think tanks contributes to party-state deliberations on domestic and global policy issues.

Equally significant is the role of think thanks in communicating policy. The CCP leadership has an intense focus on controlling political debate at home, which is now matched by determination to build “discourse power” abroad, meaning China’s capacity to set the norms, topics and language of the international debates.

The think tanks also play an important role as a channel for unofficial exchanges with foreign partners. For instance, before the pandemic, a delegation of Chinese think tankers would visit Brussels for exchanges around every two months. After the pandemic, similar exchanges have resumed with visits from representatives of the Center for China and Globalization, the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, the China Institute of International Studies or the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

US-China Rivalry in Asia and Africa: Lessons from the Cold War

Gregg Brazinsky

One of the hallmarks of the Cold War era was a competition between the United States and its democratic allies, on the one hand, and Communist powers, on the other, for the allegiance of countries in Africa and Asia. In an echo of the Cold War, a similar competition between the United States and China is playing out today. This report examines the US-China rivalry then and now and offers insights and lessons that can guide US policymakers as they navigate the contemporary competition.

China Mocks U.S. Presidential Debate: 'Very Entertaining'

Matthew Tostevin

Chinese commentators mocked the first presidential debate between President Joe Biden and Donald Trump, pointing out the president's repeated verbal stumbles and the questions over the truthfulness of his rival.

Biden was widely seen as the loser of the debate. With his voice sounding hoarse and sometimes appearing to go off track in his remarks, his performance was criticized by both Republicans and Democrats in America at a time that he had been fighting questions over his age.

"Personal attacks, hazy memory, mocking each other... this debate was very entertaining for many Chinese people," wrote high profile media commentator and former state media editor Hu Xijin on X, where he has more than 560,000 followers despite it being banned for most people in China.

Why Does China Need Another Railway Through Central Asia? – Analysis

Alan Kosh

Perhaps the cause isn’t economic gain.

China plans to build a new railway line from the western part of the country through Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, with access to Iran and Europe.

According to Kyrgyz President Sadyr Zhaparov, the construction of the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan (CKU) railway will begin in October this year and will cost $4.7 billion. He announced it on May 6.

Simultaneously, Kyrgyz Prime Minister Akylbek Zhaparov announced that the construction of the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway would require approximately $8 billion.

Various sources plan to build a total of 18 stations, 81 large and medium-sized bridges, and 41 tunnels along the approximately three hundred-kilometer stretch of railway in Kyrgyzstan. Along the way, railway trains will cross earthquake-prone mountain ranges more than 3,000 meters above sea level. About 13,000 earthquakes occur in Kyrgyzstan every year, and over the past 150 years, the country has recorded more than ten strong earthquakes with a magnitude of 7.0, aggravating the situation.

Apparently, this does not stop the project’s initiators. The Kyrgyz president is enthusiastic and confident that the road will be built in 3–4 years, although according to the National Railway Company of Kyrgyzstan, the project will take 6–8 years. Zhaparov also claims that the country will earn $200 million per year from the project. However, in order to earn them, Kyrgyzstan will have to compete with Russia and Kazakhstan, which are increasing the capacity of their routes—the Northern and Middle Corridors.

How Iran Defied the U.S. to Become an International Power

Sune Engel Rasmussen and Laurence Norman

The winner of Iran’s presidential election will inherit domestic discord and an economy battered by sanctions, but also a strength: Tehran has more sway on the international stage than in decades.

Iran, under Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s leadership, thwarted decades of U.S. pressure and emerged from years of isolation largely by aligning itself with Russia and China, giving up on integration with the West and throwing in its lot with two major powers just as they amped up confrontation with Washington. Iran’s economy remains battered by U.S. sanctions, but oil sales to China and weapons deals with Russia have offered financial and diplomatic lifelines.

It also effectively exploited decades of U.S. mistakes in the Middle East and big swings in White House policy toward the region between one administration and the next.

Today, Tehran poses a greater threat to American allies and interests in the Middle East than at any point since the Islamic Republic was founded in 1979.

Zelenskyy Says More Air Defenses Needed Against ‘Russian Terror’ As Vilnyansk Casualty Toll Tops 40

Ukraine’s State Emergency Service on June 30 raised the number of injured to more than 35 in an apparent Russian rocket attack the previous night that killed seven people in the city of Vilnyansk, in the southern Zaporizhzhya region.

It reported that building and car fires had been put out at the scene, where Governor Ivan Fedorov said three children were believed to be among the dead and nine more children among the dozens of injured.

Initial reports had put the number of injured at around 10.

“How can we be expected to live?” a resident of Vilnyansk said in comments to RFE/RL.

“There is a burned corpse there,” she said, pointing to rescue workers wrapping the body of a blast victim.

“This is a very popular area. There is an ATB [supermarket]. There are benches. People are walking. Children are walking. Some people were driving by from work. They just disappeared [in the blast] and we cannot find them.”

Europe planning 1,500-MILE defence line protecting Poland & Baltics from Putin’s WW3 invasion threat

Georgie English

Poland and the Baltics are planning to create the £2.2billion blockade to keep Russia from advancing through the continent as the threat of WW3 looms.

The brave allied nations revealed the plans on Wednesday as they asked the European Union for help with the project.

Leaders from Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia all claim a protective blockade is essential to protect Europe from a dangerous Moscow.

Putin has been ramping up his military threats among other worrying activities as he repeatedly tells the West to avoid getting involved in his war in Ukraine.

The leaders of the four countries who put together the plan described the need for extra protection as "dire and urgent".

They added all 27 EU states will be protected by the bloc including over 450 million people.

The Army’s New M10 Booker: Deploy Fast And Carry A Big Gun


The M10 Booker aims to revolutionize how U.S. Army light infantry units fight. It will have the ability to deploy rapidly aboard C-17 cargo jets right alongside the troops it was designed to support. Unlike the far heavier and slower to deploy M1 Abrams, the M10 will be an asset organic to light infantry units, regularly training alongside these agile forces. And while the Abrams excels in taking on other main battle tanks along the forward edge of a fight, the M10 is about taking out armored personnel carriers and other combat vehicles, as well as bunkers and fortifications, on demand for forward-operating light infantry.

Just don’t call it a light tank to the Army though, even though that is pretty much what it is.

Dive into the capabilities of the M10 Booker and its fascinating roots, as well as some of the questions surrounding its relevance, in our latest video feature. You can also check out our past feature on the M10 Booker and what it’s all about here.

Satellite Data Suggests Russia May Be Running Out of Tanks

Isabel van Brugen

Russia has sustained high losses of tanks since President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine more than two years ago, and may have just a few thousand of the armored fighting vehicles left, artificial intelligence (AI) analysis of satellite imagery suggests.

German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) trained an AI model to examine satellite imagery of 87 Russian military sites—including 16 bases where tanks, artillery vehicles and armored personnel carriers are stored.

The AI model counted the number of tanks at these key sites prior to the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, up until the present day, to determine the scale of the country's tank losses in the war.

One of these bases, the 111th Central Tank Reserve Base of the Army in southeastern Russia, which housed 857 tanks in April 2021, is now nearly empty, satellite imagery suggests. Just months into the war, in October 2022, Russia had lost nearly half of these tanks, the newspaper found. Analysis of other military sites painted a similar picture, SZ said.

Russia Is Not Bluffing

Benjamin Giltner

As the war in Ukraine continues into its third year of fighting, all parties appear more willing to escalate than to bring it to an end. In his annual “State of the Nation” address, President Vladimir Putin warned NATO nations that they “must, in the end, understand all this truly threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, and therefore the destruction of civilization,” if they continue to arm Ukraine and consider sending troops. Even as far back as June 2022, Putin warned U.S. officials against sending long-range missiles to Ukraine, stating, “We will strike at those targets which we have not yet been hitting.”

However, American policymakers and analysts seem to think that Putin won’t put his money where his mouth is when it comes to escalation. Adam Kinzinger and Ben Hodges assured readers that Putin is bluffing with his threats of nuclear escalation. NATO’s Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, dismissed the likelihood of Western aid to Ukraine leading to Russian retaliation. The Biden administration seems to agree, having recently allowed Ukraine to use U.S. weapons to strike inside Russian territory—a red line the administration previously refused to cross.

In this view, escalation is calculable, and countries tend to bluff with their red lines. This assumption is false. As the famed military and nuclear strategist Bernard Brodie explained, countries usually do not usually bluff when they make threats. In fact, there are multiple cases throughout history that show how this misunderstanding of escalation has led to disastrous results.

Navigating Uncertainty: The Intersection of Global Politics, Tech, and Economics


International Political Landscape

Significant tensions and strategic maneuvers mark the international political landscape. "Putin Vows to Make New Nuclear Missiles and Weigh Putting Them Near NATO Nations" by David E. Sanger and Anton Troianovski, published by The New York Times, reports on President Vladimir Putin's declaration to produce new intermediate-range nuclear missiles and hints at deploying them within range of NATO nations. This move, amidst rising tensions with the West, aims to exert pressure and signals a strategic shift in nuclear arms control. Additionally, "How the World Reacted to Biden’s ‘Disastrous’ Debate Performance" by Michael Birnbaum, published by The Washington Post, highlights global concerns following President Joe Biden's faltering debate performance, prompting U.S. rivals to recalibrate their strategies in anticipation of a potential second Trump presidency. This article underscores the significant impact of U.S. domestic politics on international perceptions and diplomatic maneuvers.

Technological Innovations

Technological innovations continue to reshape industries and defense strategies. "NATO Boosts Undersea Cable Infrastructure Fearing Russian Sabotage" by Jack Detsch and Keith Johnson, published by Foreign Policy, discusses NATO's efforts to protect undersea communication and energy cables amid fears of Russian sabotage. This initiative highlights the strategic importance of securing global communication networks against potential disruptions. Meanwhile, “How AI Might Affect Decision-making in a National Security Crisis," by Christopher S. Chivvis and Jennifer Kavanagh, published by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, explores the potential impacts of AI on national security decision-making processes. The article discusses how AI could both expedite and complicate decision-making, influence groupthink and alter the dynamics of bureaucratic politics. It emphasizes the need for clear AI governance and extensive risk mitigation training.

America’s priority should be chip design leadership- OPINION


Chips are the key economic and military enablers of the industrial world. South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol recently described chip technology leadership as paramount to a country’s economic survival (Wall Street Journal, June 5, 2024). The impact on military matters is overwhelming. As David Goldman and I wrote in the the Wall Street Journal on December 23, 2018: “Silicon, not Steel, will win the Next War.”

In that spirit, hundreds of billions of dollars are being allocated from national funds to develop the industry in countries including China, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and the US. In the US, the CHIPS Act allocated $50 billion to support manufacturing investments. These large amounts committed must be viewed in the context of the cost of a state-of-the-art, full-scale factory – between $20 billion and $30 billion. And such plants become obsolete in a few years. Staying at the cutting edge of chip manufacturing technology is a major national undertaking.

As the original developer of the industry, the US is facing major new competition. The first priority in the US should be to maintain leadership in innovative product design because that leadership impacts economic growth and the US still leads the world in this regard.

Russia wants to confront NATO but dares not fight it on the battlefield – so it’s waging a hybrid war instead

Ivana Kottasová,

When someone tried – and failed – to burn down a bus garage in Prague earlier this month, the unsuccessful arson attack didn’t draw much attention. Until, that is, Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala revealed it was “very likely” that Moscow was behind it.

The accusation prompted alarm among security officials and governments because several similar incidents have occurred across Europe in recent months. The Museum of Occupation in Riga was targeted in an arson attack in February. A London warehouse burnt down in March and a shopping center in Warsaw went up in flames in May. Police in Germany arrested several people suspected of planning explosions and arson attacks in April, and French authorities launched an anti-terror investigation after detaining a suspected bomb-maker who was injured in a botched explosion earlier this month.

Multiple hacking attacks and spying incidents have been reported in different European countries. As the same time, the European Union has accused Russia and Belarus of weaponizing migration by pushing asylum seekers from third countries to its borders. There have also been several suspicious attacks against individuals: a Russian defector was found shot dead in Spain and an opposition figure exiled in Lithuania was brutally attacked with a hammer.

Israel's Two Front War


We tend to look for explanations for decisions to go to war as stemming from a rational cost/benefit analysis, a calculation that the gains from the resort to armed force can be set against the costs of the fighting. As war always comes with high costs then it can only be justified if there is some confidence in the likely gains. When it comes to a defensive war the issue is whether the costs prevented will be greater than those incurred.

Yet even those trying to take these decisions as rationally as possible will face great uncertainties when trying to assess how a war will turn out. They might hope that when it is over a dispute will be resolved, land will have been grabbed, people better protected, long-term security ensured. But they often cannot be sure, and doubts may then hold them back.

Sometimes, however, the doubts, even if well-founded, have little influence. States go to war even when they know that the odds are against them. They do so in a mood of defiance or perhaps of fatalism. They are caught in a historic moment that leaves little choice. They have a sense of a conflict so deep, such a Manichean struggle between good and evil, that a final reckoning is bound to come so that even a promised path to peace still ends up with war. There can be no concessions for the sake of peace, for there is no true peace to be had. Every conciliatory gesture risks emboldening the enemy just as every truce provides them with an opportunity to regroup. The only choice is to accept the inevitable and then hope that through will and skill they can defy the odds.

The Unholy Alliance: Fossil Fuels and War - Opinion

Svitlana Romanko

In the global chessboard of energy, fossil fuels have long been powerful pieces, driving economies and, unfortunately, fuelling conflicts. Wars have long been fought over resources, but fossil fuels have become a primary driver of conflict in the modern era. This relationship has profound implications for international stability, economic security, and environmental sustainability. The ongoing war in Ukraine exemplifies in perfect clarity the dire consequences of fossil fuel dependency, serving as a wake-up call for the global community.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the world has witnessed a stark example of how fossil fuel revenues can finance war and aggression. Russia has earned an astounding €693 billion from fossil fuel exports since the war began. European Union countries alone have purchased more than €196 billion worth of these exports, directly fueling Russia’s war chest.

The revenue from fossil fuels has allowed Russia to sustain its military efforts, perpetuating immense human suffering and devastating Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. 50% of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure has been destroyed due to Russian attacks, leading to electricity shortages in at least five regions since March 2024. The largest private energy company in Ukraine, DTEK, has reported an 85% loss of its coal-fired generation capacity and significant casualties among its staff. This destruction underscores the vulnerability of energy infrastructures in conflict zones and the severe humanitarian crises that can result.

The myth of negotiated peace

Lawrence Freedman

Those that demand Ukraine and its Western supporters work out what concessions will be offered to Russia to cut a deal to end the war, often claim that this will have to be done at some point because “wars always end with a negotiation”. Despite its regular repetition, and however the Russo-Ukraine War concludes, this claim is simply not true. Not all wars end with negotiations.

Some end with surrenders, as was the case with both Germany and Japan in 1945; regime change, as with Italy in 1943; or cease-fires, which might require some negotiation but leave the underlying dispute unresolved, as with Korea in 1953. Even when there are negotiations intended to end a war, they often fail.

The idea that war is essentially transactional and that there is a deal always there to be struck (a view which seems to infuse Donald Trump’s approach to international conflict) ignores the high stakes for which they are fought, which become even higher when lives have been lost in their pursuit. Compromises are best found before the fighting starts. Once a war has begun, compromises become much harder to identify let alone agree and confirm in treaty form. This will require intense bargaining over specific language in the full knowledge that any ambiguity will later be exploited.

The US Wants to Integrate the Commercial Space Industry With Its Military to Prevent Cyber Attacks


The US military recently launched a groundbreaking initiative to strengthen ties with the commercial space industry. The aim is to integrate commercial equipment into military space operations, including satellites and other hardware. This would enhance cybersecurity for military satellites.

As space becomes more important to the world’s critical infrastructure, the risk increases that hostile nation-states will deploy cyberattacks on important satellites and other space infrastructure. Targets would include not just spy satellites or military communications satellites, but commercial spacecraft too.

The US Department of Defense believes its new partnership, called Commercial Augmentation Space Reserve (CASR), would enhance US national security and the country’s competitive advantage in space. It would go some way beyond the relationship between government and private contractor that already exists.

In some cases, the commercial sector has advanced rapidly beyond government capabilities. This situation exists in numerous countries with a space capability and may apply in certain areas in the US too.

The Postwar Vision That Sees Gaza Sliced Into Security Zones

Rory Jones, Anat Peled and Dov Lieber

As Israel prepares to wind down major military operations in Gaza, one question looms large: What happens next?

A plan that is gaining currency in the government and military envisions creating geographical “islands” or “bubbles” where Palestinians who are unconnected to Hamas can live in temporary shelter while the Israeli military mops up remaining insurgents.

Other members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party are backing another, security-focused plan that seeks to slice up Gaza with two corridors running across its width and a fortified perimeter that would allow Israel’s military to mount raids when it deems them necessary.

The ideas come from informal groups of retired army and intelligence officers, think tanks, academics and politicians, as well as internal discussions inside the military. While Israel’s political leadership has said almost nothing about how the Gaza Strip will look and be governed after the heaviest fighting ends, these groups have been working on detailed plans that offer a glimpse of how Israel is thinking about what it calls the Day After.

America falters in fighting the information war

Colin Demarest

Americans are unknowingly being bombarded with media manipulated by China, Russia and Iran, despite U.S. efforts to stem the tide, according to an analysis first shared with Axios.

Why it matters: The messaging stokes stateside divisions and undermines support for some of Washington's most pressing security pursuits — Taiwan, Ukraine and Israel.

What's inside: The new report published by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, whose experts include former military members and senior government advisers, examines how authoritarian regimes have for years swayed thinking at home and abroad.
  • China hopes to exhaust and subdue Taiwan, which it considers a renegade province. It also wants to deflect criticism as its neighborhood belligerence is captured on camera.
  • Russia tries to bend international thinking in its favor. It is also exploiting domestic issues to pacify its people.
  • Iran threatens dissidents, amplifies messaging from anti-American and anti-Israeli groups, and supports a constellation of proxies in the region.


Amaris Rancy

Authoritarian actors have long worked to undermine democracy at a global scale by manipulating the information space, but the recent emergence of faster, more expansive, and potentially more potent “generative AI” technologies is creating new risks. With more than fifty national elections around the globe taking place in 2024, the stakes this year are particularly high. Given these challenges, this report explores the following questions: how is generative AI helping authoritarians tip the scales against democracy and accelerate harmful narratives in a wide variety of country contexts? And how are civil society organizations using the same set of tools to push back?

He Helped Invent Generative AI. Now He Wants To Save It


In 2016, Google engineer Illia Polosukhin had lunch with a colleague, Jacob Uszkoreit. Polosukhin had been frustrated by a lack of progress in his project, using AI to provide useful answers to questions posed by users, and Uszkoreit suggested he try a technique he had been brainstorming that he called self-attention. Thus began an 8-person collaboration that ultimately resulted in a 2017 paper called “Attention Is All You Need,” which introduced the concept of transformers as a way to supercharge artificial intelligence. It changed the world.

Eight years later, though, Polosukhin is not completely happy with the way things are shaking out. A big believer in open source, he’s concerned about the secretive nature of transformer-based large language models, even from companies founded on the basis of transparency. (Gee, who can that be?) We don’t know what they’re trained on or what the weights are, and outsiders certainly can’t tinker with them. One giant tech company, Meta, does tout its systems as open source, but Polosukhin doesn’t consider Meta’s models as truly open: “The parameters are open, but we don’t know what data went into the model, and data defines what bias might be there and what kinds of decisions are made,” he says.

As LLM technology improves, he worries it will get more dangerous, and that the need for profit will shape its evolution. “Companies say they need more money so they can train better models. Those models will actually be better at manipulating people, and you can tune them better for generating revenue,” he says.

Cryptographers Are Discovering New Rules for Quantum Encryption


Say you want to send a private message, cast a secret vote, or sign a document securely. If you do any of these tasks on a computer, you’re relying on encryption to keep your data safe. That encryption needs to withstand attacks from code breakers with their own computers, so modern encryption methods rely on assumptions about what mathematical problems are hard for computers to solve.

But as cryptographers laid the mathematical foundations for this approach to information security in the 1980s, a few researchers discovered that computational hardness wasn’t the only way to safeguard secrets. Quantum theory, originally developed to understand the physics of atoms, turned out to have deep connections to information and cryptography. Researchers found ways to base the security of a few specific cryptographic tasks directly on the laws of physics. But these tasks were strange outliers—for all others, there seemed to be no alternative to the classical computational approach.

By the end of the millennium, quantum cryptography researchers thought that was the end of the story. But in just the past few years, the field has undergone another seismic shift.

The Navy’s ongoing carrier conundrum

Diana Stancy

After a grueling eight months leading the Navy’s effort to counter Iran-backed Houthi rebel attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower received a reprieve this month when it transited the Suez Canal and headed into the Mediterranean Sea, on its way back home to Norfolk.

During more than 200 days taking down a barrage of Houthi drones and missiles, the Ike became the latest East Coast-based carrier to see its deployment extended multiple times.

Dating back to 2021, carriers Harry S. Truman, George H.W. Bush, and most recently, the Gerald R. Ford, also encountered extended periods underway to fulfill American naval presence requirements amid pressing global events.

Altogether, these carriers spent roughly nine months at sea – up from the standard seven-month deployment schedule.

And while the Ike is now wrapping its deployment, another East Coast carrier isn’t ready to replace its presence in the region – prompting an already deployed West Coast carrier Navy to replace it.