Red Fort Blast Brings Urban Operations to India

Antara Chakraborthy

Source Link

On November 10, a Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) went off at the Red Fort in New Delhi, marking one of the most significant urban terrorist incidents in India in the last decade. The blast killed at least 13 people and injured dozens more (Times of India, November 11, 2025). Initial forensic assessments indicate that the explosion was a premature detonation as the vehicle was still in transit. 

While investigations will remain ongoing and details from the attack will evolve, the event has revealed a significant shift in militant operations in India. Early findings have linked the blast to what has been described as a “white-collar” terror module comprising medical doctors and other professionals, who embedded themselves within India’s urban environments (Times of India, January 4).

Mark Carney in China positions Canada for ‘the world as it is, not as we wish it’

Amy Hawkins and Leyland Cecco in Toronto

Source Link

Mark Carney’s trip to Beijing this week secured what he described as a “preliminary but landmark” trade deal and a recognition – welcomed by Beijing – that countries are operating in a “new world order”. Carney’s visit is the first time in nearly a decade that a Canadian prime minister has been welcomed in Beijing. It comes after years of a deep freeze in the relationship between Ottawa and Beijing that Carney wants to thaw, in order to reduce his country’s precarious reliance on the United States.

Guy Saint-Jacques, a former Canadian ambassador to China, said: “The main goal of trying to reset or recalibrate the relationship with China has been achieved during this trip.” That recalibration comes at a delicate moment for geopolitical alliances between North American countries and China.

How War With China Begins

Nicholas Kristof

Source Link

The first warning sign might be quiet moves by Beijing to move financial assets away from Western countries that might freeze them in a war. A second might be patriotic campaigns in China calling on citizens to donate blood. Then, amid troop movements and debates about whether these constituted a genuine threat or were a bluff, cyberattacks might disable a chunk of Taiwan’s electrical grid and banking system, and the island’s internet service would grow sluggish because of sabotage of undersea cables linking Taiwan to the world.

Missiles would strike the presidential office and military and intelligence sites in an attempted decapitation, and perhaps also American bases in Japan and Guam to keep American forces from riding to the rescue. Chinese ships would blockade Taiwan, with a special focus on keeping the United States and Japan from providing assistance.

Europe’s Tech Still Packs a Punch

Clara Riedenstein

Source Link

Picture a poker table. Someone across the table convinces you that your cards are bad. Eventually, you believe them and react accordingly: you are timid, don’t take big risks. Turns out, your opponents are tricking you. Your cards are better than you thought.

Europe finds itself sitting at this tech poker table. American and Chinese governments are convinced that the continent is weak and holds poor cards. But Europe enjoys more leverage than most think.

How it should wield these cards remains an open question. If the US threatens Europe, should it respond with equal threats — or would that cause more pain than gain? If China attempts to swamp the continent with products, will Europe lose more by retaliating than negotiating? While Washington may hold a “kill switch” over European data, Europe could respond by advertising a kill switch of its own.

How Davos went MAGA

Kathryn Carlson

Source Link

DAVOS, Switzerland — When U.S. President Donald Trump arrives in the snowy Alpine village of Davos this week, it will mark both the culmination of a yearlong courtship — and a turning point for a forum once synonymous with liberal globalism.

This year's World Economic Forum, which starts Monday, underscores a sharp shift for an event long caricatured as a “woke” talking shop: Climate and diversity have slipped down the agenda, AI and growth are ascendant, and the United States — led by Trump and his inner circle — is set to dominate the stage. That shift coincided with a monthslong campaign to land the U.S. president and reassert Davos’ relevance after years of drift.

U.S. Economic Warfare Has Strangled Iran and Venezuela

Ted Snider
Source Link

The U.S. will “keep on blowing boats up,” White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said, “until Maduro cries uncle. And people way smarter than me on that say that he will.” He didn’t.

The U.S. thought that this June’s devastating bombing of Iran coupled with assassinations would cause political and military officials to defect to the opposition and the people to rise up against their government. It didn’t.

Even in Venezuela, the limits of military action were revealed, as the U.S. managed to capture President Maduro and decapitate the government but didn’t even try to change the regime, presumably because doing so would have unleashed chaos.

Behind the spectacular military action that gets all the attention on TV is the hidden hand of economic warfare that seems to be carrying the largest load of recent campaigns to change the governments of U.S. adversaries.

Fit For Purpose? Why Global Alliances Are in Decline

Sergey E. Ivashchenko

Source Link

The main reason for this is an asymmetry of interests. Major powers are no longer willing to pay for the security of smaller partners. The United States, which in the 20th century was the architectural and motivational core of most defensive alliances, increasingly demonstrates unwillingness to bear costs and risks for allies. Donald Trump has repeatedly emphasized this publicly. In March 2025, he stated: “If they don’t pay, I’m not going to protect them. No, I’m not going to protect them.” In the same series of speeches he repeated his position: “They must pay more.” 

This rhetoric is especially visible in Europe, where Washington questions commitments once considered unshakable. European governments increasingly doubt that the U.S. is willing to act as guarantor of NATO security. Trust was further undermined by the shutdown of Starlink over parts of Ukraine in 2022, which disrupted communications during a counteroffensive. There has also been concern over Trump’s readiness to consider Russia’s territorial claims as negotiable.

The Guardian view on Trump and Greenland: get real! Bullying is not strength

Source Link

For all Donald Trump’s bluster about restoring American strength, his attempt to bully European allies over Greenland reveals a deeper weakness: coercive diplomacy only works if people are afraid to resist. Increasingly, they aren’t. And that is a good thing. Bullies often back down when confronted – their power relies on fear. Mr Trump’s threat to impose sweeping tariffs on Europeans unless they acquiesce to his demand to “purchase” Greenland has stripped his trade policy bare. This is not about economic security, unfair trade or protecting American workers. It is about using tariffs as a weapon to force nations to submit.

The response from Europe has been united and swift. That in itself should send a message. France’s Emmanuel Macron says plainly “no amount of intimidation” will alter Europe’s position. Denmark has anchored the issue firmly inside Nato’s collective security. EU leaders have warned that tariff threats risk a dangerous downward spiral. Even Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, seen as ideologically close to Mr Trump, publicly called the tariff threat a “mistake” – adding that she has told him so.

Confession: I Can’t Figure Out Trump’s Latest Move

George Friedman

Source Link

The task I have dedicated my career to is understanding the things that nations must do and what they must not do. I see leaders not as free actors but as manifestations of national imperatives and interests. They become leaders because they pursue these imperatives and interests; those who do not damage the nation and, in turn, are rejected by the governed. This is true in democracies and dictatorships alike. In each, the process is different, but leadership and success are fundamental in both cases, although the ways nations deal with failed leaders in both situations are distinct.

Therefore, national imperatives and interests – the things that are necessary for a nation to do – are a guide to what nations, via their leaders, will do. Whatever success in geopolitical forecasting I have achieved is based on this concept, although in practice it is more complex than I have presented here.

Britain Must Lead the Pushback Against Trump

WILLIAM R. RHODES and STUART P.M. MACKINTOSH

Source Link

To ensure that Greenland remains a territory of Denmark, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and other European leaders must put pressure on NATO’s most powerful member. Given the US president’s love of royalty, one way to do that would be to organize a public meeting between British King Charles III and Danish King Frederik X.

NEWCASTLE/WASHINGTON, DC – US President Donald Trump’s pursuit of a new American empire suggests that NATO’s resilience may face its greatest test in 2026. In the last few weeks alone, the Trump administration has captured and extracted Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela and threatened to annex Greenland by force. This international adventurism has made the neocolonial “Donroe Doctrine” – a grossly distorted version of the Monroe Doctrine asserting US dominance over the Western Hemisphere – a deadly reality.

Faisal Islam: Trump's Greenland threats to allies are without parallel

Source Link

US President Donald Trump's apparently coercive threat to force Western allies not to oppose his proposed annexation of Greenland, or face further damage to their trade with the US, is without both parallel and precedent.

We've had some unusual and unexpected economic threats from President Trump over the past year, but I think it is safe to say this exceeds all of them, and takes us into both surreal and utterly dangerous territory.

If taken at face value, it is a form of economic war being levied by the White House on its closest allies.

French Army tests Ukraine-inspired battlefield solutions

Dylan Malyasov

Source Link

The French Army’s 2nd Armored Brigade presented new combat systems shaped by battlefield lessons from the war in Ukraine during an Innovation Day held on January 15, 2026, in Bitche, highlighting France’s effort to rapidly adapt its ground forces to modern high-intensity warfare.

The event focused on technologies developed by brigade regiments over nearly two years, with an emphasis on solutions already proven effective on the battlefield in Ukraine, including fiber-optic guided drones, mobile fire support systems, and adaptive protection against strike drones. Military personnel, institutional partners, and defense industry representatives attended the event to accelerate the transition of tested concepts into operational use.

Confronted with thorny problems, Trump turns to the military

Jack Detsch and Paul McLeary

Source Link

President Donald Trump threatened to unleash a familiar tool this week when he sought to stop protests against immigration agents in Minnesota: the military.

His warning to send federal troops into the state came as administration officials debated whether to order Pentagon strikes against Iran and use troops to seize Greenland from Denmark. Faced with a domestic or international problem this term that he can’t resolve with traditional diplomacy or politicking, Trump has increasingly turned to the armed forces as an initial option rather than a last resort.

When Venezuela’s leader wouldn’t step aside, he sent special forces into the country to grab him. When he thought negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program wasn’t working, he ordered U.S. missiles to destroy their development facilities. And when he wanted to lower crime rates in Democratic cities, he deployed the National Guard.

The State Department’s secret playbook for using sports to advance Trump’s agenda

Source Link

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured here in the Oval Office with FIFA President Gianni Infantino and the World Cup trophy, has warned foreigners hoping to visit the United States for this summer's tournament that "your ticket is not a visa.” | Win McNamee/Getty Images

Maybe the State Department should call itself the Sports Department.

President Donald Trump has kept most of Foggy Bottom’s diplomats out of the loop on major global crises, relying instead on Secretary of State Marco Rubio, his small leadership team, and a few special envoys. But the State Department is finding itself on the front lines of an unexpectedly thorny geopolitical challenge: reconciling Trump’s restrictionist views on immigration with his desire to host a successful World Cup.

How Trump's Foreign Policy Gambits Are Reshaping the World

Brian Bennett and Nik Popli

Source Link

Four weeks before the beginning of his second term as President, Donald Trump abruptly floated the idea of taking back the Panama Canal. It had been a quarter-century since the U.S. formally ceded to Panama ownership of the channel connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. With one social media post, Trump threw a seemingly stable relationship off-kilter, accusing Panama of overcharging U.S. ships for passage and recklessly permitting China too much influence in the canal’s operations.

Looking back, it was an early sign of how America’s relationship with the rest of the world was about to be shaken to its core. Trump’s maximalist threat sent his foreign policy advisers scrambling. Within days of his Inauguration, military planners started work on options for taking the canal by force, according to a former Trump Administration official. “We’re going to take it back, or something very powerful is going to happen,” Trump warned. Ultimately, no military operation was necessary. Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino quickly and quietly agreed to a number of concessions, including re-examining Chinese investment in the country.

Why a U.S. Attack on Iran Would Backfire Trump has threatened strikes in support of anti-regime protesters.

Marc Lynch

Source Link

The chances of American and perhaps Israeli airstrikes on Iran appear to be rising, ostensibly in support of the protests against the regime. U.S. President Donald Trump has been posting increasingly direct threats on social media, and administration officials are leaking copiously about their preparations. Trump appears to be overly impressed by his supposed success in Venezuela and by U.S. airstrikes last year on Iran and has always been contemptuous of experts warning of risks and consequences. Reports from outside the United States indicate that European officials have been consulted about potential targets, and some personnel have reportedly been advised to leave U.S. bases in the Gulf. None of these indicators suggests an attack is a foregone conclusion—Trump might opt for another round of sanctions and cyberattacks—but the signals are worrying.

Why would the United States bomb Iran now? It’s only partly about the protests. Israel has been agitating for another round of military action against Iran’s nuclear program—Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressed the case with Trump during his late December meeting. But the protests, and Iran’s predictably violent repression, offer up an opportunity to act on a long-standing policy demand. Regime change in Iran has been the ultimate goal of American and Israeli hawks for decades. Many people have talked themselves into the idea that the protests have Iran’s regime on the ropes, and that it would take just a little military nudge to push it over the brink.

Sorry, Secretary Hegseth: The US Military Is Still Getting More ‘Diverse’

Peter Suciu

Source Link

Since taking his post nearly a year ago, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has waged a war against everything he viewed as “woke” within the Pentagon, most notably its “DEI” programs. The “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” efforts that began under President Joe Biden were intended to make leadership within the United States Armed Forces more closely reflect the changing dynamics of the United States.

However, try as he might, Hegseth cannot reduce the military’s diversity, as it has been on a course towards increasing diversity since it desegregated in the aftermath of World War II. Ironically, as The Wall Street Journal reported this week, DEI initiatives created the recruitment crisis that the military faced in recent years—but in their absence, the historical norm has returned.

Donald Trump Just Hit Russia Where It Hurts

Brandon J. Weichert

Source Link

For nearly a decade, President Donald Trump’s domestic enemies have spread the word that he is little more than a Russian dupe—who admires Vladimir Putin and seeks to emulate his style of leadership, if not take orders from him directly. These claims have never had much to support them. Yet they continue to circulate, likely because they have a grain of truth at their center. Trump does respect Putin’s strength. He has treated the Russian president as the leader of a great power, rather than a pariah—a state of affairs intolerable to those who would rather imagine Putin on trial at the Hague.

Nevertheless, claims that Trump is “soft” on Putin miss the mark. The 47th president has pursued a very significant strategy of weakening the economic pillar that has been propping up the Russian Federation’s war machine for the last few years, as it moves with brute force into neighboring Ukraine.

The Last Supper Is Over SECWAR's speech at Starbase signals a new era at the Pentagon.

Shyam Sankar

Source Link

2026 has started with a bang: Delta Force’s spectacular snatch-and-grab raid in Venezuela, the ‘1979-in-reverse’ revolution brewing in the streets of Iran, the hunt for sanctioned shadow fleet tankers on the high seas, President Trump’s tough love for the primes, and much more.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s speech at Starbase, Texas earlier this week deserves a place on that list. History will look back on that speech and the reforms it unveiled as an inflection point for the Pentagon in how it acquires new technology and uses autonomy to fight and win wars. Let’s hope we remember this as the moment the long hangover from the Last Supper ended and the table was set for the First Breakfast, with plenty of seats for new entrants, innovators, and heretical heroes. Or as Secretary Hegseth put it, the old era “created a closed innovation ecosystem dominated by just a handful of prime contractors. . . . Today that old era comes to an end.”

The war for oil never really went away

Paul Josephson

Source Link

The decision of the Trump administration to attack Venezuela, capture its president, Nicolas Maduro, and his wife, and spirit them out of the country for prosecution, killing at least 100 people in the process, is all about oil. The US president has openly stated that his goal was to place Venezuela’s oil under US control, apparently so that US-based oil companies will re-enter the country, rebuild infrastructure at the cost of tens of billions of dollars, and start pumping oil. A messy, if familiar, mix of factors continues to drive global affairs. Oil and the battle for its control are fundamental features of world politics. For decades, European leaders operated under a faulty strategic assumption that fossil fuel supplies – especially Russian gas and oil – were stable, cheap, and politically manageable. That logic collapsed the moment Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The European capitals should have known better. Fossil fuels have been the objects of war and the lubricant of aggressive foreign policies since the turn of the 20th century.

With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, European powers and the US established oil fiefdoms in the Middle East and in South America. Oil was crucial to industry at home. British conquest and control in the Middle East and on the high seas was directly connected to oil. Algerian natural gas was essential to French strategies of colonialism. Oil triggered development of Venezuela’s Orinoco Belt during the First World War. US foreign policy has long been dedicated to keeping oil from the Middle East flowing into tankers bound for the US and Europe – at a cost of trillions of dollars. And oil and gas have financed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – just as natural and mineral resources have supported Russian empire building since the 18th century.

America’s techno-imperial moment

Christian Ruth

Source Link

While Christmas and New Year celebrations took place, fleets of American stealth drones flew over Caracas, Venezuela. Largely invisible to the naked eye and radar systems, these eyes in the sky were gathering intelligence on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s routines, the defences of his compounds, and the layout of his possible escape routes. They were flying over Caracas late at night on 3 January, when American special operations forces captured Maduro.

The US Air Force deployed at least one of its highly secretive RQ-170 stealth drones over Caracas, and an unknown number of other intelligence gathering drones that provided them with real-time surveillance for special operations forces. Roughly 150 aircraft launched from 20 American military bases across the Western Hemisphere, over a dozen ships, and thousands of American military personnel were involved – directly or indirectly – in Operation Absolute Resolve.

AI-Enabled Wargaming at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College: Its Implications for PME and Operational Planning

Timothy J. Williams, Anthony A. Joyce, Seth Lavenski, Jody Colton, Regina Ebell, Tyree Meadows

Source Link

Wargaming remains a cornerstone of military planning, enabling commanders to test courses of action (COAs), anticipate adversary responses, and refine operational designs under compressed timelines. As articulated in Joint Publication (JP) 5-0, Joint Planning, wargaming synchronizes warfighting functions through action-reaction-counteraction cycles, exposing vulnerabilities and optimizing resource allocation. Yet, traditional analog methods—reliant on manual adjudication and static maps—constrain iteration and depth, particularly in multi-domain scenarios against peer threats. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) offers a transformative solution. Hybrid pipelined ontological-augmented generation (OAG) with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) models, such as those integrated into the Army’s Vantage platform, can adjudicate outcomes probabilistically while adhering to doctrinal constraints, accelerating decision cycles without sacrificing rigor.

Recent U.S. military experiments underscore this potential. The Air Force’s Decision Advantage Sprints exercises have employed AI to simulate human-machine teaming in wargames, reducing adjudication time from hours to minutes. Similarly, the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory’s (JH APL) GenWar initiative uses large language models (LLMs) to automate scenario generation and replay, addressing the labor-intensive nature of traditional exercises. At the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College (CGSC), where faculty have led the Army’s integration of AI into military education, similar innovations culminated in a wargame exercise in November of 2025 where AI not only amplified throughput but also fostered deeper doctrinal application among novice planners. This paper analyzes the CGSC event’s execution, outcomes, and enabling factors, drawing parallels to broader Army and Joint Force initiatives. It concludes with recommendations for scaling AI integration, emphasizing the ethical and operational imperatives in an era of accelerating great-power competition.

How 2026 Could Decide the Future of Artificial Intelligence

Chris McGuire

Source Link

Artificial intelligence (AI) is entering a decisive phase—one defined less by speculative breakthroughs than by the hard realities of governance, adoption, and strategic competition. As AI systems move from experimentation to widespread deployment, policymakers face mounting pressure to translate abstract principles into enforceable rules, while managing the economic and security consequences of uneven adoption across countries and sectors. For the United States and its partners, the challenge is no longer whether AI will reshape society but how and under whose rules.

In this collection of perspectives, six Council on Foreign Relations tech fellows examine the forces that will shape AI’s trajectory in 2026. Together, they explore the frictions between regulation and innovation, the quiet but consequential spread of AI across civilian and military institutions, and the intensifying geopolitical contest—particularly with China—over standards, markets, and strategic advantage. Their analyses underscore a common theme: Decisions made in the coming year will help determine where responsibility, power, and opportunity ultimately concentrate in the AI era.

The Year AI Hype Becomes a Reality

Winning the AI Arms Race Against the Chinese Communist Party

Matt Pottinger

Source Link

Chairman Mast, Ranking Member Meeks, and other distinguished members of the committee, I’m privileged to have the opportunity to testify today. In the next handful of minutes, I’d like to dispel a few myths that have begun to mislead U.S. policymakers toward a losing path in our competition with China on artificial intelligence (AI).

But first, a word about what’s at stake.

Imagine, if you will, that the question before you today were whether the United States should sell China our advanced propulsion systems that make our nuclear submarines quiet and stealthy. Or imagine that we were debating whether to sell China a prototype of our F-47 next generation fighter for them to reverse engineer. Or whether we should assist the Chinese military’s biological warfare program. Or help Beijing map out the best way to paralyze our power grids through cyberattacks.

I replaced every Microsoft app on Windows with open-source tools, and here's how it went

Parth Shah

Source Link

Windows desktop has always felt like a curated showroom for Microsoft’s latest services. After all, the company’s defaults are baked into every corner of the OS. But what happens when you strip away Edge, Outlook, OneDrive, and more to make room for a purely open-source workflow?

For the last month, I have replaced every stock Microsoft app with a FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) alternative to see if a privacy-focused, community-driven desktop is actually viable in 2026. Here is the good, the bad, and the broken of my open-source Windows experiment.

Revolution in Iran : Now and Then

Lawrence Freedman

Source Link

On 16 January 1979, exactly 47 years ago, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Iran, left his country, never to return. His departure had been urged by the man left in charge of the government, Shapour Bakhtiar, a moderate opposition politician, who was hoping to stabilise the country with serious reforms. 

It was all too late, insufficient to dampen the revolutionary fervour that had overtaken the country. At the start of February the Ayatollah Khomeini, the 78-year-old cleric who had become the acknowledged leader of the revolution, flew into Teheran from Paris and took control. The next month the Iranian people were asked to decide whether they wanted to live in a monarchy or an Islamic republic. They overwhelmingly chose the latter.

A New Rift in the Gulf, and Only the Gulf Can Solve It

Michael Ratney

Source Link

For two countries now at each other’s throats, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have an awful lot in common. They share the ambition and resources to remake the Middle East as an engine of economic opportunity and to serve as global hubs for artificial intelligence, shipping and aviation, tourism, finance, and much more. 

They both long to turn the page on the region’s history of extremism and instability, and focus instead on commerce, social development, and economic diversification. They are both working to wean their economies away from dependence on oil, investing in renewable energy and their own human capital. They both want a strong security partnership with the United States to help defend against their ultimate threats, namely Iran and jihadi terrorists including al Qaida and ISIS. And they both think Israel should ultimately be an integral part of their region, even while their timelines and conditions for advancing that relationship differ sharply.

Iran protests abate after deadly crackdown, Trump says Tehran calls off mass hangings

Parisa Hafezi and Nayera Abdallah

Source Link

"I greatly respect the fact that all scheduled hangings, which were to take place yesterday (Over 800 of them), have been cancelled by the leadership of Iran. Thank you!" he posted on social media. Iran has not publicly announced plans for such executions or said it had cancelled them.

The protests erupted on December 28 over economic hardship and swelled into widespread demonstrations calling for the end of clerical rule, culminating in mass violence at the end of last week. According to opposition groups and an Iranian official, more than 2,000 people were killed in the worst domestic unrest since Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Iran and the Limits of American Power

Andrew P. Miller

Source Link

Over two weeks into wide-scale protests against the Islamic Republic regime in Iran, the death toll and number of arrests are rapidly mounting. Iranian human rights organizations place the number of dead at 2,500, while other sources suggest it may exceed 10,000. Needless to say, the Iranian people have displayed remarkable bravery in challenging an authoritarian government that still retains immense repressive power. And by emboldening Iranians to turn out by repeatedly raising the prospect of U.S. military intervention to defend Iranian demonstrators, U.S. President Donald Trump is implicated as well in the outcome of the protests.

There are, however, major question marks regarding the potential efficacy of U.S. military action in protecting demonstrators. Unfortunately, one of the few judgments that can be made with some confidence is that foreign military intervention is unlikely to produce a consolidated democracy of any kind, let alone one favorable to the interests of the intervening power. If, as should be the case, the U.S. objective is to support the Iranian people in transitioning to democratic governance, success may hinge on what Trump chooses not to do. Although the United States can and should help, how it does so will determine whether its influence proves beneficial or detrimental to the Iranian people—in whose hands Iran’s fate ultimately must lie.

PODCAST: Rob Thelen on the US Army IWar Initiative

Rob Thelen 

Source Link

“The Cognitive Crucible is a forum that presents different perspectives and emerging thought leadership related to the information environment. The opinions expressed by guests are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of or endorsement by the Information Professionals Association.

During this episode, COL Rob Thelan discusses the US Army’s Information Warfare (IWAR) Branch. IWAR aims to integrate the IO (Information Operations) and PSYOP (Psychological Operations) communities into a unified, conventional force branch. Other topics include: U.S. lagging behind adversaries like China and Russia in IO funding and the need to break down “stovepiping” within the U.S. information operations community; the State Department’s Global Engagement Center and filling the void with respect to mis/dis-information; and military public affairs evolution.”

Iran’s protests: the regional and international responses

Sascha Bruchmann and Martin ‘Sammy’ Sampson

Source Link

The prospect of a deal between the United States and Iran, if the regime survives, hinges on several factors. The US course of action in the coming days or weeks, notably whether it embarks on military intervention or favours diplomatic engagement instead, may be decisive in determining Iran’s appetite for negotiations with Washington. Despite a lacklustre response to US strikes on its nuclear facilities in June 2025, Iran has held on to its refusal to negotiate with Washington over its conventional capabilities. 

Given the failure of its air defences during the Twelve-Day War with Israel and the decimation of its network of armed non-state actors in Lebanon and Gaza, missiles are the last remaining pillar of Iran’s deterrence strategy. As a result, Iran has embarked on a sustained effort to reconstitute its missile forces and production infrastructure following the damage they sustained during the war with Israel.

The Costs and Global Trade-Offs of U.S. Military Action Against Venezuela

Mark F. Cancian and Chris H. Park

Source Link

As the U.S. force surge into the Caribbean continues into its sixth month, the question arises: How much does this campaign cost? A rough answer is $31 million per day. Of this, $28 million was already in the budget, but about $3 million is unbudgeted. The Department of Defense (DOD) will need to cover this by cutting other programs, using money from the reconciliation bill, or persuading the White House to ask Congress for more money. The major cost is the strategic trade-off: Forces in the Caribbean limit assets available for other hotspots, such as the Middle East or the Indo-Pacific. That is, however, a trade-off the administration has said it is willing to make.

The Fiscal Costs

The FY 2026 budget includes funds to operate the ships and aircraft deployed to the Caribbean and to pay the service members who operate them. The table below shows the authors’ estimate for those forces fully engaged in operations. Beyond these, many forces and capabilities have been used intermittently, like bombers, satellites, and cyber.

An “America First” Tech Stack Cannot Be America Alone

Stephan Lang

Source Link

In the coming weeks, the Trump administration will send important signals on the future of international collaboration in building trusted information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure around the world. With the December 13 deadline for comments on the Commerce Department’s request for information on the administration’s American AI Exports Program now passed, it will soon be time to announce how the federal government will structure the program to promote a U.S. AI stack. In that announcement, it will be critical to show that the United States is committed to working across the entire tech stack with like-minded partners and allies, bringing real resources to promote a shared approach to technology that strengthens democracy and supports basic human rights.

Europe Threatens War over Greenland—Then Buys More Missiles from America

Brandon J. Weichert

Source Link

French Army General Nicolas Richoux wants the United States to know that if it dares to take Greenland, then the French—and Europeans—“must fight the Americans.” He’s not the only senior European military or political figure who has been advocating hostility toward the United States—a strange prospect, given that the United States is the key backer of all European security.

Europe Just Can’t Take on America in a Fight

Indeed, prominent Europeans have been making empty threats at the Americans for weeks, as fears grow that the United States is readying to annex Greenland irrespective of what the government of Denmark wants. Should that happen, European states believe that it would basically end NATO—which, incidentally, is an outcome that Trump would hardly mind. Of course, many have been asking how much of Brussels’ chest-thumping and caterwauling about the neo-imperialism of the United States is just for show. After all, the Europeans collectively lack an impressive military.

What Just Happened in Venezuela? And What Comes Next?

Source Link

On January 3, the United States carried out an operation that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores. Maduro and Flores were brought to the United States to stand trial on drug trafficking charges. In a subsequent press conference, President Trump declared that the United States would take charge of Venezuela, expecting that the de facto vice president of the country, Delcy Rodriguez, would work with the United States. 

However, many questions remain unanswered. What is the future of Venezuela? Is there a chance for a transition to democracy? Will the United States be able to work with a protégé of Maduro to help govern Venezuela? And what does political instability mean for the Venezuelan oil sector and global energy security? Join CSIS experts as they address these questions and more.