24 February 2016

India, Pakistan & The Great American Game

FEBRUARY 22, 2016

Some shift the focus on Pakistan's ability to manipulate a "misguided" Washington. Such views are common but betray a naiveté.

The White House decision to approve the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan has once again sparked an interest on the nature of America's role in the subcontinent. While Indian observers have unanimously expressed their discontent, there is no serious attempt to deconstruct US policy. The reaction is a combination of frustration and irritation softened by a confidence that India is strong enough to take these recurring set backs in its stride. Some shift the focus on Pakistan's ability to manipulate a "misguided" Washington. Such views are common but betray a naiveté. The dearth of serious historical studies on US's South Asia policies remains curiously stark considering India's entire military machine including its nuclear weapons complex has been erected to deal with the consequences of US involvement in subcontinental geopolitics.

Reporting on Life, Death and Corruption in Southeast Asia

By THOMAS FULLER

FEB. 21, 2016

BANGKOK — The protesters built what looked like medieval ramparts topped with sharpened wooden stakes in the heart of Bangkok. The military was preparing to sweep them out.

As the sun was setting, I spotted Maj. Gen. Khattiya Sawatdiphol, a renegade who had defected to the protesters, and asked him what he would do next.

His “people’s army” would not back down, he said. “The military cannot get in here.”

Then came a loud crack, the sound of a sniper’s bullet breaking the sound barrier. General Khattiya collapsed at my feet.

One blink earlier he was answering my questions. Now he was slumped on the ground, his vacant eyes still open, as blood spilled onto his camouflage uniform. The world around me went into slow motion as I watched the general being dragged away by his supporters.

WikiLeaks Claims NSA Spied On Ban Ki-Moon, Other World Leaders For US Oil Companies

FEBRUARY 23, 2016

Wikileaks published a new trove of top secret documents revealing that the NSA spied on the private meetings of major world leaders, including UN chief Ban Ki-Moon, German chancellor Merkel, as well as the prime ministers of Italy and Israel.

The National Security Agency (NSA) listened in on high-level meetings on climate change, global economics, and even “how to deal with [US President Barack] Obama,” according to the new documents released by WikiLeaks.

One of the revelations was that the NSA bugged a private meeting between UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in which they discussed how to tackle climate change. The goal of the snooping, according to WikiLeaks’s press release, was to protect American oil interests.

“Today we showed that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s private meetings over how to save the planet from climate change were bugged by a country intent on protecting its largest oil companies,” said WikiLeaks founder and editor Julian Assange.

Assange added that the UN will most likely react to these leaks.

New Capability And Reach Of China’s Navy: Strategic And Tactical Implications In South China Sea And Indian Ocean Region – Analysis

By Commodore RS Vasan IN Retd*
FEBRUARY 23, 2016

The PLA-Navy continues to be in the news as China is determined to add to its growing maritime capability to build a blue water navy of form and substance. The addition of a new assets to the PLA on a regular basis provides a power projection capability not just within the confines of the South China Sea where it has territorial claims contested by other littorals in the region., but also in the in the Indian Ocean. The recent assertive maneuvers by the US Navy in consonance with the Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) has not been a source of comfort for China. Likewise, the efforts of Philippines to internationalise the South China Dispute by taking the case to ICJ has not endeared it to China which did not want any embarrassment.

China on its part in a process to consolidate its position , has engaged in assiduously reinforcing its claims over reefs and Islands with in the nine dash line by building artificial Islands by enormous dredging around the disputed rocks/reefs to reinforce its territorial claims. There is no surprise that these Islands today have Runways, military garrisons, communication networks and other support infrastructure to help China to mount a credible C4ISR structure using the developed Islands which will act as links and hubs. This will also extend the reach of the PLA Navy and Air force elements. It is only a matter of time before these Islands are converted in to full-fledged forward posts in South China Sea. The fact that it also declared Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) some three years ago in certain areas which were contested has only complicated the air situation and safety aspects.
Acquisition of Amphibious Vessels

SAVING OURSELVES FROM WATER TORTURE IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA

FEBRUARY 23, 2016

Recent revelations demonstrate that U.S. efforts to prevent “reclamation, construction, and militarization” in the South China Sea have failed. The United States may “fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows,” but doing so will not deter China from altering the status quo. The current administration appears unwilling to accept the degree of risk required to deter Chinese revisionism, so U.S. leaders must now decide whether to acknowledge the new status quo or maintain the increasingly untenable line that returning to the status quo ante is possible.

Beijing’s South China Sea activities continue to make headlines, but the trend of growing Chinese assertiveness in the region is old news to most observers. Although some experts believe that Beijing will shift course and adopt a more cooperative stance in the South China Sea, most think that absent a change in U.S. strategy, China will continue expanding its maritime operations and capabilities. This assumption is the result of China’s methodical creation of layered anti-access and power projection postures moving southward from the Paracel Islands to the Spratly Islands. For example, in just the last few months, imagery has shown surface-to-air missiles in the Paracels and airfield construction in both the Paracels and Spratlys.

US-China Relations: In the Shadow of Conspiracy Theories

February 22, 2016

It is beyond any doubt that the established policy of the United States since the beginning of this century has been to treat China as its biggest imagined enemy, sparing no effort to disintegrate China so as to make it another former Soviet Union. Planning and implementing this war have enlisted the best and brightest from the Wall Street, the White House, the Pentagon, and hundreds of foundations. This project—unparalleled in human history—is a super strategy that aims to encircle China from five fronts, namely, military, diplomatic, political, economic, and cultural.

This is a paragraph from a lengthy online article sensationally entitled “The Campaign to Defend China: The Ultimate Battle in Human History Is Unfolding!” (“中国保卫战—人类历史的终极对决即将上演!”) The article came out a week ago and immediately went viral on WeChat, the most popular Chinese social media.

The nuclear crisis in the Korean peninsula, according to the author, is merely “a seamless collusion between the United States and North Korea.” The author continues: “The United States needs the existence of North Korea, because this troublemaker provides excuses for encircling China; if North Korea is eliminated, then South Korea will unify the Korean peninsula, and China will be the biggest beneficiary.”

Meet the Chinese Air Force's New Drone-Tracking Unit

February 23, 2016

China’s Air Force has created a new unit dedicated solely to tracking and responding to drones, according to China Daily. In a press release, the PLA Air Force said the unit would focus on “small, slow-moving drones flying at an altitude of less than 1,000 meters,”China Daily reported.

The language in the report makes it seem as though military drones are the main target. The article mentions that the new unit has been practicing drills against drones used in “reconnaissance, infiltration, or strike operations.” It also notes that small drones, which are difficult to detect via radar, “can pose a substantial threat to key positions.” However, the specific focus on low-altitude, low-speed drones makes it more likely that the PLAAF unit will spend most of its time engaging with drones being operated by China’s own citizens.

The unveiling of the news unit comes as China mulls how best to control drone use by civilians, in the wake of several potentially dangerous incidents. In November 2015, a drone was discovered flying near a military airfield in Hebei Province without authorization. According to China Military Online, a PLAAF helicopter forced the drone to land and police confiscated it. In another incident, an unauthorized UAV flying near an airport in Zhejiang Province forced the airport to close for nearly an hour. China Military Online, without going into detail, also claimed that other unauthorized drone flights “have disturbed military flight training.” All of the drones involved in those cases were civilian: the UAVs in question “were owned by private companies, aviation enthusiasts as well as a few airlines,” CMO reports.

The Right Way to Sanction China

February 23, 2016
OVER THE LAST five years, the United States has struggled to influence Chinese behavior. Washington’s responses to Beijing’s increasingly assertive activities—ranging from economic espionage to artificial island construction—have been largely ineffective. Yet U.S. leaders are now considering a new option: economic sanctions. Conventional wisdom holds that the U.S.-Chinese economic relationship is “too big to fail” and that Washington therefore has little economic leverage with Beijing. Indeed, U.S. policymakers should be realistic that extensive sanctions against China would be unwise and infeasible. Nevertheless, certain limited, conduct-based sanctions may be able to shape Chinese behavior at an acceptable cost.

The surprising aspect of the debate in Washington over whether to sanction China is that it took so long to emerge; within the last decade, the United States has sanctioned every one of its major national-security concerns other than China. Iran, Russia, North Korea and terrorist groups have found themselves facing not only U.S. unilateral sanctions, but extensive international sanctions regimes. Acknowledging the need for more effective policy options, President Barack Obama issued an executive order providing the Treasury Department authority to sanction state and nonstate actors—including Chinese entities—engaging in malicious cyber activity. Last year, the administration threatened to impose sanctions on a number of Chinese persons in the lead up to President Xi’s state visit. Likewise, various presidential candidates have suggested that the United States impose sanctions against Chinese agencies or businesses involved in cyber attacks against economic targets.

"The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers in the Twenty-First Century: China’s Rise and the Fate of America’s Global Position"

A Chinese man holds a national flag during a protest outside the Japanese embassy in Beijing, Wednesday, August 15, 2012.

Journal Article, International Security, volume 40, issue 3, page 7–53

Winter 2015/16

Authors: Stephen Brooks, Former Fellow, International Security Program, 2003-2004, William Wohlforth, Editorial Board Member, Quarterly Journal: International Security

Belfer Center Programs or Projects: Quarterly Journal: International Security

Fears that China will soon displace the United States as the international system’s superpower are unwarranted. Unlike previous rising powers challenging leading states, China’s technological and military capabilities are much lower relative to those of the United States. Further, converting economic power into military might is far more difficult than it was in the past. Scholars and analysts need to go beyond the concepts of unipolarity and bipolarity and engage in fine-grained analysis of the distribution of power.

Sudden retreats don’t mean that ISIL is defeated

February 21, 2016

On Friday, Hasaka became the second Syrian province to be fully liberated from ISIL in two years, after Idlib around this time in 2014. According to local reports, the group’s withdrawal from its last stronghold in Hasaka was “swift and surprising”. This sudden defeat, which follows similar ones in recent months, raises questions about the group’s current capabilities.

ISIL’s loss of Shaddadi, its last outpost in Hasaka, is significant and symbolic. This was the town from where, in 2014, the group planned much of its effort to take or secure its control of Syrian territory. Jabhat Al Nusra, Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, crumbled there after most of its fighters switched sides when Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi announced the formation of ISIL. The city was the planning centre for ISIL, and there were rumours that Mr Al Baghdadi had visited it a few times.

The defeat is also operationally remarkable. The group has now lost control over oilfields – about 200 small oil wells and major oilfields such as Jibisa and Kabibah – and critical areas that could potentially weaken its defences in Deir Ezzor, Raqqa and even Mosul.

NEITHER REMAINING NOR EXPANDING: THE ISLAMIC STATE’S GLOBAL EXPANSION STRUGGLES

FEBRUARY 23, 2016

Judging from the Islamic State’s propaganda, it would appear the group is rapidly overtaking the Muslim world. The Islamic State has declared wilayats (provinces) in ten countries spanning from Nigeria to the Caucasus region. It has executed high-profile attacks in several otherwise stable countries, including Tunisia, Turkey, Kuwait, France, and the United States. The group has championed its victories and downplayed its defeats at every turn, portraying itself as a military behemoth destined to restore the caliphate to its former glory. In short, the Islamic State would like the world — and especially prospective recruits — to believe it is “remaining and expanding” (baqiya wa tatamaddad), a slogan that defines the group’s propaganda.

Yet in reality, between state security forces and rival jihadist groups, the Islamic State has encountered one serious obstacle after another as it has tried to expand its presence beyond Syria and Iraq. Several of its nascent affiliates met decisive defeat. In some places, the Islamic State has been its own worst enemy, as personality clashes and disagreements over strategy created deep cleavages.

U.S. Scrambling to Contain Growing ISIS Threat in Libya

Eric Schmitt
February 22, 2016

U.S. Scrambles to Contain Growing ISIS Threat in Libya

THIES, Senegal — The Islamic State’s branch in Libya is deepening its reach across a wide area of Africa, attracting new recruits from countries like Senegal that had been largely immune to the jihadist propaganda — and forcing the African authorities and their Western allies to increase efforts to combat the fast-moving threat.

The American airstrikes in northwestern Libya on Friday, which demolished an Islamic State training camp and were aimed at a top Tunisian operative, underscore the problem, Western officials said. The more than three dozen suspected Islamic State fighters killed in the bombing were recruited from Tunisia and other African countries, officials said, and were believed to be rehearsing an attack against Western targets. 

Even as American intelligence agencies say the number of Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria has dropped to about 25,000 from a high of about 31,500, partly because of the United States-led air campaign there, the group’s ranks in Libya have roughly doubled in the same period, to about 6,500 fighters. More than a dozen American and allied officials spoke of their growing concern about the militant organization’s expanding reach from Libya and across Africa on rules of anonymity because the discussions involved intelligence and military planning.Photo
During training supervised by the United States military, Senegalese commandos practiced evacuating a wounded comrade. Credit Sergey Ponomarev for The New York Times

Assessing ISIS’s Emergence as a Prime Threat in SAARC Countries

By Ramtanu Maitra
22 Feb , 2016

In recent days, the South Asian news media has been inundated with reports suggesting that terrorists aligned with the socalled Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) are emerging in some member nations of the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC). India’s home minister Rajnath Singh went on record warning the Indian population that ISIS-led attacks cannot be ruled out in India in the future. Projecting a serious ISIS threat, one Indian analyst wrote: ‘Literature seized from the terrorists in West Bengal indicate that they were plotting to create an ISIS-like caliphate in parts of Bangladesh and then use this base to destabilize the whole of India’s northeast, especially parts of West Bengal and Assam where the demography has moved against the local populations.’1

From Bangladesh, a number of analysts have written about the growing ISIS presence among the known terrorists. An article published ahead of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Dhaka last June suggested the existence of a link between Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JuM-B), a banned yet functioning terrorist group that is aided and partially funded from abroad, and ISIS. The article also claimed that there was growing concern about this development within the intelligence agencies in India and stated that the JuM-B and ISIS together would like (emphasis added) to establish a Bangladeshi caliphate.2

Isis: Israel is the only country terrorist group fears, says first Western journalist to survive 'Islamic State'



Jürgen Todenhöfer, who spent 10 days with the group in Mosul last year, said fighters were not intimidated by the US or UK 

Israeli Merkava tanks drive near the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip as they return from the Hamas-controlled Palestinian coastal enclave on August 5, 2014, AFP/Getty Images

Israel is the only country in the world that Isis fears, according to the first Western journalist to enter the group’s territories and survive.

Jürgen Todenhöfer spent 10 days in the so-called Islamic State last year, publishing his findings in a book.

In an interview with the Jewish News, the German reporter said Israel is not included in Isis’ planned “first stage” of colonisation in the Middle East.

Saudi Foreign Minister: 'I Don't Think World War III Is Going To Happen in Syria'


In an interview, Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir expresses his continued support for regime change in Syria and his desire for rebels to be supplied with anti-aircraft missiles that could shift the balance of power in the war.

The wait for the interview with the minister takes six hours, but then he greets the journalists in a large conference room in a grand hotel in Munich. Adel al-Jubeir, 54, a slim, amiable man, wears a traditional robe and looks a bit fatigued. He and his counterparts spent the previous evening negotiating a cease-fire in Syria well into the night. And since early this morning, they have been busily discussing current global events. Al-Jubeir is the embodiment of a new breed of top Saudi Arabian leaders: He went to school in Germany and college in the United States and then served as the Saudi ambassador to Washington. In contrast to his longtime predecessor Prince Saud al-Faisal, who served as the country's top diplomat for decades stretching from the oil crisis in the 1970s until early 2015, al-Jubeir is not a member of the royal family. At the time of his appointment as foreign minister last April, Saudi Arabia had just gone to war with neighboring Yemen and the situation in Syria was escalating. Al-Jubeir is now responsible for representing his country's controversial foreign policy. And he allowed himself plenty of time to do so in this interview with SPIEGEL. When his staff sought to end the interview after 45 minutes because he had a speech to give at the Munich Security Conference, al-Jubeir suggested we continue the discussion in his limousine -- both on the way to his talk and back to the hotel afterward.

SPIEGEL: Mr. al-Jubeir, have you ever seen the Middle East in worse shape than it is in today?Al-Jubeir: The Middle East has gone through periods of turmoil before. In the 1950s and 1960s, there were revolutions. When monarchies were collapsing in a number of countries, we had radicals and we had Nasserism. Today it's a little bit more complicated.

Remembering 'People Power' in ASEAN

February 23, 2016
http://thediplomat.com/2016/02/remembering-people-power-in-asean/

In recent years, the “Occupy” movements and “Arab Spring” came to symbolize popular actions for social change across the world. In Southeast Asia, the massive gathering of citizens against an unjust political order is more widely known as an expression and legacy of “People Power.”

The idea of People Power became a potent political force when it led to the ouster of the late Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos in 1986. Many scholars believe that the Philippine brand of uprising – peaceful and spontaneous assembly of ordinary masses – inspired several democracy movements around the world. This trend also influenced the political tactics of opposition parties and grassroots organizations across the Southeast Asian region.

As we commemorate the 30th anniversary of the fall of dictatorship in the Philippines, it is also timely to review how the discourse of People Power has been appropriated in the region.

In 1988, two years after the successful use of People Power in the Philippines, Burmese students actively mobilized against the junta. The pro-democracy movement was quelled but it didn’t stop the opposition from clinching a victory in the polls two years later. However, the junta prevailed by ignoring the results. In 2007, the Saffron Revolution led by monks seriously challenged the military dictatorship.

The Problem Neither Obama Nor Bush Could Solve

February 23, 2016

THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL campaign is turning into a mirror of the 2008 race. Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton seeks to distinguish herself from the policies of the sitting chief executive, while sundry Republican candidates maintain that Obama’s incompetence has made America less safe and diminished its position in the world. No one seeking to become Barack Obama’s successor is promising to continue his approach in foreign policy, just as, in 2008, no one ran on a platform of adopting the policies of the George W. Bush administration.

As much as Democratic partisans may resent the comparison, President Obama, entering the final stage of his second term, seems to be presiding over a foreign-affairs trajectory similar to the final years of the Bush administration. Obama’s tenure has been defined by a deterioration of the U.S. position in the international order; growing anti-American sentiment as reflected in public-opinion surveys around the globe; an increased willingness of rising and resurgent powers to challenge American presence abroad; and difficulty in assuring friends that Congress will honor the key agreements the President conducts with foreign leaders. These difficulties are fomenting profound unease among the American electorate about its future safety and prosperity. According to Republican foreign-policy practitioners, the Obama administration will leave office in a year’s time stymied by the same obstacles that bedeviled his predecessor’s administration: the inability to understand Russia’s position in a post–Cold War world without alienating American allies and the struggle to set Afghanistan and Iraq on sustainable paths to peace and stability. The challenges in those areas endanger in turn a third U.S. goal—pivoting towards East Asia. Democrats today no longer enjoy any advantage over Republicans in terms of competence in foreign policy or national security. The final quarter of the Obama presidency has eroded any of the gains made by Democrats over the past ten years in that area. This is quite an unexpected reversal of fortune.

The Wall Street Journal’s War on Donald Trump

February 23, 2016

As Donald Trump continues his Shermanesque march through the Republican primaries, the Wall Street Journal continues to fire relentless volleys of cheap shots, pot shots, and the paper’s much hoped for gut shot. Just consider last week’s run-up to what would be Trump’s resounding South Carolina victory.

Just days prior to the vote, the editorial page demanded Trump release his tax returns to call into question the true wealth of the undisputed billionaire. In a front page lead story, reporters also featured a cooked up poll claiming to show Trump falling behind Ted Cruz in a national poll.

This poll result was laughable on its face considering Cruz’s weak South Carolina showing. Cruz lost every single county, including those neck deep in evangelicals.

More broadly, the Journal has waged a relentless war on Trump’s promise to crack down on China’s currency manipulation. It has falsely called into question Trump’s clear understanding of the Trans-Pacific Partnership—which the Journal supports and Trump accurately describes as a horrible deal for American workers and domestic manufacturers.

George Kennan, Containment, and the West's Current Russia Problem

By Matthew Rojansky for NATO Defense College (NDC)

Containment has not been relegated to the dustbin of history, argues Matthew Rojansky. If anything, we’re in an era of “new containment” where the ambitions of a bellicose Russia need to be checked. Before Western leaders go too far, however, they should remember George Kennan’s subtle thoughts on the subject.

This paper was originally published by the NATO Defense College (NDC) on 25 January 2016.

At the core of the Western strategy for managing the Cold War, from the late 1940’s to the 1980’s, was an American-led policy of "containment" of Soviet power and influence. This containment policy, which is generally credited to U.S. diplomat George F. Kennan and his influential writings in the early Cold War period, diagnosed in Soviet foreign policy an expansionist undercurrent, which had the potential to threaten the foundations of economic prosperity and political stability on which vital Western interests depended. Accordingly, Kennan advised "a long­ term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies," not only in Europe, but globally.[1]

How Putin Is Surviving Lost Oil Revenue

FEB 22, 2016

In assessing Russian President Vladimir Putin's ability to stay in power and defy the West, one crucial question is how much longer his government's finances can stand extremely low oil prices. Judging from an analysis by economists at Deutsche Bank, he might be able to hold out longer than previously thought.

Russia is peculiarly sensitive to energy prices, in part because taxes from oil and gas comprise about half the country's budget revenues. Hence, after oil prices started plunging in 2014, some economists worried -- despite a rainy-day fund worth nearly $90 billion -- that the government could run out of money and be forced into severe austerity by the end of this year.

Since then, much has changed. A sharp drop in the exchange rate of the ruble has boosted the local-currency value of energy revenues. And Putin so far has managed to restrain spending without much effect on his popularity rating. As a result, Deutsche Bank economists estimate that the oil price required to balance the budget this year is about $66 a barrel, down from more than $103 in 2014. Here's how that looks:

What Will We Do If We Start Capturing Terrorists Instead of Killing Them Outright?

February 22, 2016

What to do if US begins capturing more suspected terrorists?

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama has refused to send any suspected terrorists captured overseas to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. But if the U.S. starts seizing more militants in expanded military operations, where will they go, who will hold them and where will they be tried?

Those are questions that worry legal experts, lawmakers and others as U.S. special operations forces deploy in larger numbers to Iraq, Syria and, maybe soon, Libya, with the Islamic State group and affiliated organizations in their sights.

Throughout Obama’s presidency, suspects have been killed in drone strikes or raids, or captured and interrogated, sometimes aboard Navy ships. After that, they are either prosecuted in U.S. courts and military commissions or handed over to other nations.

This policy has been enough, experts say — at least for now.

“If you’re going to be doing counterterrorism operations that bring in detainees, you have to think through what you are going to do with them,” said Phillip Carter, former deputy assistant defense secretary for detainee policy. “If the U.S. is going to conduct large-scale combat operations or large-scale special ops and bring in more detainees, it needs a different solution.”

Former CIA Director Mike Hayden’s Defense of Drone Strikes

Micah Zenko
February 21, 2016

Evaluating Michael Hayden’s Defense of CIA Drone Strikes

An MQ-9 Reaper takes off on Kandahar Airfield in Afghanistan on December 5, 2015. 

Former director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Gen. Michael Hayden has an op-ed in today’s New York Times: “To Keep America Safe, Embrace Drone Warfare.” The two-thousand-word piece provides some unique insights into the process by which CIA directors authorize—including over the phone—individual drone strikes and even order the specific munition to be used. Moreover, Hayden provides a more plausible and granular defense than those offered by other former CIA chiefs, including George Tenet, Leon Panetta, and Michael Morrell. He even makes some effort to engage directly with certain prominent criticisms of these lethal operations.

It should be acknowledged that it is difficult to evaluate Hayden’s op-ed, because he refers to intelligence reports that the American public will never see. Moreover, it is impossible to know whether everything Hayden wanted to reveal is included in the published Times piece, since the content of the op-ed must have been approved by the CIA Publications Review Board, whether as a stand-alone piece or an excerpt from his forthcoming book. Nevertheless, there are a few troubling aspects to the op-ed, which are consistent with all U.S. government officials’ arguments in support of drone strikes: how the program is framed and what complicating bits of information that are left out.

The Influence of the Movie “War Games” On Today’s Cyberwar Policy

Fred Kaplan
February 21, 2016

‘WarGames’ and Cybersecurity’s Debt to a Hollywood Hack

From left, Dabney Coleman, Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy in “WarGames” (1983). The film led to the nation’s first directive about computer security. CreditMGM

Movies rarely influence public policy, but Washington’s policies on cyberattacks, computer surveillance and the possibility of cyberwarfare were directly influenced by the 1983 box-office hit “WarGames.”

The film — starring Matthew Broderick as a tech-whiz teenager who unwittingly hacks into the computer of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and nearly sets off World War III — opened nationwide that June 3. The next night, President Ronald Reagan watched it at Camp David. And that is where this strange story — culled from interviews with participants and Reagan Library documents — begins.

The following Wednesday, back in the White House, Reagan met with his national-security advisers and 16 members of Congress to discuss forthcoming nuclear arms talks with the Russians. But he still seemed focused on the movie.

High-energy laser weapons target UAVs

Michael Peck

Every weapon has its nemesis. The invention of the tank led to anti-tank guns; the rise of aircraft led to anti-aircraft guns; and now the growing use of military unmanned aircraft is spurring the development of multiple types of countermeasures, including lasers, guns and jammers.

Lasers are the most exotic of anti-unmanned aerial vehicle weapons, and the U.S. has several directed energy weapons projects underway. The Army’s Space and Missile Defense/Army Strategic Forces Technical Center in Huntsville, Alabama, the lead Army agency for developing high-energy laser weapons, is working on three systems with anti-UAV capabilities.

The High Energy Mobile Laser Test Truck, or HELMTT, aims to demonstrate a vehicle-mounted 10-kilowatt laser rugged and practical enough to use on the battlefield. The project was originally the High Energy Laser Mobile Demonstrator (HEL MD), until the Army opted to mount a smaller laser on a Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck. HEL MD managed to shoot down a 22 to 55 pound Class 2 UAV during a 2014 test at the High Energy Laser Systems Test Facility at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. The Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command plans to eventually develop a 100-kilowatt weapon.

The United States needs a new Long Telegram. But from where?

February 22, 2016

George F. Kennan arrived in Kyoto, Japan, and was greeted by Maj. Gen. Joseph M. Swing, Commanding General I Corps, Kyoto and Brig. Gen. Eugene L. Harrison on March 6, 1948. 

Today marks the 70th anniversary of diplomat George F. Kennan’s Long Telegram, a missive he sent from his post in Moscow to explain Soviet intentions to a perplexed and confused State Department in the postwar era. That telegram — which eventually was converted into Kennan’s “Sources of Soviet Conduct” essay in Foreign Affairs — had a dramatic effect on how U.S. policy principals thought about American foreign policy toward the Soviet Union.

Which raises an interesting question: From where in the world right now could the United States use another Long Telegram?

The first thing to understand about the Long Telegram is the role that luck and technology played in its impact. As John Lewis Gaddis chronicles in “George F. Kennan: An American Life,” Kennan had grown increasingly frustrated in Moscow. Six months before drafting the Long Telegram, he had submitted his resignation because he felt his warnings were being ignored (though Kennan is regarded now as the wisest of the Wise Man, he was also a diva of the first order).

WHY WE STILL NEED THE DRAFT

FEBRUARY 23, 2016

The recent political fracas over women and the draft is making headlines around the country and has become acampaign issue in the Republican presidential primaries. But this debate raises even more profound questions about the need for — and value of — the draft more broadly. Put simply, Selective Service is the only remaining thread in American society that ties all U.S. citizens to their military. It links the American people to the nation’s wars, and the risks of military service in those wars, through the fundamental responsibility of defending the country when needed. It also continues to serve an often-overlooked but nevertheless important role in protecting American security.

Many Americans are questioning whether the draft remains relevant in the 21st century. Today’s U.S. military is widely considered the most advanced, the most powerful, the best-led, and the most capable military in the world. The all-volunteer force has proved both successful and resilient since it was established in 1973, to include the harshest test thus far of its capabilities — the last 15 years of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Despite the stresses of repeated deployments to highly demanding combat environments, it remained largely well disciplined and effective. Some members of Congress believe that this remarkable performance means that the United States should abolish the draft. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), who recently co-sponsored a bill that would do exactly that, explained his position by saying that the “all-volunteer military has given us the most elite fighting force in the history of the country.”

23 February 2016

** Stop Writing Pakistan Blank Checks

FEBRUARY 18, 2016 

Billions of taxpayer dollars spent on development assistance have propped up the most repressive elements in Pakistani society. So it's time to alter the deal. 

On Feb. 10, the Wall Street Journal reported that Sen. Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, plans to block the Barack Obama administration from financing the sale of up to eight F-16 fighter aircraft to Pakistan. In a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, Corker observed that the U.S. relationship with Pakistan is “complicated and imperfect,” and that although cooperation has achieved “some of our interests,” Pakistan remains a “duplicitous partner, moving sideways rather than forward in resolving regional challenges.” Corker was particularly angered by Pakistan’s persistent support to the Haqqani faction of the Afghan Taliban.

Corker’s decision is no mere lonely move by a maverick legislator. It is a bellwether of widespread and growing frustration with Pakistan on Capitol Hill. The time has come to mend, if not end, U.S. assistance to Pakistan.

Pak-China Script in University

By RSN Singh
22 Feb , 2016

The recent anti-national sloganeering in JNU campus has shaken the collective conscience of India. This anti-national fulmination by the students of the JNU had vicious pro-Pakistan overtones in context of Kashmir. The centrality of Kashmir drove the students to the extent of wishing ‘breaking India’ into nine pieces. It may be reiterated that these students are subsidized hugely by the Indian taxpayer.

Most of these activists are on the payroll of NGOs and agencies of inimical countries. Many of the activists in JNU are no exception.

This author, asked one of the key leaders of the entire anti-national movement a basic question with regard to Kashmir rather Jammu and Kashmir, the question being – which are the broad geographical parts of the Indian held and Pak Occupied J&K? This question was asked with the qualifying pre-condition that if she, the anti-national and Kashmir activist were to answer correctly, this author would never show his face on television. It may appear to be a huge risk but this author was confident that the so-called activist would be askance at the question. This author then asked the lady activist if she had any clue about Northern Areas or Gilgit-Baltistan. She again drew a blank. She was then reminded that to one can only be an activist, if one is informed about the subject, but unfortunately this is never the case.

Need for an Indian Marine Force

By Col JK Achuthan
21 Feb , 2016

Our continued neglect of the maritime frontier and the opportunities that it provides reflects the thinking of a ‘landlocked’ power. If we create a master plan to devote one per cent of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) towards building up our maritime potential over the next 15 years, we can become a manufacturing and trading power bigger than any European country. Our country is blessed with warm seas and good navigability for vessel of any size all the year round. Yet it is a challenge to investigate and determine which of these factors are holding up our maritime growth – is it inertia or lack of practical thinking; discouragement of ‘spurred’ economic activities along our seaboard or not granting ‘special’ economic development powers to our island territories; is it just lack of a ‘risk taking’ mentality or is it due to the absence of a ‘will of steel’ to become a great nation?

“When the chips are down, call in the Marines”, goes the popular motto of the American Marines. India, which claims to be an ancient maritime nation and has a long coastline of nearly 4,500 kilometres and outlying island territories to defend, does not have a Marine Force! It makes one wonder as to why we have never achieved the status of a great maritime nation despite transcending the main world trade routes. Maybe even strong past Indian rulers never grasped the strategic need to have strong trade relations with other countries and civilisations, using indigenous maritime fleets to increase national prosperity, and gain from the free flow of new ideas from across the globe.

India's Dilemma: A Maritime or Continental Power - II

By Daanish Inder Singh Gill
19 Feb , 2016

In his article ‘India needs to augment it’s Maritime power‘ , Himanil Raina hopes to counter my assertion as presented in ‘India’s dilemmas- A Maritime or Continental power?‘, where I argued in favour of greater spending directed at the Indian Army as opposed to the Navy. He accuses me of not expressing the correct facts whilst himself resolving to present no facts at all. What results is an amorphous and generally incoherent set of polemics that could be insulting, if they weren’t so vaguely infantile. In the spirit of polemics, here are a few of my thoughts on Himanil’s article-

Firstly, it appears curious that Himanil has quoted Zorawar Daulet Singh’s paper ‘Mackinder Vs Mahan’ in support of his maritime argument. This is a paper that is decidedly in support of a ‘Continent First’ approach. It even refers to the Navy’s attempts at controlling SLOCs as a ‘Mahanian Delusion’. As a matter of fact, the conclusion of the paper is subtitled ‘Taming the Mahanians for a Continental-First Geostrategy’. I have the sneaking suspicion that Himanil has not read the articles he so garrulously quotes. Why would you cite an article that negates your overall argument? Perhaps the author is willing to make a strategic blunder for a tactical win. Or maybe he just Googled it and saved some time. However, the reader can expend some of his efforts and read the paper Himanil has misquoted right here - Mackinder Vs Mahan? by Zorawar Daulet Singh