“The global missile defense system, under construction by the United States, is a prime example of Washington trying to take advantage at the cost of other countries’ security. Meanwhile we are adamant that achieving agreements on nuclear missile issues without factoring in U.S. missile defense is impossible.” ~ Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev Read Full Story
The Trump administration’s funding priorities display an apparent strategy to play “catch-up” with the growing Russian and Chinese hypersonic threat capabilities — and to rely totally on the Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) strategy of the Cold War. Does President Trump really want a new Cold War, now involving a multilateral offensive nuclear arms race? I hope not! Read Full Story
“Regrettably, both Congress and the Administration appear to present ambiguities in their approach to missile defense policy. The U.S. Congress can do better, as the FY 2017 NDAA demonstrated. And the Administration will have to get on the same page consistently if it wants to effectively communicate the value of ballistic missile defense to the American people and members of Congress who represent them.” Michaela Dodge in her March 2020, National Institute for Public Policy Report, The Backward Step on Missile Defense in the FY 2020 NDAA Read Full Story
“The Chinese government has been methodical in the way it’s analyzed our system… it’s assessed our vulnerabilities and it’s decided to exploit our freedoms, to gain an advantage over us at the federal level, the state level and the local level. . . Competition with China is happening. It’s happening in your state. In fact, I’d be surprised if most of you in the audience had not been lobbied by the Chinese Communist Party directly.” ~ Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Read Full Story
We are late to forming a Space Force. Russia has been pursuing space force variants since the 1980s—when Soviet leaders so vehemently opposed President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Perhaps of even greater importance, the Chinese Communist Party’s People’s Liberation Army has been pursuing a Space Force technological juggernaut responsible for space, cyber, electronic, and psychological warfare called the PLA Strategic Support Force. Read Full Story
“Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!” Sir Walter Scott in his play told in 16th century verse, Marmion, published in 1808 Read Full Story
“ . . . entrenched bureaucrats and military leaders across the Department of Defense, especially in the Air Force, have been resisting the President’s directive in every way they can. And this December, although Congress voted to approve a Space Force, it did so while placing restrictions on it — such as that the Space Force be built with existing forces — that will render it largely useless in any future conflicts.” Retired USAF Lt. General Steven Kwast Read Full Story
Various recent articles reporting on President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty have claimed that his decision was in response to Russian violations in the past 6 or fewer years — grossly understating the period of Russian violations that actually began over a decade ago and were mostly ignored by the Obama administration. Read Full Story
High-altitude EMP (HEMP) attacks would produce no blast or other immediate effects harmful to humans, but would damage life sustaining electronics so that millions could die from its long-term collateral effects that black-out our national electric grid and other life-sustaining critical infrastructures. Such attacks are regarded by enemy military planners as a relatively easy, potentially un-attributable means of inflicting mass destruction and forcing opponents to capitulate. Read Full Story
“[S]pace capabilities are critical for effective deterrence, defense, and force projection capabilities. . . Due to the critical importance of these assets, the national security strategy states, ‘any harmful interference with or attack upon critical components of our space architecture that directly affects this vital U.S. interest will be met with a deliberate response at a time, place, manner, and domain of our choosing.'” Under Secretary of Defense for Policy John Rood Read Full Story
We will be adding key policy briefs as we progress.