Friday News Roundup — April 17, 2020
Killing the Gerrymander in Michigan; International COVID Cooperation; Distributing Political Power; Ukrainian Espionage; COVID in Russia; Emerging Markets in Crisis; Maritime Force Projection; Plus News You May Have Missed
Good morning and happy Friday, we hope you are all well as we stay home and stay safe. As the Trump administration discusses relaxing social distancing guidelines, it appears efforts to “bend the curve” are showing results, but many experts continue to raise concerns regarding the nation’s testing capacity. With this in mind, we maintain cautious optimism while urging all of our readers to keep adhering to best practices including hand washing and physical distancing. If we all continue to work together, we can beat this pandemic.
This week’s roundup is a packed one, with all hands on deck to examine the nation’s goings on. CSPC President & CEO Glenn Nye discusses a recent victory for gerrymandering reform in Michigan, while Dan laments U.S. retreat from international organizations. Chris debunks President Trump’s grandiose claims of outsized power, and Joshua contributes two pieces: one regarding espionage in Ukraine and an update on COVID-19 in Russia. CSPC Senior Advisor Michael Stecher makes a grand return to the Roundup to discuss the implications of the present crisis on emerging global markets, and Ethan analyzes the effects of COVID-19 on maritime force projection. As always, we wrap up with news you may have missed.
Michigan’s Independent Redistricting Victory
Glenn Nye
This week, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Michigan’s newly created independent redistricting commission, upholding the will of the voters expressed by referendum in 2018. The commission has been a hot topic in the state as of late, where opponents sued to nullify the new process based on the commission’s eligibility requirements. While the commission was approved by voters by referendum and is set to be rolled out in time for redistricting in 2021, two lawsuits have attempted to stop its implementation, alleging that prohibiting elected officials and their families from serving on the commission is discriminatory and impermissible.
In a victory for fair districts and the notion that voters should choose their politicians and not the other way around, the 6th Circuit upheld a lower court decision allowing the commission’s implementation to proceed as planned. The judge writing the opinion on the case stated that “The government’s interest in avoiding partisan conflicts of interests and unsavory patronage practices” aren’t unconstitutional, as reported in Bridge magazine. What seems like a plainly logical statement is a hard-won reality in politics. Although the plaintiffs could appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, such action is unlikely to succeed in the wake of the Court’s recent ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause. In that case, the justices ruled that federal courts do not have a role to play in gerrymandering cases due to the political nature of the issue at hand.
Ultimately, the 6th Circuit has delivered a just victory for the people of Michigan. CSPC joined an amicus brief in this case this February which detailed multiple benefits of the new redistricting mechanism. With the popular will fulfilled and a just process established, Michigan joins a growing cohort of states which have implemented common sense reforms to ensure free and fair elections. Virginia’s legislature voted to approve placing a non-partisan commission on the ballot for voters to ratify in November 2020. We look forward to seeing such reforms implemented from coast to coast, and to a future in which all Americans are represented fairly and the incentives in politics aligned to less partisan, more effective governance.
Why America Can’t Turn Its Back on International Bodies
Dan Mahaffee
Over the past weeks, the war of words between the United States and China over the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic has increasingly focused on what role China’s influence at the World Health Organization (WHO) meant for the initial response. U.S. frustration with the WHO has been epitomized by President Trump’s announcement this week that Washington would withhold its funding for the WHO pending a review of its response to this pandemic.
The debate about the WHO’s handling of the pandemic is a valid one. Whether the organization was influenced by China’s largesse or naive in its credulity towards Beijing and its apparatchiks warrants further investigation. Most of the facts — along with the way that the WHO treated Taiwan and its prescient warnings about the outbreak — do suggest that the WHO has much to explain about its performance.
Now, as we enter this time of crisis, we see what happens when the United States takes its eye off the ball when we turn our back on the international organizations that drive much of the international order. U.S. and allied leadership was responsible for the creation of many of these institutions following World War II, and ranging from global public health to postal interoperability to the recognition of patents, China has taken advantage of American skepticism about international institutions — as well as our own flawed efforts to work with allies to exercise leadership in these organizations — to elbow out the United States on the global stage. This allows China to use international bodies to pursue its own political aims, be it the continued pursuit of Taiwan’s international pariahood; obfuscating the truth about disease outbreaks; or bending technological and economic standards in its favor. It has even allowed China to project its internal political disputes into these internationally vital bodies. The story of Meng Hongwei is the most stunning example — as the first Chinese president of Interpol ended up disappearing during a trip to China in 2018 as he ran afoul of Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption campaign.
While the current pandemic draws, deservedly, most of the current attention, the struggle over technological standards cannot be ignored. Doing so will put the United States and our key innovation engines at a disadvantage to China’s state-backed companies. Take, for example, the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). Led by Chinese telecom engineer Houlin Zhao, this body recently entertained a proposal from Beijing and Huawei about the creation of a new, authoritarian-friendly, architecture for the internet. There is a legitimate debate about how the architecture of the internet can accommodate the wide range of future applications asked of it. However, the Chinese proposal, based on Huawei technology, would shift away from the decentralized network model to a more top-down model with the ability to disconnect or isolate specific nodes of the internet and route data through nodes for improved data tracking and surveillance. U.S. and allied leadership in the ITU and other bodies should make it clear that such an approach to the future of the internet is a non-starter.
The importance of these international standards-setting bodies and their impact on future technologies such as 5G networks is also clearly understood among a wide range of U.S. policymakers. Republican Senators Jim Inhofe (OK), John Cornyn (TX), Tom Cotton (AR), Mike Crapo (ID), Marco Rubio (FL) and Todd Young (IN) released a joint letter on Tuesday asking the Trump administration to make it clear that current U.S. export controls do not limit U.S. firms’ participation in the international bodies setting the standards for 5G networks and other important technologies.
Since a year ago, when Huawei and other firms have been added to the Department of Commerce entity list restricting their commercial relationships with U.S. companies, uncertainty about whether this applies to standards setting bodies has hampered full participation by U.S. companies in standards-setting bodies. Rather than isolating Huawei, it cedes the field to these firms. The Trump administration should heed these Senators’ message and make it clear that the United States is a full participant in shaping the path ahead for 5G technologies and other vital innovations.
Skepticism about international institutions and their efficacy is understandable, and new strategies will be needed. The United States can no longer assume that it has the heft and influence to isolate China. Upholding our values and remaining engaged is the best course, especially as the ham-handedness of Chinese authoritarianism — and its costs for all around the world — become increasingly clear. We need to get in shape to play hardball with China, but if we try to “take the ball and head home,” we’ll quickly be reminded that a forfeit is always scored as a loss.
The American Distribution of Power
Chris Condon
The notion that absolute power corrupts absolutely is a cornerstone of American political thought. While the phrase wasn’t specifically written until the 19th century, the principle behind it has been a driving force within political theory since the Enlightenment, from which the Framers of the U.S. Constitution drew the lion’s share of their inspiration. This week, President Trump made a mockery of America’s aversion to absolute power on two separate occasions. Frustrated over disagreements with governors over when stay-at-home orders would be lifted, the president first asserted that “[w]hen somebody’s the president of the United States, the authority is total, and that’s the way it’s got to be.” He later went on to claim the authority to forcibly adjourn Congress, bristling at his inability to make recess appointments due to Congress’ use of pro forma sessions to technically remain in session at all times. This hopefully goes without saying, but both assertions are categorically false.
First, let’s consider the narrower claim of presidential authority to forcibly adjourn Congress. While President Trump likely refers to a portion of Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, he does so in error. The clause in question reads: “[The president] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper.” Far from a permit for the chief executive to adjourn Congress in order to install recess appointments, the clause was added to the constitution to limit (rather than grant) power. The Framers sought to ensure that the president did not interfere with the schedule of the legislature, but recognized the need for a mediator in the rare and narrow case that the House and Senate could not agree on a time to adjourn. That situation has never occurred to the extent where the president was able to exercise this authority.
The Founders included this proscription in the Constitution with very defined examples of tyranny in mind. Especially in the case of English monarchs, especially Charles I, the executive power to dissolve legislatures at will had been used for thoroughly nefarious purposes. Alexander Hamilton acknowledged such examples in Federalist 69, also acknowledging the ability of state governors to adjourn state legislatures in some cases. He could not have been more explicit about where the President’s authority differs: “The President can only adjourn the national legislature in the single case of disagreement about the time of adjournment.” Since the assent of both houses is needed for either to adjourn, the case in which the president’s authority to adjourn Congress applies is almost impossibly narrow. The current situation most definitely doesn’t suffice.
Next comes the claim that the president exercises absolute authority, which is broader and even more dangerous than claiming the ability to adjourn Congress. It is difficult to know where to begin in refuting this claim, so I will narrow it to President Trump’s related argument that the federal government exercises absolute power over the states. The Framers, namely James Madison, pioneered the notion of federalism in national governance. While antifederalists in the founding era sought to divorce all control of internal affairs from a national government, federalists argued that bestowing authority over a limited number of internal issues upon a federal government would bind the nation together and prevent sectarian squabbles among the states. Key in this scheme, however, is the ability of states to control significant portions of their internal affairs, as each state government is better able to respond to localized issues that a government spanning the entire continent.
The 10th Amendment specifically codifies this scheme in the Constitution. While largely forgotten in the modern era, the amendment is no less important in examining the president’s claim of unchallenged federal power. Specifically, it is as follows: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution is ambiguous about many things, about how far many rights extend, what certain portions mean, and even about the basic structure of government. Much of these questions were left for future generations to toil over, but the Framers were very clear about one thing: the federal government absolutely does not hold total authority over the several states. In fact, its constitutional authority is rather narrow.
In this time of great uncertainty in the United States, few things are clear. One thing that is clear, however, is that the federal government is in no place to claim absolute authority in any matter. With states stepping up to fill in the gaps left by the administration, the people should certainly not place their faith in an atrophied Congress or a power hungry president. Such a president cannot adjourn Congress, cannot order the states to do anything, and categorically does not wield absolute power. After all, power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Wilderness of Mirrors in Ukraine
Joshua Huminski
Recent discussions on intelligence have focused, understandably, on who knew what and when in relation to the COVID crisis and how various intelligence organizations are adapting to the new environment.
For example, the New York Times recently reported that the Central Intelligence Agency is working to find the real totals of COVID cases and deaths from China. The Times also reported how Israel’s Mossad, having determined Iran to be a reduced strategic threat given the impact of COVID, pivoted to supporting the public health system.
While the immediate focus is understandable, it is worth remembering that the bread and butter of intelligence — agent identification, recruitment, and running — remains unchanged. To illustrate this, Ukraine announced that it detained Major General Valery Shaitanov of the SBU — Ukraine’s equivalent of the CIA — on charges of espionage and treason. Shaitanov served as head of special operations for Ukraine’s SBU.
According to SBU counterintelligence, Shaitanov served as “an agent of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation” since at least 2014. The SBU reported that the investigation found Shaitanov would receive $200,000, a Russian military officer (retired) status, in order for his “pension to be taken care of”, and a Russian passport for his services.
The FSB tasked Shaitanov with carrying out covert operations (discussed more, below), providing information on international cooperation with other intelligence services, identifying employees of the Ukrainian security and intelligence services, and scouting of senior Ukrainian officers for recruitment by the FSB.
The SBU also alleged that Shaitanov was planning terrorist acts within Ukraine and was planning the assassination of Adam Osmaev, an ethnic Chechen, who served as a commander in Ukraine’s volunteer battalion.
Osmaev is wanted by Moscow on charges of terrorism for reportedly plotting to assassinate Vladimir Putin. Osmaev survived two attempts on his life, but, in 2017, his wife, who also fought as a volunteer alongside her husband, was killed in Kiev during the second attempt on Osmaev’s life while in Ukraine.
General Shaitanov served as agent “Bobyl” and was handled by FSB Colonel Igor Egorov. This is not the first time that Egorov’s activities have emerged in the public eye. He is also a high-ranking member of the “Vympel Charitable Fund.” This organization was linked by Der Spiegel, with the murder of Zelimkhan Khangoshvili, a former Chechen rebel commander in August.
SBU chief Ivan Bakanov said, “Unfortunately, a man who had to protect Ukraine in fact worked against it.”
That a major general in a foreign intelligence was arrested and charged with espionage is, on its face, quite surprising. The equivalent in the United States would be, perhaps, a Directorate Chief of CIA arrested for spying for Moscow. However, it is worth noting that Russia’s penetration of Ukraine is all but total and not at all surprising.
At the end of the Cold War, Ukraine may have left the Soviet Union, but Moscow never left Kiev. Indeed, Russia’s role in Ukraine is all encompassing from the election interference in 2004 (to include the poisoning of one of the candidates), the annexation of Crimea (accompanied by “little green men”, Russian soldiers without insignia), and the ongoing separatist conflict in eastern Ukraine.
Just one day after the arrest of Shaitanov, Moscow announced that it uncovered a Ukrainian intelligence group in Crimea. The “sabotage and terrorism” group included a Russian servicewoman who provided information to Ukraine’s military intelligence from 2017–2018. According to the FSB, Russia’s security service, “the operation was directed by Colonel Oleg Akhmedov, the head of military intelligence in the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson”.
This, according to Radio Free Europe, comes just a few days ahead of an expected prisoner exchange between the government of Ukraine and the separatists of Donetsk and Luhansk, scheduled for the Orthodox Easter (19 April).
The spy games continue in Ukraine and will certainly continue through COVID. Russia’s geo-strategic concerns demand that Kiev remain friendly to, if not directly beholden, to Moscow, and certainly not Western-inclined. Any instability in Ukraine ensures that Kiev will not become or represent a threat to Russia’s near abroad.
Indeed, as reported in the Friday News Roundup on 15 November, Moscow aims to instill psychological unease and instability in its neighbors. Espionage is merely another tool to create that environment, while using Ukraine as a proxy to advance its interests, including pursuing dissidents and separatists like Osamev.
Russia COVID Update
Joshua Huminski
Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, took a sharp turn on his optimism related to COVID. In a video conference with Russian health officials, Putin said “We see that the situation is changing almost daily and, unfortunately, not for the better. He added, “The number of people who are getting sick is increasing, with more cases of severe illness.” Sergei Sobyanin, the mayor of Moscow and the official in charge of the COVID task force, warned that the outbreak was “nowhere near” its peak. Moscow has the preponderance of cases in Russia, with nearly 12,000 confirmed out of the country’s 18,000 cases.
This is less than a month from when Putin declared that the COVID situation was “under control”. In March, at a government meeting, he said “We were able to contain mass penetration and spread” of the pandemic and that “The situation is generally under control despite high risk level.”
Putin has been largely in seclusion during the crisis and his hands-off approach is being criticized at home. Thus far, Putin has been keen to devolve governmental authority to the regional governors, distancing himself from unpopular decisions such as social distancing or quarantines.
Putin is undoubtedly attempting to balance the politics and optics of the COVID crisis. After downplaying it for so long, abruptly shifting to crisis mode will call into question his earlier blasé attitude and decision to not act aggressively from the outset. Moving too aggressively now with unpopular measures, even if warranted, may, in his view, tarnish his image at a time when he is attempting to ensure the extension of his presidency beyond the existing term limits.
Alternatively, this new, firmer tone, could mark the beginning of an assertive more hands-on Putin in managing this crisis. Perhaps this is Putin’s pivot point, much like Stalin overcoming his initial shock at Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union.
These optics are of paramount importance to Putin, especially as the 9 May Victory Day parade, which centers on military hardware, is still scheduled. If this were to be cancelled, or sharply curtailed, it would not look good for Putin’s appearance as a strong figure, however sensible the cancellation may be.
We Should Be Worrying about Emerging Markets, Before It’s Too Late
Michael Stecher
For the last two months, a substantial fraction of all commercial activity has either stopped or found new modalities. Consumers are feeling this most with the food supply. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, more than half of all food spending is for meals that take place outside the home — at schools, restaurants, or other venues. Food served outside the home tends to be serviced by a parallel supply chain of wholesale vendors who have seen their demand cut to nearly zero by social distancing during the pandemic. That is why, despite a massive spike in meals eaten at home, milk is being poured into manure pits and crops ploughed back into fields.
If the era of eat-in meals continues, middlemen will find better ways to get products into the hands of consumers, but all of these changes will make the system less likely to spring back into its pre-crisis state. In other sectors of the global economy, there are additional stresses. Chile’s economy is strongly tied to global economic growth because copper — a metal used predominantly in manufacturing — accounts for roughly half of its exports. With factories shut down, no one is buying copper; even when economies reopen, it is likely that the process of clearing out inventories and manufacturing new goods will take some time, which means it could be many months before copper miners in Chile are back to regular work.
Concerns about global growth are bleeding into every facet of the Chilean economy. Fewer exports leads to lower economic growth, which means lower tax receipts and more government borrowing. A drop in international sales means that Chilean firms are receiving less foreign currency that they use to buy Chilean pesos. This makes borrowing more expensive and depresses the value of the peso — which has fallen by 15% since the beginning of the year. Imported goods have become more expensive for Chilean consumers, but many Chilean firms also borrow in the global financial markets in developed market currencies like the dollar or euro, which means that debt repayment has become more expensive just as sales are slipping.
This is not to pick on Chile, and a similar story could be told about many emerging market countries. When there are concerns about the global economy, money floods out of emerging markets and into safer assets, most notably U.S. Treasuries, but non-financial companies in emerging markets were issuing bonds in increasingly expensive dollars and euros at record rates as recently as February.
For as long as we have been doing the Friday roundup, I have worried that the growing debt load in emerging markets has been the Chekhov’s Gun of the post-2012 economic growth story. The International Monetary Fund has reported that 90 countries have inquired about bailouts since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak and 60 have contacted the World Bank. Emerging market debt defaults would force middlemen to find new ways to provide goods to consumers and they would almost certainly be more expensive and worse, making it more difficult for the global economy to spring back when the virus recedes. It would also hurt billions of people in the developing world, who would be at risk of having years of economic growth erased — this should not be underestimated; the growth of the global middle class has been concentrated in the developing world and the near-elimination of extreme poverty in these countries is one of the most important stories in human history.
The 2008 global financial crisis and the Eurozone debt crisis that followed it propelled right-of-center and right wing nationalists to power around the world on a platform of protecting the livelihoods of the folks at home. If the need arises for emergency funding for the developing world, will these leaders be inclined to provide it? If not, there is a real risk that economies will collapse and the global financial and trading system will come unglued. Countries with ready cash and revisionist political ambitions will find great investment values to advance their mercantilist goals.
Beyond the concerns about buzzy political issues, global economic integration is a Good Thing. Free markets and the free flow of capital improve lives and incentivize non-military problem solving among great powers. Past episodes of deglobalization, most recently from 1910–1945, have not exactly been banner stretches for the human condition. The warning signs are out there. Global trade of goods and services as a share of GDP peaked in 2008. Decoupling of the major engines of global growth is a policy goal that is being actively pursued in many capitals. A financial crisis that moves us further in that direction would add fresh political risks on top of the economic ones. As Neil Irwin wrote in the New York Times this week, “At times over the last 12 years, it has felt as if the world were reliving the period from 1918 to 1939, but as if told by a forgetful student who was getting the events out of order.” We should be mindful; #spoileralert that story does not have a happy ending.
COVID-19 and Maritime Force Projection
Ethan Brown
The COVID-19 global pandemic continues to dominate headlines and consume the focus of state, industry, media, and defense leaders around the world. At a time of heightened strain and controversy in the DoD with regards to readiness amidst the coronavirus outbreak, a familiar face in the Great Power Competition has seized the initiative — the most critical component of fighting any war. Even if that war is being fought on the perception front, the initiative matters.
China has ambitiously and brazenly filled a void left by the US and French Navies in the wake of shifting strategic priorities, responses to this global pandemic, and spurious rhetoric. The USS Theodore Roosevelt remains docked in Guam relieved of its Commander and fully engaged in dealing with a COVID-19 spread through its bulkheads. Similarly, France’s Charles de Gaulle Aircraft Carrier returned early for its homeport to address it COVID-19 outbreak, while the USS Ronald Reagan remains at pier in Japan, undergoing a standard post-deployment maintenance cycle (The Reagan is a forward-staged carrier who calls the Yokosuka Prefecture of Japan its home port) and is months away from being ready to return to the seas.
The USS Nimitz, the planned relief-in-place Carrier Strike Group (CSG), will assume those duties under the US Navy’s 7th fleet (Indo-Pacific Theater), but remains weeks away from its embarkation in Washington State awaiting standard preparations and COVID-19 preventative measures. The timeline for the USS Theodore Roosevelt returning from deployment to its home port of San Diego remains unknown.
As such, no western forces are currently patrolling the blue water regions in the East and South China seas, resulting in the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) flaunting its rising naval prowess in a deliberate play to advantage. Unimpeded, the Liaoning Aircraft Carrier and its five-ship flotilla passed through the Taiwan Strait and between the Japanese islands of Okinawa and Miyako on Tuesday, leaving an undoubtedly nerve-wracked and isolated Taiwan alone to scramble its precious few wartime resources against the impending show of force by its authoritarian neighbor.
PLAN blue water excursions have extended these rings…significantly (Asia Maritime Transparency -CSIS)
As noted in a Newsweek article from earlier this month, US Intelligence services (and for an extended time the experts at the CSPC) have foreshadowed increasing aggression by Chinese and Russian actors in an attempt to upset the global power dynamic — namely to the knock the king (the United States) off the hilltop. In a time when attention in the US has shifted to domestic problems with COVID-19, China has overtly and unabashedly made good on that foreshadowing. To the surprise of no one they have perpetuated a misinformation campaign and seized the opportunity to demonstrate power in an uncertain time. It is no small gesture that the Liaoning chose to steam right past Taiwan on their power parade.
The presence of US Carrier groups or coalition naval partners in the region is not to instigate conflict with China, but rather as a check on the rampant and drastic measures of expansion used by Beijing’s regime to expand its sphere of influence (see: artificial islands). Without those CSG’s reaffirming US commitment to partner (Taiwan) security, China could not have been given a better opportunity to assert its influence.
This projection by the PLAN demonstrates two key points when assembling a strategic calculus: 1) the proximity of the Liaoning to Taiwan and its bypass of the Japanese isles is a deliberate show of force, intended to demonstrate to Taipei just how nearby the rising might of the PLA industrial machine and its evolving capabilities are; 2) this deep water patrol, far from the safe haven of the mainland coastline suggests a fleshing out of its Anti-Access/Area Denial net (A2/AD). This is the key difference between a US CSG in the Taiwan strait and a PLAN CTF — the US and its allies aim to keep the maritime passageways open, while China is going out of its way to assert its influence over these transitways.
Blue Water Force Projection
Make no mistake, in today’s sub-conflict power competition construct, an aircraft carrier is among the strongest signals a state can send in terms of projecting range and influence. It is why the US is so heavily reliant on our Sailors and Marines for deterring mischief in areas of instability the world over. It is this calculus which led to the DoD dispatching the USS Harry S. Truman CSG to supplement the USS Abraham Lincoln CSG in 5th Fleets Persian Gulf- to deter continued escalation by Iran following the airstrike which killed Qasem Soleimani and the subsequent regional backlash. Generally, it worked. Few states are truly prepared to get froggy when a US CSG is near, let alone multiple flotillas churning the nearby seas.
The Liaoning and Support Flotilla during a South China Sea display (Reuters)
The Liaoning Aircraft carrier is the PLAN’s first and oldest, but most experienced blue water force projection platform. Organized into a Carrier Task Force (CTF), the Liaoning leads a complement of four to six Type 054A Jiangkai-II class Guided Missile Frigates. These para-stealth cruisers are outfitted with an impressive array of weaponry, including a 32-slate Vertical Launch System for a variety of precision guided missiles, including the highly sophisticated HQ-16 air defense system. Further augmenting the CTF is an assortment of Type 52cd Luyang-Class destroyers and Renhai-Class Cruisers, all arrayed with a variety of advanced multi-phase radars and bandoliers of offensive weaponry.
The combination of frigates remains varied as the PLAN continues to develop its deep-water naval doctrine, specifically its utilization of aircraft carriers as a force projection tool (compared to its limited scope proximity-defense under earlier decades of force management). While the PLAN inventory still does not compare toe-to-toe with the sheer firepower, doctrinal superiority or experience-driven sangfroid of the US Navy, they are evolving. And rapidly. The global pandemic of recent months has simply gift-wrapped an opportunity for the PLAN and its Chinese Communist Party overlord-ship to continue creeping out the lines of demarcation in the struggle for Indo-Pacific dominance.
It remains to be seen how the situation with the US carriers will shake out, as the logical and obvious considerations reside with the health and wellbeing of the service personnel on the Theodore Roosevelt and those of the tour-lengthening Harry S. Truman (now at sea for seven months). The USAF made an effort to offset the lack of the CSG presence with an “Elephant Walk” on Andersen AFB (Guam) — lining up the full inventory of B-52 bombers and KC-135 Stratotankers as a show of force in response to China’s belligerence. The intent was to demonstrate that readiness is not an issue for the DoD when it comes to curtailing Chinese expansionism, but that statement is louder with a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in the hip pocket. During this difficult time, that ace is no longer in the hole.
The views are of the author, and do not reflect the views, position, or policy of the U.S. Air Force or Department of Defense.
News You May Have Missed
Where Are All The Unused Planes Right Now?
Aida Olivas
As countries around the world have prevented their citizens from nonessential travel in efforts to slow the spread of Coronavirus, there has been a dramatic decrease in flights. Nearly all companies have cut many flights, ranging from a third to all. As a result, several airlines have been faced with the task of finding areas large enough to store dozens of planes. Hangers have been filled to their brim and old, unused Air Force bases have been temporarily re-opened to serve as a storage area from the countless, grounded commercial planes. Some companies have used their factories as a parking lot for their planes such as the Airbus factory in Mobile, Alabama for two Airbus models. Meanwhile, Roswell, New Mexico has been housing several Boeing aircraft, including the popular 737, while others have made use of aircraft boneyards. In the United States, the storage question became one of whether to pay more for storage space at large, important airports, or pay less parking fees at the cost of transporting the planes to farther locations. In Europe, however, less empty space is available, and airlines resorted to parking the planes in empty and unused areas of runways and airports. With the forced grounding of planes, airlines have declared they will use this opportunity to determine the need to keep older aircraft and whether it may be best to permanently retire the planes from their companies.
Facebook To Tell Millions Of Users They’ve Seen “Fake News” About Coronavirus
Aida Olivas
Facebook has been recognized as the social media platform with the most misinformation concerning Coronavirus. Various fact-checking organizations working with Facebook for the past several weeks to stop and clear the misunderstandings but have reached limited results since the debunked posts were not taken down afterwards. Now, Facebook will be taking steps to delete posts containing misinformation and will be notifying millions of users of the possibility they may have read or engaged with false information concerning the virus. Facebook had also taken steps to provide easy access to reliable information about the virus at the top of every person’s newsfeeds. These moves, however, will not extend to information relating to politics and campaigns. Working together with fact checking organizations around the world, the social media platform has steadily lowered the amount of false posts on their website in English, although fact checked misinformation posts in Spanish and Italian that have yet to be deleted remain well over 50 percent. Despite the efforts, the information and images from the original posts (most now deleted), continue to spread as they are shared by friends and families who believe it to be true.
Large Wildfire Spreads through Chernobyl Zone of Alienation
Wyatt Newsome
A major wildfire has recently proliferated through forests near the abandoned Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, which scientists worry could cause radiation to spread throughout Eastern Europe. Officials are concerned about fires and wind causing settled radiation to spread from the forest to more populated areas. However, authorities are also worried of a much more catastrophic fate — the potential of the fires reaching the nuclear plant itself, where radiation is greatly concentrated. The Exclusion Zone Management Authority has deployed firefighters and helicopters to the site to extinguish the wildfires, but officials currently “cannot say the fire is contained.” Since the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in April 1986, approximately 1,000 square miles of area in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine have been evacuated in fears of radioactive contamination.
Federal Challenge Raised Against Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act
Wyatt Newsome
On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Legal Voice filed a lawsuit against Idaho’s recent Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, which prohibits transgender high school and collegiate athletes from competing on sports teams that correspond to their gender idendities. The advocacy groups contend that the law violates Title IX and unfairly prohibits intersex and trans women from participating in a comfortable sports environment, and further subjects all female athletes to invasive genital and testosterone screenings to prove their biological sex. Lawmakers who signed the law cite physiological differences in cis men and women that affect athletic performance (such as testosterone levels) as justification for separation of sports teams by biological sex. While the topic has been a recent national debate, the Idaho law was the first of its kind in the nation.
The views of authors are their own and not that of CSPC.