Month: March 2022

Did he or didn’t he? That was the question on the minds of Western intelligence officers earlier this week as they tried to determine if Putin’s claim of “drastically reducing hostilities” in Kyiv and Chernihiv was true. The conclusion most analysts reached is that Putin only “rearranged” his troops but has not withdrawn them from Ukrainian territory or given up on war. On Tuesday Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told journalists that “Nobody should be fooling ourselves by the Kremlin’s now recent claim that it will suddenly just reduce military attacks near Kyiv, or any reports that it’s going to withdraw all its forces.” One week ago, Russian general staff head of military operations, Sergei Rudskoi, announced that Russian forces had accomplished their first objective and would concentrate on their only goal, a “complete liberation of Donbass.” That also has proven false. There may be another reality on the ground that few are reporting in the West.

Putin is repositioning troops. It provides Russia two bonuses. It allows Putin to reorganize his forces to prepare for another offensive on the capital and the northern city of Chernihiv. It also serves as disinformation to quell strong international support for Ukraine’s population who have vowed to continue the fight. It may not be all that is happening. On the same day that Kirby said don’t be fooled, Russian Defense Minister Alexander Fomin formally announced Russia planned to reduce its military attacks on Kyiv during diplomatic negotiations between the governments. Putin used the past tense, yet his own Defense Minister spoke about it as a future event.

The stories coming out of Russia and its highly effective propaganda department are effective and changing. Over the past four weeks Russia has met with unexpectedly high and efficient resistance from Ukrainian forces and the general population. Putin has lost a number of generals and other high ranked military and more soldiers in a few weeks of this war than during its entire two-decade long occupation of Afghanistan. Intelligence reports coming in from the field describe logistical failures with large numbers of Russian soldiers left unfed and to forage for their own food. Troops have used up their ammunition and are idled awaiting supplies from outside Ukraine. Tanks and armored vehicles are running out of fuel. It is apparent, according to one military specialist following the situation closely, that Putin and his military planners did not calculate the dynamics of a possible extended action inside Ukraine with any accuracy. The war has “lasted much longer than the few days Moscow expected,” exposed gaps in its logistics, and exposed a lack of discipline among Russian troops. Russia may not be able to win this battle, but already Russia is suggesting another front.

Both Russia’s northern advance and southern fronts are stalled. Defense One’s Tara Coop reports that Kirby pointed out this week that Ukrainian forces are “repelling attacks in Mykolaiv and Kherson, and [there is] fierce fighting in Mariupol, where the city is still resisting despite a weeks-long siege.” What does this mean for Ukraine? If Russian forces are not fighting here, then where will they go? It appears that Putin may be assessing Russian losses and revamping his goals to align with an easier one by reprioritizing the war to concentrate on the Donbass region and breakaway territories. It does not mean the war is winding down, although it may soon become bogged down in spring mud. Putin may be switching tactics. But it does not end here, according to one Russian.

In an article entitled “Russia Will Blow up European Borders,” Moscow-based commentator Albert Akopyan (Urumov) argues that the conflict in Ukraine has given Russia “a unique opportunity” to promote border adjustments in Europe—both near its western frontiers and further afield—and to do so “in the name of justice and those same European values” that Russia is often criticized for violating, cited by Paul Goble writing for the Jamestown Foundation. He quotes Urumov as saying that Moscow can distribute its conquered territories to neighbors in ways that serve them and Russia. It also can hand over ethnic-Hungarian-populated territories in what is now western Ukraine to Budapest, and it can exchange territories with Poland and Moldova. Goble notes Uramov states this will accomplish three goals.

First, Russia will “show the peoples of Europe an alternative to the existing ‘principles’ of nation-state construction” by showing that after the war in Ukraine, “everything has changed” and that they must live in a world where force alone determines outcomes rather than any principles of law. Second, the amenable countries will share an interest in helping Russia eliminate the seedbeds of Ukrainian nationalism in the West. Third, such moves will allow Russia to secure several much-needed transportation corridors. What is perhaps most disconcerting is that Urumov’s statement is not the most extreme coming out of Moscow. Goble argues that some Russian analysts are considering the possibility of border revisions or the “creation of Russian client statelets within countries that do not neighbor Ukraine.”

The new arrangements would be made to convenience Russia. Is this what Putin is now planning to pull off since his Ukrainian war is stalled? The Russian leader’s sleight of hand may be directing the West to look one way while he carries out plans to expand the breadth of the war in an entirely new direction. Western intelligence officials remain unsure of Putin’s next plan and how far he is willing to go. That makes him a dangerous man to watch in the coming days and weeks.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

As the Ukraine war rages on, Russia is attempting to deter western assistance to the embattled nation by threatening cyberattacks.  Apple was recently the suspected target of one such assault.

Charles Gasparino, in a published report, warns that that “Russia appears to have officially declared cyberwar on the US, taking what’s been described as preliminary steps at crippling its banking system and possibly other major industries.”

From at least January 2020, through February 2022, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), National Security Agency (NSA), and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have observed regular targeting of U.S. cleared defense contractors (CDCs) by Russian state-sponsored cyber actors. The actors have targeted both large and small CDCs and subcontractors with varying levels of cybersecurity protocols and resources. On March 24, 2022, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed indictments of three Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) officers and a Russian Federation Central Scientific Research Institute of Chemistry and Mechanics (TsNIIKhM) employee for their involvement in intrusion campaigns against U.S. and international oil refineries, nuclear facilities, and energy companies.

Cyber attacks emanating from Russia are not new. The Colonial Pipeline and the JBS meat processing corporation were previous targets.  In response, the Biden Administration issued a bizarre statement containing a list of 16 infrastructure entities that the President warned Moscow not to hit, essentially giving a green light to attack everyone else.

Ina Fox News Interview, Rebecca Heinrichs, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute explained “”It could actually entice Russia to increase attacks against all the other entities besides those 16 things. We should be complicating Russia’s calculations not making them simpler and certainly not essentially green-lighting any kinds of attacks… Sen. Ron Johnson, (R-Wis.) told Fox News ‘Together with deciding not to impose sanctions to halt the completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, his limited demand on cyberattacks signals weakness that our adversaries will notice and take advantage of,’ said Johnson, who sits on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.”

Biden’s odd attitude towards cyber security has been noted. In 2021,Maggie Miller, writing for The Hill, noted that “President Biden‘s $2.25 trillion infrastructure plan does not include any funds to protect critical infrastructure against cyberattacks, even as the threat grows against targets such as the electric grid. Experts say it was disappointing to see there were no funds set aside to defend systems critical to everyday life from hackers, particularly as the proposal calls for things like $100 billion for improving grid resiliency, the creation of new jobs and developing more clean electricity.”

The Biden Administration has even attempted to pass the buck on this area of defense policy to the private sector. Rather unusually, notes Ryan Lovelace, in the Washington Examiner, “President Biden telling the private sector it is responsible for its own defense against Russian cyberattacks has drawn critics who counter that fighting off a hostile nation is the federal government’s job.” In a statement, the White has urged “our private sector partners to harden your cyber defenses immediately by implementing the best practices we have developed together over the last year. You have the power, the capacity, and the responsibility to strengthen the cybersecurity and resilience of the critical services and technologies on which Americans rely. We need everyone to do their part to meet one of the defining threats of our time — your vigilance and urgency today can prevent or mitigate attacks tomorrow.”

Earlier in his Administration, Biden had been  criticized for his failure to timely appoint a “Cyber defense Czar.” Eventually, however, National Cyber Director Chris Inglis and National Security Agency Cybersecurity Director Rob Joyce were appointed.

Illustration: Pixabay

President Biden recently spoke with China’s President Xi Jingping to discuss Beijing’s position on the Ukraine crisis. There are other topics, apparently not emphasized by the White House, that should have been included in the discussion.

Beijing’s meteoric rise to the status of an economic and military superpower has led many to raise concerns about its aggressive nature in commercial, diplomatic, and  military matters, and the worldwide detrimental impact of them. 

U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) outlined those concerns:

“China’s economy has grown sevenfold in the last two decades. China already has a million members in terms of active duty soldiers.

“China also has the largest Navy in the world. That’s right, it’s now larger than ours. And the Chinese military is not stopping.

“China plans to build more than 100 new ships in the next eight years. In those same eight years, China is also building about 300 missile silos and plans to have 1,000 nuclear missiles.

“Several times this year China has tested hypersonic weapons capable of use around the world.

“At the same time the world has witnessed increasing Chinese aggression.

“China’s goal is unmistakable. It truly wants to become the world’s one dominant power.

“Since day one, the Biden administration has been caught flatfooted. As president, Joe Biden has been soft on China.

“And this is no surprise given the fact that Joe Biden has been soft on China for 50 years.

“When he was vice president, he said, quote, ‘a rising China is a positive development.’ He said, ‘not only for China, but for America and the world at large.’

“During his run for president, candidate Joe Biden said China was not a threat to the United States.

“During his announcement speech, when he was announcing that he was going to be a candidate for president, he said ‘they’re not bad folks. They’re not competition for us.’

“Joe Biden should tell that to the working families in factory towns that have been put out of business by communist China.

“He should tell that to the families who lost loved ones to fentanyl and other opioids made in China.

“He should tell that to the Uyghurs and ethnic minorities persecuted and used as slave labor by the Chinese Communist Party.

“The leaders on both sides of the aisle here have been shocked by those comments by then-candidate for president Joe Biden.

“Many Democrats recognize the danger posed by communist China. Regrettably, our president Joe Biden is not one of them.

“On issue after issue the Biden administration’s policies are only making China stronger, and at the same time that makes America weaker. I want to just mention a few.

“President Biden’s first budget proposed to basically super-size the government of the United States. Huge budget increases in every government agency you can think of except for two.

“The two were defense and homeland security.

“His political appointees at the Pentagon seem more focused on climate change and dissident ideologies and vaccine mandates than on security threats to our nation.

“While China’s military is growing, ours is going broke and ours is going woke. That’s the difference fundamentally today.

“Joe Biden has stopped America’s policy of helping developing countries use fossil fuels to eliminate poverty and grow their economies.

“Who are these other countries turning to for help now? Well, they’re turning to communist China.

“Joe Biden seems to be doing everything he can to shut down coal production here in America.

“Wyoming is proud to be America’s leading coal producer, and we have for 35 years straight.

“Coal is the most affordable and reliable energy source known to man. Yet, Joe Biden is determined to drive down coal production and drive energy jobs overseas.

“China is not making this same mistake. China is acting in its own self-interest. China is producing and using more coal than ever before.

“China is also funding the construction of coal-fired power plants as part of their belt and road initiative.

“The Biden administration and the Democrats have also put a big Christmas present to China in their reckless tax-and-spending spree because the bill includes trillions of dollars in new taxes on American businesses.

“As a result, some of our tax rates are going to be higher than those in China. It’s going to make it cheaper to do business overseas. And that is exactly what many companies will do.

“According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, the taxes in this bill that the Senate is trying to push on the Democrat side of the aisle and the Republicans are trying to stop, the taxes in the bill will eliminate 125,000 American jobs.

“Democrat giveaways for electric vehicles will also send additional money directly to China.

“Electric vehicles use lithium batteries, the critical mineral necessary for those batteries rely on child labor in cobalt mines in the Democrat Republic of the Congo and slave labor in China.

“At the same time, Democrat spending bill would virtually end mining on federal lands here at home. Instead of getting the minerals we need from home in Wyoming, we’re going to get them from China.

“More than a million Muslims in western parts of China have been put into slave labor camps. In many cases those people are forced to make solar panels.

“Last week, Senator Rubio offered an amendment to the defense bill to ban imports from Chinese companies using slave labor.

“This is the same legislation that this Senate passed unanimously in July.

“Yet, now Democrats are kowtowing to an administration weak on China and are blocking Senator Rubio’s proposal.

“Why have the House Democrats failed to move forward on this critical issue?

“According to The Washington Post, it is because the Biden administration asked them to. The Washington Post reports, ‘while the administration supports the legislation in public, they are asking Democrats to essentially water it down in private.’

“On issue after issue, Democrat policies are only making America weaker and making China
stronger.

“It’s no wonder that only a quarter of Americans approve of how President Biden is handling China.

“On Monday, the president announced the United States will boycott next year’s Olympics in Beijing.

“This is a good first step, but it’s not enough. Symbolism is not enough.

“It’s time for Democrats to wake up to this threat from communist China before it is way too late.”

Russia’s War Crimes in Ukraine:

Since launching his unprovoked and unjust war of choice, Russian President Vladimir Putin has unleashed unrelenting violence that has caused death and destruction across Ukraine.  We’ve seen numerous credible reports of indiscriminate attacks and attacks deliberately targeting civilians, as well as other atrocities.  Russia’s forces have destroyed apartment buildings, schools, hospitals, critical infrastructure, civilian vehicles, shopping centers, and ambulances, leaving thousands of innocent civilians killed or wounded.  Many of the sites Russia’s forces have hit have been clearly identifiable as in-use by civilians.  This includes the Mariupol maternity hospital, as the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights expressly noted in a March 11 report.  It also includes a strike that hit a Mariupol theater, clearly marked with the word “дети” — Russian for “children” — in huge letters visible from the sky.  Putin’s forces used these same tactics in Grozny, Chechnya, and Aleppo, Syria, where they intensified their bombardment of cities to break the will of the people.  Their attempt to do so in Ukraine has again shocked the world and, as President Zelenskyy has soberly attested, “bathed the people of Ukraine in blood and tears.”

Every day that Russia’s forces continue their brutal attacks, the number of innocent civilians killed and wounded, including women and children, climbs.  As of March 22, officials in besieged Mariupol said that more than 2,400 civilians had been killed in that city alone.  Not including the Mariupol devastation, the United Nations has officially confirmed more than 2,500 civilian casualties, including dead and wounded, and emphasizes the actual toll is likely higher.

Last week, I echoed President Biden’s statement, based on the countless accounts and images of destruction and suffering we have all seen, that war crimes had been committed by Putin’s forces in Ukraine.  I noted then that the deliberate targeting of civilians is a war crime.  I emphasized that Department of State and other U.S. government experts were documenting and assessing potential war crimes in Ukraine.

Today, I can announce that, based on information currently available, the U.S. government assesses that members of Russia’s forces have committed war crimes in Ukraine.

Our assessment is based on a careful review of available information from public and intelligence sources.  As with any alleged crime, a court of law with jurisdiction over the crime is ultimately responsible for determining criminal guilt in specific cases.  The U.S. government will continue to track reports of war crimes and will share information we gather with allies, partners, and international institutions and organizations, as appropriate.  We are committed to pursuing accountability using every tool available, including criminal prosecutions.

U.S., G7 Condemn North Korean Missile Test

The text of the following statement was released by the G7 foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union.

Begin Text:

We, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union strongly condemn the continued testing of ballistic missiles by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), including the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch conducted on March 24, 2022.

Since the beginning of 2022, the DPRK has conducted an unprecedented series of missile tests which build on ballistic missile tests conducted in 2021, including launches of new so-called hypersonic missiles, and has claimed a submarine-launched ballistic missile test. These tests demonstrate the DPRK’s continued efforts to expand and further develop its ballistic missile capabilities. We deeply regret that the DPRK, with the most recent launches, has also abandoned its self-declared moratorium on ICBM launches. We strongly condemn these acts which are in blatant violation of the DPRK’s obligations under numerous UN Security Council resolutions including resolution 2397 (2017). These reckless actions threaten regional and international peace and security, pose a dangerous and unpredictable risk to international civil aviation and maritime navigation in the region, and demand a united response by the international community, including by further measures to be taken by the UN Security Council.

We strongly urge the DPRK to fully comply with all legal obligations arising from the relevant Security Council resolutions. We call on the DPRK to accept the repeated offers of dialogue put forward by all parties concerned, including the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan. We, the G7 foreign ministers and the High Representative of the European Union, also call on the DPRK to abandon its weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner.

We are clear that the dire humanitarian situation in the DPRK is the result of the DPRK’s diversion of the DPRK’s resources into weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs rather than into the welfare of its people.

We call on all States to fully and effectively implement all restrictive measures relating to the DPRK imposed by the UN Security Council and to address the risk of weapons of mass destruction proliferation from the DPRK as an urgent priority. We note with concern the report by the Panel of Experts established in pursuant to resolution 1874 (2009) that illicit ship-to-ship transfers continue to take place. We remain ready to assist in and strengthen capacities for effective sanctions implementation. In the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, we commend the work of the 1718 Committee, which has swiftly approved all Covid-19 related sanctions exemption requests for humanitarian assistance for the DPRK.

The G7 are committed to working with all relevant partners towards the goal of peace on the Korean Peninsula and to upholding the rules-based international order.

With war raging in Ukraine a discussion about the future of the 14^th Dalai Lama living in exile in India may appear out of place. Yet China, a country supporting the Russian aggression, is surprisingly enthusiastic about replacing the current incarnation of the Dalai Lama with or without his consent. Beijing is ramping up the pressure and may appoint a new Dalai Lama on its own. Three years ago, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shaung reiterated Beijing’s stance, stating that “the reincarnation of living Buddhas, including the Dalai Lama, must comply with Chinese laws and regulations and follow religious rituals and historical conventions.” In 2007, the communist regime passed a law that permitted it to decide which Buddhist lamas are allowed to reincarnate. 

Tibetans will be pressured to follow the lama appointed by Beijing even if the exiled Dalai Lama names his successor to the throne. According to Jamestown Foundation’s Tenzin Dorjee, “The exile candidate will carry greater moral authority and internal legitimacy, but the PRC-backed puppet will enjoy greater financial resources and political access. China will use its economic leverage and political clout to open doors for its own candidate and raise his profile on the highest stages, while working to marginalize the exile candidate in the global arena.” Over the last few years China has pressured other nations to deny a visa to the current Dalai Lama to reduce his influence and international prestige, despite his winning the Nobel Peace prize.

The Dalai Lama is a religious leader that exerts spiritual influence beyond China’s borders. Key among those areas are Taiwan and Mongolia. He also is revered by Buddhist indigenous populations in Ladakh, Sikkim, and Arunachal Pradesh, which are located along the 2,100-mile Sino-Indian border. China is competing for territory and influence in these regions and actual military supremacy high in the Himalayans. The CCP is unable to cement its claim to legitimacy in Taiwan, but the Dalai Lama remains a higher respected figure among much of its population.

The Dalai Lama represents soft power that China can use for its own purposes. Dorjee suggests that in a time when nuclear-armed countries are in a stalemate, the Dalai Lama is a powerful tool in China’s quest for regional hegemony. The 14^th Dalai Lama is the poster child of resistance to Beijing. If China appoints a new one, even if in competition with another, it will enable Beijing to press forward with its agenda. 

There is historical context for China using the influence of the Dalai Lama. In Republican China, just over 100 years ago after the 1918 Sino-Tibetan battle, it tried to use the Buddhist leader to force the incorporation of Tibet into China. Fifteen years later, China under the Nationalist Party leader Dai Jitao, argued that Buddhism “was the one uniting feature” that could be used to bridge the racial, cultural, and linguistic gap between the two “estranged peoples.” If China is successful in appointing a new Dalai Lama, it will not resolve all the issues surrounding the spiritual leader, but it will allow Beijing to split support off from the 14^th Dalai Lama and garner strength for Beijing’s position in and outside of China. China is a nuclear-armed nation located adjacent to India that also possesses nuclear weapons. Beijing may be planning to use a new, communist-appointed Dalai Lama, to break the nuclear stalemate over military supremacy in the remote Himalayan mountains. China wants to maintain military control over the Chumbi Valley to support any future conflict against India. It also serves as the only overland trade route permitted between the two countries. The two populous states also are competing economically in the region to build infrastructure. An old Chinese adage says that one mountain cannot claim two tigers. In this case the prize may be even larger if China gets it own Dalai Lama. The underlying value for China is in capturing the Asian economy. This is potentially one more step in that direction while the eyes of the world as cast west toward the war in Ukraine.  Xi Jinping is a brilliant strategist. He may have decided now is the wrong time to use hard power to invade Taiwan. Instead, he appears to be planning to deploy another type of influence operation. Whether he is successful remains to be seen. The world can be certain that Xi is not sitting back and relaxing while Russian troops conduct war in Ukraine.  He is making good use of the distraction to further his hegemonic plans.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

One question quietly being asked in Washington this week is Who is in charge in Moscow? Russia’s Minister of Defense, Army General Sergey Shoigu, apparently suffering from a sudden but unidentified heart problem, has disappeared. Putin’s top envoy, who previously helped Russian President Medvedev develop the architecture for the country’s economic reforms, resigned this week and has fled the country citing the war against Ukraine. He is refusing to return to Russia until Putin stops the war. More than eight generals and other top Russian military commanders have died with many thousands of soldiers killed in action inside Ukrainian territory. News coming in from the theater reports that over 800 Russian armored vehicles and tanks have been destroyed by Ukraine’s forces defending the country. Russian troops, according to military analysts, simply are left to forage for food as their stomachs are as empty as the gas tanks of the army’s armored vehicles. 

Military planners in Washington are surprised by Moscow’s lack of logistical planning with some asking: “Is anyone left in charge in the Kremlin?” Reports coming in from the field suggest the Russian military will begin running out of its food supplies within a few days. Ukrainian defense forces recently destroyed a rail line from Belarus that Russia had intended use to resupply its troops. Videos verified as real are surfacing this week depicting Russian tanks pulling up to Ukrainian gas stations to fill their machines with fuel.

As Russian troops grow hungry and weary, get pushed back farther from the capital, and human loses mount, Putin is said to grow more cantankerous and desperate. Defense One reports that a NATO military officer said Wednesday that between 30,000 and 40,000 Russian troops have been injured with between 7,000 and 15,000 killed. Putin’s spokesman, in a startling interview given earlier this week, calmly confirmed that Russia is willing to commit to a first use doctrine to employ nuclear weapons in the battlefield. President Biden on Wednesday said that Washington also is growing concerned that Putin faces a window to win that is closing, as the war is dragging into the muddy spring planting season. 

It makes the Russian leader more dangerous and unpredictable. Biden said the US believes Putin is preparing to use chemical and biological weapons in order to win the war before that window closes. Analysts shared that events match a pattern where Russia blames the West for something before committing the same action. Russian forces have bombed civilian shelters, schools, a maternity hospital, shopping malls, and apartment complexes and deliberately killed many civilian noncombatants. The US on Thursday officially declared that Russian forces have committed war crimes. NATO leader Jens Stoltenberg said this week that “Any use of chemical weapons would totally change the nature of the conflict, and be a blatant violation of international law and will have far-reaching consequences.” Russia has a history of using these types of weapons of mass destruction in Grozny, Chechnya, Aleppo, and Syria. If such weapons are released inside Ukraine they could contaminate NATO Member states and would be viewed as an attack against the Western alliance.
Again, who is charge in Moscow and who is advising Putin now that his long-time confident Shoigu is gone. The general was in charge of the Army and some political ideology. Putin appears increasingly isolated from his other aides. He has purged some of his military commanders who questioned his actions. The oligarchs who help keep him in power are unhappy about their financial losses and freedom due to the sanctions. Russian security expert and writer Andrei Soldatov says:  “Putin cannot control every road and every battalion….” Putin tends to trust his former KGB colleagues. He has surrounded himself with many that he has known over the years. But, according to one analyst, “It’s not as if we can say with complete confidence who is calling the shots and who took the decisions.” With Russian nuclear forces on high alert, and intensifying threats coming from the kremlin, the risk of a mistake sparking a regional or world war grow more likely. Hopefully, sane forces in Moscow will be willing to compromise before Putin launches a “Hail Mary” that will set the world on fire.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

Photo: Pixabay

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has issued the 2022 Annual Threat Assessment. 

As in any government report, this Assessment is colored by the political inclinations of the current White House, which is reflected in the summary below.  The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents the Report’s summary

In the coming year, the United States and its allies will face an increasingly complex and interconnected  global security environment marked by the growing specter of great power competition and conflict, while  collective, transnational threats to all nations and actors compete for our attention and finite resources.  These challenges will play out amidst the continued global disruption resulting from the COVID-19  pandemic, contention over global efforts to deal with a changing climate, increasingly powerful non-state  actors, and rapidly evolving technology, all within the context of an evolving world order where the  continued diffusion of power is leading actors to reassess their place and capabilities in an increasingly  multipolar world. These challenges will intersect and interact in unpredictable ways, leading to mutually  reinforcing effects that could challenge our ability to respond, but also introducing new opportunities to  forge collective action with allies and partners against both the renewed threat of nation-state aggression and  emerging threats to human security. The 2022 Annual Threat Assessment highlights some of those  connections as it provides the Intelligence Community’s (IC’s) baseline assessments of the most pressing  threats to U.S. national interests, while emphasizing the United States’ key adversaries and competitors. It  is not an exhaustive assessment of all global challenges and notably excludes assessments of U.S.  adversaries’ vulnerabilities. It accounts for functional concerns, such as weapons of mass destruction and cyber, primarily in the sections on threat actors, such as China and Russia. 

Competition and potential conflict between nation-states remains a critical national security threat. Beijing,  Moscow, Tehran, and Pyongyang have demonstrated the capability and intent to advance their interests at  the expense of the United States and its allies. China increasingly is a near-peer competitor, challenging the  United States in multiple arenas—especially economically, militarily, and technologically—and is pushing  to change global norms and potentially threatening its neighbors. Russia is pushing back against  Washington where it can—locally and globally—employing techniques up to and including the use of force.  In Ukraine, we can see the results of Russia’s increased willingness to use military threats and force to  impose its will on neighbors. Iran will remain a regional menace with broader malign influence activities,  and North Korea will expand its WMD capabilities while being a disruptive player on the regional and  world stages. Major adversaries and competitors are enhancing and exercising their military, cyber, and  other capabilities, raising the risks to U.S. and allied forces, weakening our conventional deterrence, and  worsening the longstanding threat from weapons of mass destruction. As states such as China and Russia  increasingly see space as a warfighting domain, multilateral space security discussions have taken on greater  importance as a way to reduce the risk of a confrontation that would affect every state’s ability to safely  operate in space. 

The lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to strain governments and societies, fueling  humanitarian and economic crises, political unrest, and geopolitical competition as countries, such as China  and Russia, seek advantage through such avenues as “vaccine diplomacy.” No country has been completely  spared, and even when a vaccine is widely distributed globally, the economic and political aftershocks will  be felt for years. Low-income countries with high debts face particularly challenging recoveries and the  potential for cascading crises leading to regional instability, whereas others will turn inward or be distracted  by other challenges. The IC continues to investigate the concerning incidences of Anomalous Health  Incidents and the danger they pose to U.S. personnel. 

Ecological degradation and a changing climate will continue to fuel disease outbreaks, threaten food and  water security, and exacerbate political instability and humanitarian crises. Great power competition and  disputes between wealthy and low-income nations will threaten progress on the collective action that will be  needed to meet global goals for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. 

Other transnational challenges will pose an array of direct and indirect threats to the United States. They  will interact in complex and cascading ways with each other and with threats posed by great power  competition, increasingly empowered non-state actors, the pandemic, and climate change. Emerging and  disruptive technologies, as well as the proliferation and permeation of technology into all aspects of our  lives, pose unique challenges. The scourge of transnational organized crime, illicit drugs, violent extremism,  and endemic corruption in many countries will continue to take their toll on American lives, prosperity, and  safety. Both state and non-state cyber actors threaten our infrastructure and provide avenues for foreign  malign influence threats against our democracy. We will see continuing potential for surges in migration  from Afghanistan, Latin America, and other poor countries, which are reeling from conflict and the  economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic. Economic and political conditions in Latin America  continue to spark waves of migration that destabilize our Southern neighbors and put pressure on our  Southern border. Finally, ISIS, al-Qa‘ida, and Iran and its militant allies will take advantage of weak  governance to continue to plot terrorist attacks against U.S. persons and interests, including to varying  degrees in the United States, and exacerbate instability in regions such as Africa and the Middle East. 

Regional instability and conflicts continue to threaten U.S. persons and interests. Some have direct  implications for U.S. security. For example, the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan threatens U.S. interests,  including the possibility of terrorist safe havens re-emerging and a humanitarian disaster. The continued  fighting in Syria has a direct bearing on U.S. forces, whereas tensions between nuclear-armed India and  Pakistan remain a global concern. The iterative violence between Israel and Iran, and conflicts in other  areas—including Africa, Asia, and the Middle East—have the potential to escalate or spread, fueling  humanitarian crises and threatening U.S. persons, as in the case of Al-Shabaab, which is leveraging  continued instability in East Africa and the lack of security capacity of regional states to threaten U.S.  interests and American lives. 

Bulgaria has established and is now leading a NATO multinational battle group.  The Eastern European nation has also taken in an astounding 80,000 Ukrainian refugees. The U.S. continues to move troops to Germany, Romania, Poland and the Baltics.

Bulgarian Prime Minister Kiril Petkov said America has shown tremendous support to Bulgaria, stating that “Unfortunately, there is now not a single country that can live with the illusion that they are safe and secure since the Russian invasion began…No one can defend themselves alone. Our security lies with the collective security with our allies within NATO.” 

The United States has agreed to provide a Stryker armored unit to contribute to the battle group in Bulgaria, under Bulgarian command. Strykers, introduced in 2000, are eight-wheeled, medium-weight armored vehicles with substantial protection against enemy assault.

Petrov also said the U.S. and Bulgaria discussed logistics and ways to better facilitate troop movements such as building roads, railroads and a bridge over the Danube River. 

Bulgaria fell within the Soviet sphere of influence as a captive nation and became a “People’s Republic” in 1946. Communist domination ended in 1990, when Bulgaria held its first multiparty election since World War II and began the process of moving toward political democracy and a market economy while combating inflation, unemployment, corruption, and crime. The country joined NATO in 2004,  and the EU in 2007.

A Gallup study noted that NATO and the U.S. “rejected Russia’s demand to roll back the alliance’s presence in 14 Eastern European countries that became members after 1997. The idea likely would have gained little traction in those countries, where Russia’s leadership has been highly unpopular since it annexed Crimea in 2014. Since then, median approval (of Russia) across the mostly former Eastern bloc countries has never topped 30%, and disapproval has never dropped below 46%. In 2021, before the threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, nearly half (49%) disapproved.”

According to Gallup, Disapproval of Russia’s leadership is highest in Poland, where 79% of adults disapproved in 2021. That level of disapproval is 28 points higher than it was in 2013 before the annexation of Crimea.

Current levels of disapproval are also particularly high in two of the three Baltic states, Estonia at 56% and Latvia at 49%. Disapproval in both countries is 10 and 11 points higher than in 2013, respectively. Estonia and Latvia — and Lithuania — have sent weapons to Ukraine to support the country against a potential Russian invasion. Disapproval of Russia’s leadership remains well above where it was before the annexation of Crimea. In both Hungary and Bulgaria, levels are 21 points higher in 2021 than in 2013, while in Romania, the level of disapproval is 10 points higher than where it previously stood.

Putin’s goal was to weaken NATO, both now and in the future by discouraging expansion.  His invasion has achieved exactly the opposite. Switzerland, the ultimate “neutral” state in Europe, has joined its European Union neighbors in placing sanctions on Russia.

Sweden, which also has maintained neutrality for over one hundred years, is moving closer to NATO. According to published reports, it has provided   135,000 field rations, 5,000 helmets, 5,000 body shields and 5,000 anti-tank weapons to Ukraine. A National Interest study noted that the Nordic nation has also provided Bofors AT-4, a single-use anti-tank launcher weapons to the embattled nation.

Finland, as well, as reacted sharply to Putin’s war. A Foreign Policy report quotes Finnish President Sauli Niinisto reacted promptly to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s demand for “legal security guarantees from the Weststating  that “maintaining a national room to maneuver and freedom of choice is the foundation of Finland’s foreign, security, and defense policy…Finland’s room to maneuver and freedom of choice also include the possibility of military alignment and of applying for NATO membership…”

Photo: An honor guard welcomed the U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, when he arrived in Sofia, Bulgaria on March 18. (DoD photo)