Author: Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.

The evidence that the nation’s government officials are extensively separate from the concerns of the American people grows larger each day.

Review just a few recent examples. 

New York State is in a rapid downward spiral.  Stunning levels of crime, outrageous taxes, failing schools and a regulatory environment that destroys jobs and businesses large and small besiege the remaining residents of what was once known as the Empire State.  But you wouldn’t know that from the early 2023 actions of its government.  Facing a myriad of very real challenges, what did legislatures work on? Well, they gave themselves a pay raise.  They followed up that nonsense with a provision to approve human composting.  According to a published source,   “The practice is formally referred to as ‘natural organic reduction’ and is seen as a more environmentally friendly alternative to more traditional burials. New York is the sixth state to legalize human composting since 2019. The green burial process was legalized by Governor Kathy Hochul.”

Legislators got a raise and they use your body for composting. That solves everything, doesn’t it? That certainly explains the mass exodus from New York (those who follow science fiction movies will probably prefer the phrase “Escape from New York,” a 1981 flick starring Kurt Russell.)

Spectrum News reports that New York continues to lead the country in population loss and outmigration, according to data released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Empire State saw the largest annual numeric and percent decline in its population between July 2021 and July 2022, dropping by 180,341 people. Overall, that’s a 0.9% decrease in people living in New York, the bureau reported. Net domestic migration accounted for much of the decline in the state’s population, with New York losing 299,557 to other states. New York in the last two years has seen a sharp drop in its population, losing more than 400,000 people during that time.”

New York is not alone.  As California contends with brownouts because they can’t produce enough electricity, and people across the once-golden state struggle to pay massively increased energy bills, the progressive legislature and governor are seeking to replace less costly natural gas with hyper-costly electricity. Claims that some uses of natural gas, such as that used for cooking, cause health problems are sheer nonsense, disproven by the simplest reviews of the ridiculous claims. The same culprits want to eliminate gas-driven cars, as well.

KTLA reports that The (California) “state’s population…continues to decline, according to the latest data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Figures released …showed California’s resident population at 39,029,342 in July 2022, a decline of more than 113-thousand since July 2021 and down more than a half-million people since July 2020.”

At first glance, engaging in actions that chase your population away, or that ignore real needs like crime control, inflation and runaway taxes, appear to be exceptionally absurd. Are these actions the results of ignorant leaders in Sacramento and Albany?   To understand their bizarre decisions, you have to understand their actual goals.  Those plans have nothing to do with the environment, public health, or safety. They have everything to do with control.  The distribution of electricity is a far easier action to control than other energy sources. If everyone, every business, every vehicle is wholly dependent on electricity, which can be limited at the flick of a few switches, big government has massive influence in every decision about everything. If starting or running a business is too expensive to engage in, then you must depend on government for your survival. 

While families contend with trying to pay higher bills and avoid being victimized by the criminals government elites let out onto the street thanks to lax law enforcement and the growing strength of criminal cartels let into America through Biden’s open southern border, Progressive officials and their media lackeys ignore those concerns.  They distract from it with overblown environmental allegations, and a whole litany of grievance issues that serve only to alienate different segments of the population from one another, a divide and conquer technique that strengthens their hand even further.

Illustration: Pixabay

Russian war dead in Ukraine likely exceed 300,000 according to US officials, with another 180,000 wounded in the war. Those estimates dwarf Ukrainian losses, which are estimated to be 70,000 killed with slightly more than 100,000 wounded. Although Russia’s uniformed military including the Wagner group mercenary force is almost three times larger than Ukraine’s 1.3 million soldiers, Putin is being forced to recruit heavily in Central Asia to fill the ranks. It is becoming more challenging for Russia to recruit in Kyrgyzstan as it is illegal for their citizens to participate in the armed hostilities as a mercenary serving Russia. Although that does not bode well for the Kremlin, Putin is pushing back against the Central Asian elites balking about supplying men for his war. 

Kyrgyzstan’s Supreme Court on August 30 held a criminal hearing in the case against one of its national’s, Askara Kubanychbek-uulu. He was detained by the country’s State Committee for National Security in January 2023 and in May sentenced to 10 years for participating in the Ukraine war, before the case was revisited and a new trial set. Nurbek Bekmurzaev, of the Jamestown Foundation, says that in June 2022 Kubanychbek-uulu signed a contract with the “armed forces” of the so-called Luhansk “people’s republic” to obtain Russian citizenship.  

The Russian publication RT on July 19 reported that he requested the Kremlin grant him a Russian passport and extricate him from prison. This marks what appears to be the first case of a Central Asian citizen convicted for participating illegally in the war in Ukraine on behalf of Russia. Analysts expect there will be additional cases. Despite Central Asian states attempting to discourage participation as mercenaries, Russia is continuing to step up its efforts to recruit as its domestic efforts falter. 

According to Kaktus Media, Kirill Kabanov, a member of the Russian Presidential Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, promised to speed the passport process for  Kubanychbek-uulu, stating that Russia “is obliged to use all possible pressure mechanisms in response to clearly unfriendly actions on the part of the Kyrgyz authorities.” Putin needs to reinforce his armed forces and cannot afford the Central Asian courts to discourage recruits. After the initial ruling Moscow started exerting pressure on Bishkek to drop the charges. Both the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Interior were involved in the operation to free Kubanychbek-uulu. 

Central Asian migrants, notes Bekmurzaev, “present a large pool of potential recruits and allow the Kremlin to avoid having to mobilize ethnic Russians in its city centers. If the Kremlin is to succeed with these recruitment efforts, it cannot ignore such cases as Kubanychbek-uulu’s and leave Central Asians who fought on the Russian side rotting in prison in their home countries.” C. Krishnasai, writing in WION on September 4, says that since late June “Russian miliary reportedly put up military advertisements targeting Armenian and Kazakhstani migrants, offering down payments of 45,000 rubles, equivalent to about US $5,140 and staring salaries of 190,000 rubles, or US $1,973 dollars.”  

Krishnasai adds that the UK Ministry of Defense reports that there are upwards of 6 million Central Asian migrants inside the Russian Federation, all of whom are “potential recruits” in the Kremlin’s eyes. As of May 2022, there were 3.35 million labor migrants, according to a Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration analysis publish in June 2022, entitled, “Monitoring the Economic Situation in Russia: Tendencies and Challenges of Socio-economic Development.” Eighty-three percent of the migrants arrived from Central Asia and work in the service and construction industries on large infrastructure projects. It was a natural transition for them to enter the military sphere. The Jamestown Foundation reports that the first video evidence of Russian recruitment of Central Asians coincided with the first day of the war in Ukraine on February 24, 2022. It depicts an Uzbek male in uniform driving a truck in the Luhansk region of Ukraine. The video reported that many Tajiks and Uzbeks already had signed contracts to join the Russian invasion.  

The Russian government as early as spring 2022 attempted to threaten Central Asians possessing Russian passports, which are required for working in Russia, with losing their citizenship if they failed to appear when summoned to Russian enlistment centers. Although it was not legally required, the intimidation appears pervasive. Those without Russian passports were promised one immediately upon their contract completion of military service. In addition to Moscow recruiting Central Asians, the Wagner Group also sought prisoners from the region and brought them to its training center in Molkino, Russia. The Asiaplus publication in Tajikistan reported last June that at least 93 Central Asian prisoners from Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan died while fighting in Ukraine.  

As desperation seeps throughout the corridors of the Kremlin, it is likely Russian officials will increase their coercion of migrant workers to join the ranks of its military fighting in Ukraine. Earlier this month Uzbek nationals arriving in Mariupol as construction workers were tricked into fighting on the front lines in Ukraine after contract papers, they were required to sign, had a small section of the document designating them as military. With the 2024 Russian elections looming on the horizon, Putin cannot risk the widespread alienation of Russian voters. Bekmurzaev argues that a new verdict in Kubanychbek uulu’s case may expose just how desperate Putin is this fall and how weak the Central Asian elites are if they cave to Russia’s demands. The outcome of the war in Ukraine is far from decided. 

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: Pixabay

India’s population, military strength, and strategic geographical location render it one of the world’s most important nations.  The implications for the United States, particularly in the dangerous challenges from China, are extraordinary.

Key Indian government officials met in Washington in early February to meet with their Pentagon counterparts and discuss the growing Indo-U.S. military relationship.

The Pentagon notes that “Over the past decade, the U.S.-India defense relationship has become indispensable in promoting peace, prosperity and stability in the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean region.”

The State Department notes that “The U.S.-India strategic partnership is founded on shared values including a commitment to democracy and upholding the rules-based international system. The United States and India have shared interests in promoting global security, stability, and economic prosperity through trade, investment, and connectivity.”

India has consistently taken a nonaligned position in global affairs.  However, as China’s aggressiveness has increased dramatically, it has been forced to face the reality that its security lies with western-aligned nations.

The U.S. Institute for Peace reports “On December 9, hundreds of Indian and Chinese forces clashed along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the roughly 2,100 miles contested boundary that separates northern India from China … both Indian and Chinese forces sustained injuries. The skirmish was the worst since the summer of 2020, when deadly fighting in the Galwan Valley led to the most significant border escalation in over four decades. In the wake of those 2020 clashes, India and China held 17 rounds of military talks — but have been unable to reach terms for disengagement across key areas of the disputed border.”

 According to American Military News, Japan and India held their first joint air drills in an area outside of Tokyo as both countries step up military exercises with other countries amid worries about China’s assertiveness.

Globaldata’s  Abhijit Apsingikar, a Defense Analyst at that organization, writes: “Growing presence along the Himalayan frontier, cross-border incursions and increased naval activity in the Indian Ocean by China are a cause of concern to India’s strategic interests, and hence India has enhanced it’s defense budget.”

Earlier this year, the White House notes, President Biden and Prime Minister Modi announced the U.S.-India initiative on Critical and Emerging Technology (iCET) in May 2022 to elevate and expand the strategic technology partnership and defense industrial cooperation between the governments, businesses, and academic institutions of the two countries. The two negotiations agreed to Develop a new bilateral Defense Industrial Cooperation Roadmap to accelerate technological cooperation between both countries for the joint development and production, with an initial focus on exploring projects related to jet engines, munition related technologies, and other systems. The U.S. has received an application from General Electric to jointly produce jet engines that could power jet aircraft operated and produced indigenously by India.  The United States committed to an expeditious review of this application. They also agreed to enhance long-term research and development cooperation, with a focus on identifying maritime security and intelligence surveillance reconnaissance (ISR) operational use cases. Additionally, an “innovation bridge” will be launched to connect U.S. and Indian defense startups.

While India has recognized the common threat it faces from China with the U.S., it remains “nonaligned” in other international matters.

The Council on Foreign Relations notes that “New Delhi does not want to ruin its historical ties to Moscow, which is also a significant source of military equipment. (Over 70% of India’s military hardware comes from Russia, and last year, Russia delivered to India S-400 air defense systems.) But India also knows that it needs new international partners. And over the last two decades, it has found one in Washington.”

Illustration: Pixabay

In the past, Elon Musk was never considered a member of the political right, or even a Conservative thinker.  For instance, “Musk has repeatedly warned about the risks of climate change to humanity. In 2015, he made a head-turning speech on the subject at Paris-Sorbonne University. ‘If we wait and delay the change (away from fossil fuels), the best case is simply delaying the inevitable transition from sustainable energy. This is the best case if we don’t take action now..(t)he worst case, however, is more displacement and destruction than all the wars in history combined.”  Not exactly a viewpoint expressed by most Republicans, is it?

In fact, according to The Independent, “(o)ver his many years of fame as the chief executive of Tesla, SpaceX, and now Twitter, the South African-born tycoon has…carefully triangulated between left and right and donated to both Democrats and Republicans while variously declaring himself a ‘moderate’, a ‘socialist,’ and ‘socially liberal and fiscally conservative.'”

All of that changed after Musk bought Twitter. “Musk appears deeply committed to the right’s culture war against progressivism in most forms,” according to The Atlantic. “His purchase of Twitter was an explicitly political act couched in the notion of preserving free speech. But Musk’s notion of free speech is a broad course correction that involves amplifying and advancing the interests of right-wing reactionaries while trolling the left. Musk might argue that this is restoring balance to the system, but if we are judging based only on actions and outcomes, it is very hard to see his tenure at Twitter as anything other than a series of policies intended to benefit a particular ideology.” 

And just how has Musk “amplified and advanced the interests of right wing reactionaries?” Perhaps it was by releasing internal Twitter files to the public after his purchase of the social media platform, information which revealed the efforts made by the Biden Administration to censor generally right-leaning critics of the government’s edicts and politics.  As Matt Taibbi, one of the Journalists to whom Musk released the “Twitter Files,” stated to the House Judiciary Committee in March, “(t)he original promise of the Internet was that it might democratize the exchange of information globally. A free internet would overwhelm all attempts to control information flow…(w)hat we found in the Files was a sweeping effort to reverse that promise, and use machine learning and other tools to turn the internet into an instrument of censorship and social control.

Unfortunately, our own government appears to be playing a lead role…(w)e learned Twitter, Facebook, Google, and other companies developed a formal system for taking in moderation ‘requests’ from every corner of government: the FBI, DHS, HHS, DOD, the Global Engagement Center at State, even the CIA… (u)ndeniably, the making of such lists is a form of digital McCarthyism.” 

As we discussed in July, these efforts at censorship led to a lawsuit brought against the Biden Administration by several States, and a ruling in Missouri v. Biden which detailed the extensive efforts made to censor the views of the American public in general, and Conservative thinkers in particular. “The opinion is 155 pages long, and more than 80 pages…details the factual basis for (an) injunction.  These facts are a stunning indictment of the efforts members of the Biden Administration have made to suppress free speech, calling even the truth ‘misinformation’ if it did not suit the narrative the government wished to impose on the American public.” 

Musk’s purchase of Twitter was accomplished in October of 2022.   The “Twitter Files” were released to the public in December.  Taibbi then testified before Congress regarding those files in March of this year. 

It was then that the Biden Administration began its harassment of Elon Musk.

Not long after his purchase of the company, Musk laid off more than 6,000 people, or approximately 80% of Twitter’s staff. In March of 2023, it was announced that “(t)he Federal Trade Commission is investigating Elon Musk’s mass layoffs at Twitter and trying to obtain his internal communications…(t)he Republican-led House Judiciary Committee published excerpts from the FTC’s letters…alleging that the agency was overreaching ‘to harass Elon Musk’s Twitter’…(t)he House said the requests amounted to a deluge of ‘demands about its personnel decisions in each of the company’s departments, every internal communication relating to Elon Musk and even Twitter’s interactions with journalists’ who Musk’s team allowed to see certain employee emails and messages. Those documents were dubbed ‘The Twitter Files’ and were meant to show how the company made decisions to moderate content before Musk took over.” 

In other words, the FTC demanded that Musk reveal the discussions he had with Matt Taibbi and other journalists about the release of Twitter’s internal documents (documents which Musk owned at that point, and had every right to release) on the pretext of “investigating layoffs.”

 Then, in May, The Federal Trade Commission struck again. “(FTC) is reviewing Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk’s $44 billion takeover of Twitter Inc..(t)he agency will decide…whether it will do an in-depth antitrust probe of the proposed transaction…(s)uch a probe would delay the deal’s closing by months.”  This probe was conducted even though “Antitrust experts have said there is little likelihood the agency will find any evidence that Musk’s purchase of Twitter is illegal under antitrust law.”  

In a court filing in July, Musk asked a Federal Court in California to end the FTC’s harassment of himself and Twitter.  “In the filing, Twitter asks the court to ‘rein in an investigation that has spiraled out of control and become tainted by bias’…The filing states that the FTC has issued 16 demand letters to (Twitter) since Musk’s takeover of Twitter, in comparison to approximately 28 demand letters it issued in the decade (prior to Musk’s purchase of the company).” 

But the Federal Trade Commission is only one tool being used by the government to punish Musk for his commitment to free speech.

Recently, “(t)he Biden administration sued Elon Musk-owned rocket and satellite company SpaceX…for allegedly discriminating against asylees and refugees in hiring… US Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke, who heads the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights, brought the SpaceX suit following an investigation by the division’s Immigration and Employee Rights Section…’Our investigation found that SpaceX failed to fairly consider or hire asylees and refugees because of their citizenship status and imposed what amounted to a ban on their hire regardless of their qualification, in violation of federal law,’ Clarke said.” 

SpaceX is in the business of making and flying rockets and other spacecraft.  “SpaceX won a slice of a billion-dollar agreement to launch new rockets for the Space Force. Two months later, it secured a $149 million Pentagon contract to make satellites that can track missiles. Then, less than a week later…the US military said it was teaming up with SpaceX to build a rocket capable of delivering weapons around the world at 7,500 mph.”  Further, “SpaceX’s launch services have already become an invaluable resource for the U.S. government, but the company is now jumping into the deep end of the pool…Starshield, a new vertical within SpaceX, will provide ‘government entities’ (think three-letter agencies) with secure communications and bespoke satellite designs…on the Starshield page…(t)he tagline is ‘supporting national security’…Satellite-sourced data — particularly live imagery — is of enormous importance to the military.” 

It is clear, therefore, that SpaceX is a defense contractor, involved in some sensitive and confidential work that benefits the United States Military, as well as our Space Force.

DOJ’s case against SpaceX is brought pursuant to 8 USC Sec. 1324b., which states that “(i)t is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual…(A) because of such individual’s national origin, or (B) in the case of a protected individual…because of such individual’s citizenship status.”  A “protected individual” is described as “an alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence, is granted the status of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence…is admitted as a refugee…or is granted asylum…”  

According to the lawsuit filed by the Justice Department, “(f)rom at least September 2018 to at least May 2022, SpaceX discriminated against asylees and refugees throughout its hiring process, including during recruiting, screening, and selection, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). Because of their citizenship status, asylees and refugees had virtually no chance of being fairly considered for or hired for a job at SpaceX.” 

The DOJ complaint goes on to state that “(i)n online postings and statements by SpaceX’s CEO and other SpaceX officials and recruiters, SpaceX discouraged asylees and refugees from applying to the company by wrongly stating that SpaceX can only hire U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents .SpaceX officials have repeatedly said publicly that they can only hire U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents because of export control laws and regulations.”  Further, the complaint alleges that “SpaceX’s CEO (Elon Musk)…posted (that), ‘U.S. law requires at least a green card to be hired at SpaceX, as rockets are advanced weapons technology.'”

The complaint alleges that “export control laws and regulations do not prohibit or restrict employers from hiring asylees and refugees; those laws treat asylees and refugees just like U.S. citizens,” and that Musk’s statements are false.

Are these allegations true?  Must SpaceX hire refugees and asylum seekers?

Not under 8 USC 1324b(a)(4), which states that “(n)otwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to prefer to hire, recruit, or refer an individual who is a citizen or national of the United States over another individual who is an alien if the two individuals are equally qualified.”  Certainly, given the nature of SpaceX’s work for the US military, there would be a natural preference to hire citizens of the United States – a perfectly legal position, under this provision of the law.

Further, under paragraph 2 of 8 USC 1324b, an exception is made for “discrimination because of citizenship status which is otherwise required in order to comply with law, regulation, or executive order, or required by Federal, State, or local government contract.”  In fact, some contracts with the US government require that “(e)ach individual employed under the contract shall be a citizen of the United States of America, or an alien who has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence as evidenced by a Permanent Resident Card,” and that “(a)ny exceptions must be approved by the Department’s Chief Security Officer or designee.” 

Thus, some of the contracts between SpaceX, Starshield, and the US military most likely require Musk’s company to hire only US citizens for reasons of national security.

Of course, this is irrelevant to the US Attorney who brought the case against SpaceX.  In a post on Twitter, Clarke wrote that  “Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla & SpaceX saw his wealth surge 413%, spiking from $24.6B to $126.2 billion between March 18 to November 24. 50.4M Americans are food insecure up from 37.2M in 2018. Growing wealth inequality in the U.S. is NOT sustainable.”  At the time of her appointment to lead the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, Clarke was the subject of much Congressional scrutiny.  “Clarke also has a history of making highly controversial statements, including a 2020 Newsweek op-ed headlined: ‘I Prosecuted Police Killings. Defund the Police—But Be Strategic.’ Clarke said in a hearing before the Judiciary Committee that she did not actually mean to say police should be defunded in that op-ed, despite the fact the text of the op-ed said, ‘We must invest less in police’ three separate times.” Perhaps Clarke is just following her own star, and believes SpaceX should hire refugees and asylum seekers to perform highly confidential work on rockets, regardless of whether or not the company’s contracts with the US government and military say otherwise, and regardless of national security requirements.

Or perhaps, Clarke has joined the government pile-on, and is engaged in the systemic harassment of the man who opened up Twitter to free discourse, and revealed the extent of the Biden Administration’s efforts to censor you and I.

Judge John Wilson served on the bench in NYC

Illustration: Pixabay

North Korea’s threat to the United States is expanding, both in its increasing nuclear and missile prowess and its growing closeness to Russia.

In a statement issued in June, the White House stated that “The existence and risk of the proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula and the actions and policies of the Government of North Korea continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. “ 

Events in July have highlighted the increased danger.  In July, Pyongyang launched a Hwasong-18 intercontinental missile.  The test flight was the third ICBM test this year, following others in March and April. The Congressional Research Service warns that Recent ballistic missile tests and military parades suggest that North Korea is continuing to build a nuclear warfighting capability designed to evade regional ballistic missile defenses

The July launch occurred in the same month as a visit by Russia’s Defense Minister, Sergei Shoigu, to the nation.  Shoigu and Kim Jong jointly attended a military expo in Pyongyang. A Chinese Communist Party politburo member joined the two. According to the North Korean government, “Kim Jong Un expressed thanks to Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and members of the Russian military delegation for visiting Pyongyang with militant comradeship and friendly feelings…The outcome of the talks was the adoption of the DPRK-Russia Joint Declaration. The Joint Declaration confirmed that the further development of cooperation and collaboration between the DPRK and the Russian Federation accords with the fundamental interests of the two peoples and contributes to the establishment of the fair and reasonable international order based on the principles of equality and mutual respect.  It also affirmed that the DPRK and Russia recognize the sovereign rights of each state to choose its own road of political, economic, and social development, and support each other’s efforts to oppose interference in other countries’ internal affairs and to safeguard independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.

A Bloomberg analysis reported that “Secret Deals With Russia Help Kim Jong Un Fund Nuclear Program. [The] economic rebound means the regime can weather sanctions and continue its nuclear build-up.”

Pyonyang’s realtions with Moscow expanded in recent years, following Putin’s Ukrainian invasion. North Korea is one of the few governments that recognizes the alleged independence of the breakaway states of Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics in Eastern Ukraine. Additionally, North Korea volunteered 100,000 of their own troops to help Donbas. Moscow as reportedly  purchased millions of shells and rockets from North Korea for its attempted conquest of Ukraine.

The enhanced axis of Russia, China and North Korea was illustrated at a United Nations Security Council meeting, where the two nations joined together to veto a draft resolution which would have strengthened sanctions against Pyongyang. The Nikkei publication notes that “It was the first time the council had done that after unanimously adopting all 10 previous resolutions since 2006, the year Pyongyang conducted its first nuclear test.”

A Foreign Policy analysis points out that “North Korea’s decision to draw closer to both countries [comes] as Pyongyang categorically rules out negotiating with Washington over its nuclear weapons program. … North Korean leader Kim Jong Un [has]sent a message to Putin to mark the anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. Kim hailed what he described as the growing ‘strategic and tactical cooperation, support and solidarity’ between the two nations.”

There is a fourth member of the North Korea, Russia, Chinese axis. Iran and North Korea have worked together in missile development. A Diplomat study emphasizes that “Cooperation between North Korea and Iran has been a critical — yet under examined — enabler of the recent success. What started as a transactional relationship, where Iran provided much-needed cash to North Korea in return for missile parts and technology, has evolved into an increasingly effective partnership. The time has come to view their previously independent ballistic missile programs as two sides of the same coin.”

Illustration: Pixabay

China’s two million uniformed military personnel form a large and powerful force, but there is an overlooked aspect of China’s defense system that dwarfs its regular forces and should be giving Asian nations concern. China’s reserve auxiliary force is estimated to contain as many as eight million additional personnel, according to Western analysts. During the 1960’s Cultural Revolution period, barefoot soldiers were ill-trained and ill-equipped. Today, China’s war planners are leaning more heavily on a better equipped reserve auxiliary force composed largely of former uniformed soldiers and others with specialized skills and training.  

Where the leadership in Beijing once relied on its militia to play only a supplementary support role, it is now assigning those personnel new responsibilities. This summer, reserve force exercises conducted in Hunan Province included training in piloting drones, driving assault boats, and manning command-and-control vehicles, says Thomas Corbett and Peter Singer of Defense One. It represents a change from the militia’s indirect involvement in warfare to an active and direct role working with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).    

Official documents indicate that China began integrating its militia force capabilities into the PLA when it created the National Defense Mobilization Department (NDMD) in 2016. Beijing used joint-cooperation agreements to combine civilian and military personnel and provide the PLA with easily accessible human resources. Blue Path Labs recently produced a report for the China Aerospace Studies Institute with two key findings. The reserve forces are providing expanded support to the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF). Secondly, in the case of a protracted war in Asia, senior military leaders intend to use civilian assets in the reserve force in critical front-line roles. Reserve units provide different specialized skills to the uniformed forces. A PLAAF airfield might rely on a local militia to excavate and resurface a runway, while another provides medical treatment, meteorological assistance, and help with surveying, says Corbett and Singer. 

China also counts on its civilian businesses near PLA bases to support the uniformed military. They might provide access to transportation facilities, airport terminals, and local fuel supplies that could be needed during a PLA operation. In the event of a protracted conflict, the assistance might include in-house support capabilities as a cost-saving measure. By doing so, the regular forces would not need to maintain as many vehicles. In one recent case, civilian support allowed one regiment to cut its support force by 50% and reduce transportation requirements by 200 vehicles, according to Defense One.  

As China prepares for potential war in Asia, these joint-cooperation agreements are becoming more common and increasing in importance. Many PLA units this summer invited local reserve forces to military bases to work within PLA units. The intention is to provide China additional options during a conflict. In one case this summer a PLAAF base conducted a two-week support exercise that included the reserves acting out their potential roles in wartime.  

Over 150 personnel at an air base in Xuzhou performed emergency response activities, provided medical support, and repaired a damaged airfield. Beijing is starting to assign reserve forces increasingly complex tasks and more important missions this year. The political leadership is moving beyond using these forces for pre-combat support on a regular basis. The PLA itself is also improving interoperability and blurring the line between support and front-line combat. According to Defense One, “Several airfields have begun tasking their militias with setting up anti-aircraft platforms and building field communication facilities.” One analyst familiar with Chinese naval operations compared it to preparations conducted by Japan for WWII military operations and the implementation of its Co-Prosperity Sphere in East Asia. The reserve forces today are cross-training to fill in technical gaps that exist within the uniformed forces.

Although some reserve troops complain about the time demands and being taken away from the day jobs, the integration program is working. One remaining major issue is that Chinese forces are not battle-tested, have not worked together under pressure, and the reserves may not have sufficient training and discipline to act in a high-stress environment.  

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

For many years Russia’s Caspian Flotilla dominated this inland sea and was the region’s most important navy. That is evolving today as outside powers, including Turkey, expand their national navies and assume a larger role. The Caspian littoral states, previously focused on deploying their Coast Guards, are this summer constructing naval vessels in Kazakhstan capable of challenging the Russian Caspian Flotilla and enabling Turkey to project power throughout the region.  

Located east of the Black Sea the often overlooked, large body of water contains a wealth of oil and gas reserves. It can be accessed only through canals connecting it to the Black Sea, Azov Sea, the Baltic, and Russia’s Volga River. No saltwater reaches its shores. While some describe it simply as the world’s largest lake, it contributes an estimated 10% to the GDP of the countries along its shores and accounts for about 40% of their exports. It also serves as a link between east and west with competing powers vying for dominance. 

Central Asian governments view it as more valuable than a freshwater lake and now Turkey is planning a genuine navy in the Caspian Sea, according to Paul Goble of the Jamestown Foundation. He points out that Astana has signed agreements with Turkey to construct large naval vessels for Ankara in Kazakhstan. They will be capable of challenging Moscow’s regional influence once deployed in the Caspian. The deals inked this summer will enable the Turkish government to be the “naval contractor of first resort or even use the ships it builds under the flags of others to promote Turkish goals,” says Goble. 

Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan were not allotted ships from the former Soviet Caspian fleet upon the dissolution of the USSR. As a result, Kazakhstan recently refocused its approach to sea corridors through shallow waters and is building additional coastal defenses. Today Astana has the largest naval inventory of any of the Caspian littorals states, including Russia. It developed a two-prong approach, both purchasing ships from foreign states and by increasing domestic production in cooperation with foreign shipbuilders.  

The Russian publicationSovsekretno, on August 29, reported that Moscow officials will be paying closer attention to Kazakhstan’s naval plans this fall. The Kremlin suggests that Astana is deliberately allowing Turkey to project power beyond the Turkish world in a move aimed at placing it into the dominant geopolitical position once held by Russia. If this summer’s announced plans are fully carried out, Turkey could dominate the entire southern port of the post-Soviet space to the border with China. That could force Putin’s hand, compelling him to respond militarily or lose status in the Caspian Sea and in the nearby Central Asian states.  

Five years ago, Moscow had the shipbuilding market cornered using bilateral agreements with the littoral states. The Central Asian states, including Kazakhstan, leaned toward the Russian Federation for shipbuilding, according to Goble. They used the provisions in the 2018 accord on the delimitation of the Caspian to end conflict among states in the region that had been on the rise since 1991. Despite Moscow’s efforts, the states later turned to South Korea and now Turkey for the construction of its ships. 

According to at least one Russian analyst, “Ankara has found a way around the restrictions about the introduction of foreign navies on the Caspian,” says Goble. Yury Lyamin, a senior researcher at Moscow’s Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, is quoted in Sovershenno Sekretno, as suggesting that “in order to control the oil and gas wealth of the Caspian Sea, and at the same time support their ally Azerbaijan, which is arguing for huge reserves of blue fuel with Turkmenistan, the Turks have come up with the idea of ​​deploying their naval forces here under the flags of their kindred “Turkic” countries, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan.”  

Despite the 2018 Convention prohibiting the use of non-Caspian armed forces, Baku and Astana are prepared to circumvent the restrictions imposed by Iran and Russia. Turkey is projecting power in the region and also aiding its closest ally, Azerbaijan, to ensure Ankara can access Caspian oil and gas. This will allow it to emerge potentially as the predominant geoeconomic power over all of Central Asia. One analyst suggests that Turkey has an additional goal of exerting its influence within the current borders of the Russian Federation as Ankara considers “…the representatives of peoples living in Russia, certain republics of the Caucasus, the Middle Volga, Kalmykia, parts of the Urals and Siberia” as properly within their sphere of influence.  

The concept of a Turkish world is an old, but not a forgotten one in Ankara. An expanded and more powerful Turkish fleet can bypass Russian trade routes and limit Moscow’s ability to trade with the Indian Ocean states and Iran. The question analysts are asking this month is can the West fend off the Turkish challenge in Central Asia and, especially, inside Kazakhstan. For Russia, these developments represent yet another southeastern state than may leave Moscow’s fold. It could force Russia to align more closely with its competitive ally China and possibly Iran. A once backwater region is emerging as a new flashpoint for serious conflict and with far-reaching consequences for the great powers. 

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

Photo: Pixabay

In 2019, candidate Joe Biden stated emphatically that  “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.”  Biden also said, “I have never discussed, with my son or my brother or with anyone else, anything having to do with their businesses. Period…And what I will do is the same thing we did in our (Obama) administration. There will be an absolute wall between personal and private [business interests] and the government. There wasn’t any hint of scandal at all when we were there. And I’m going to propose the same kind of strict, strict rules. That’s why I never talked with my son or my brother or anyone else — even distant family — about their business interests. Period.” 

These words could be interpreted as being technically true – in those 20 phone calls and even the dinner with a representative from Burisma, the then Vice President did not need to be involved in any discussion of business.  As Archer testified, his presence alone, and Hunter’s ability to get him on the phone so easily, proved that Hunter had his father’s ear.

In the words of Lilo Galente, “(a) smart boss finds the sweet spot between being remote enough from street level associates/soldiers who do the dirty work so that he’s not easily caught up in law enforcement investigations and being close enough to the hoodlums so that they know that he knows what they’re doing or not doing…(t)he boss takes a healthy piece of all of the activities, businesses, or rackets in which the organization is involved. Usually the boss has enough experience to know what most people are doing and how much money they should be earning.” 

All this comparison between the behavior of Biden and the average crime boss is facetious at best without evidence of actual criminal or unethical activity.  So far, the bulk of the hard evidence points toward a pattern of tax evasion and other criminal conduct by the President’s son – enough to merit the appointment of a Special Counsel to conduct an investigation of Hunter Biden’s business affairs.    What evidence is there of a pattern of criminal and or unethical behavior by the President, and other members of his family?

In May of 2023 (as the New York Times was claiming that there was “no proof of misconduct”), the House Oversight Committee released a Memorandum detailing some of their findings.  “The Committee has subpoenaed four different banks and received thousands of records in response,” according to the Memo.  “The Committee’s bank subpoenas were tailored to specific individuals and companies that engaged in business activities with Biden family members and their business associates.” 

The Committee reports that “(w)hen President Biden ran as a presidential candidate, he assured the American people his family received no money from China. President Biden recently claimed the Committee’s bank records regarding his family’s receipt of funds from China are ‘not true.’” Yet, “Biden family members and business associates created a web of over 20 companies—most were limited liability companies formed during Joe Biden’s vice presidency…Bank records show the Biden family, their business associates, and their companies received over $10 million from foreign nationals’ companies. The Committee has identified payments to Biden family members from foreign companies while Joe Biden served as Vice President and after he left public office…Chinese nationals and companies with significant ties to Chinese intelligence and the Chinese Communist Party hid the source of the funds by layering domestic limited liability companies.”

Further, “(t)o date, President Biden has continued to deny that his family received money from China—despite bank records proving otherwise. In 2017 alone, bank records show President Biden’s family and their related companies received millions of dollars from Chinese foreign nationals’ companies…(b)ecause President Biden is not required to file financial disclosures for immediate family members (other than a spouse or dependents), this gaping legislative hole has allowed President Biden to make misleading statements about the source of his family’s income, act willfully blind about their finances notwithstanding potential conflicts of interest, and use federal government resources and personnel—including White House spokespersons—to conceal influence peddling.”

The established facts are these; while Joe Biden was Vice President, Hunter Biden engaged in a series of meetings with Chinese, and other foreign nationals.  He reportedly “made millions” from these activities.  Hunter showed his foreign contacts that he had ready access to his father by calling him during meetings with these overseas associates.  The rest of the Biden family then received “millions of dollars” from foreign nationals, including the Chinese, money which was spread between 20 different “shell” companies.

Much of the media will not believe that this “web” of payments does not constitute influence peddling by Joe Biden himself.  They would rather view the then Vice President as just an innocent bystander to his son’s activities.  But the Oversight Committee thinks differently.

“The amount of money involved in these financial transactions is significant. The wires and money transfers range from approximately $5,000 to at least $3 million,” the Committee states. “Many of the relevant wire transfers involve Owasco PC, a professional corporation formed in Washington, D.C. Hunter Biden was the owner of Owasco PC…(t)he transactions in Romania and China show related but separate issues identified by the Committee that raise serious questions about financial disclosures and risks to national security…(t)he Committee is releasing a selection of bank records that shows the Biden family’s receipt of money from a foreign company reportedly controlled by Gabriel Popoviciu, the subject of a criminal probe and prosecution for corruption in Romania…(t)hen Vice President Biden delivered speeches and met with Romanian leaders in 2014 and 2015 regarding corruption in the country…(t)he Committee is concerned about the Biden family’s pattern of courting business in regions of the world in which the then Vice President had an outsize role and influenced U.S. policy.”

Let us take the position that these are mere allegations.  But are these allegations, involving the current President of the United States, serious enough to require a full investigation, and the appointment of a Special Counsel?

If you ask Attorney General Merrick Garland, he has already appointed a Special Counsel, and his name is David Weiss.  “Mr. Weiss, in his capacity as U.S. Attorney and along with federal law enforcement partners, began investigating allegations of certain criminal conduct by, among others, Robert Hunter Biden,” Garland stated when he appointed Weiss as Special Counsel on August 11, 2023.   “As Special Counsel, he will continue to have the authority and responsibility that he has previously exercised to oversee the investigation and decide where, when, and whether to file charges.” (Emphasis added.)

It is argued that the “among others” referenced above includes the President himself.  but significantly, no where is it stated that David Weiss is involved in any investigation beyond that of Hunter Biden’s activities.

In fact, as reported by Newsweek, “(t)he GOP-led House Oversight Committee wrote on X that Garland’s move is part of a cover up aimed to discredit the ‘Committee’s mounting evidence of President Joe Biden’s role in his family’s schemes selling ‘the brand’ for millions of dollars to foreign nationals.'” 

Is this assertion true?  Judge for yourself.  As we stated in August, “rather than select someone from outside the Justice Department, Attorney General Merrick Garland chose the current US Attorney for Delaware, David Weiss, to serve as his Special Counsel – the same David Weiss who has conducted an investigation into Hunter Biden for five years, failed to bring felony charges against Hunter Biden in a timely manner, failed to bring a routine felony gun charge against the President’s son, offered Hunter a plea to two misdemeanors and a diversion program, and then watched that agreement blow up under questioning by a federal judge.” 

It is therefore safe to conclude that even if David Weiss is conducting an investigation of Joe Biden and the rest of his family for the unethical and potentially criminal activities outlined by the House Oversight Committee, we can expect the same incompetent and “slow-walked” investigation we have witnessed Weiss conduct regarding the President’s son.

Let us be honest here – given the evidence uncovered by the House Oversight Committee, the American people deserve better than David Weiss to look into these serious allegations.

Judge John Wilson served on the bench in NYC