Author: Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.

As heavy air pollution from the Canadian wildfires blankets much of the United States, there is another country contributing to the air pollution problem.

A new report released this spring says that China permitted more coal power plants in 2022 than at any time in the last seven years despite its pledge at the Paris Climate Conference. That is an average of two new coal power plants per week!  According to Global Energy Monitor and the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) “The continued addition of new coal power capacity implies insufficient emphasis on overcoming the power system and … perpetuate[s] dependence on coal. The worst-case scenario is that the pressure to make use of the newly built coal power plants and prevent a steep fall in utilization leads to a moderation in China’s clean energy buildout, and/or the promotion of energy-intensive industries to consume the electricity.” Despite President Xi Jinping’s stated commitment, Chinese actions indicate the country is not prepared to follow through on its climate pledge. We can expect to see a major increase in China’s CO₂ emissions by the end of this decade. The CCP leadership has repeatedly shown that it cannot be trusted at its word, even among its own allies. What Beijing says and what it does within its policy framework are not the same, whether it concerns the climate, global economics, or military activity in the South China Sea.

Last week US Secretary of State Tony Blinken was in Beijing for talks aimed at reducing tensions between Beijing and Washington. It appears he made little to no progress. China’s expanding military deployments in East Asia are continuing unabated despite Beijing’s attempt to publicly portray its naval movements as defensive. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and China’s Defense Minister Li Shangfu were in Singapore for a conference earlier this month, where Li arrogantly demanded signs of “mutual respect” from the United States. China tried pushing Washington to limit its naval patrols near China and halt all arms sales to Taiwan. Reuters this week quoted a senior US defense official as saying that “since 2021 China had declined or not responded to more than a dozen requests to talk with the Pentagon and nearly 10 working-level engagement requests.” This is despite Chinese claims it is cooperating and that Washington is the one being obstructionist. The facts bely the reality of the bilateral political-military environment.

Events in Russia last week may have shaken the CCP leadership in Beijing, however, it did not improve its belligerent, untrustworthy behavior. Before Putin invaded Ukraine, China announced a “no limits” partnership with Moscow. Russia is one of China’s few allies. Yet even within this special “partnership” China continues to play by its own rules. On Monday a top US official said, “the weekend uprising… unsettled Beijing’s cloistered leadership, and some analysts inside and outside China have started to question whether Beijing needs to ease off its political and economic ties to Moscow,” according to Reuters. Apparently, there are limits on the “no limits” relationship when it is convenient for Beijing. Chinese businesses scurried to halt orders of auto parts and other machinery destined for Russia, uncertain about what was happening in Moscow. Now it appears Beijing is trying to figure out how to back even further away from the partnership to avoid new global sanctions and condemnation. The Chinese government is labeling the recent events  Russia’s “internal affair.” Even with its closest ally and “dear friend” Putin, Beijing cannot be trusted to do what it says. 

In a Saturday, June 24, commentary in Chinese-language Singaporean newspaper Lianhe Zaobao, Professor Yang Jun of Beijing’s China University of Political Science and Law, called for China to directly support Ukraine to avoid being “dragged into a quagmire of war by Russia.” He added that “With the development of the current situation and the trend of the war…(China) should further adjust its position on Russia and Ukraine, make its attitude clearer, and decisively stand on the side of the victors of history.” This may be the most honest statement to come from China in recent history. China’s leadership is not loyal to its allies or its own people. If the litmus test in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing is to “stand on the side of the victors” then the rest of the world needs to wake up, “adjust,” and recognize the modus operandi and self-serving characteristics of China as a very dangerous, nuclear-armed state.

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

The world fixated on Russia last weekend as events unfolded in Rostov. New-minted Russia watchers birthed novel scenarios to explain the “coup,” “mini coup,” “insurrection,” or whatever other name they proposed for the Wagner Group’s military march to Moscow. It is relatively simple to provide a chronological timeline. What is more challenging is to correctly identify the root cause of events in a secretive, strong-man regime, filled with experts in psyops and capable of great brutality. Even among trained Western intelligence analysts, there is disagreement over many of the details and, perhaps, even more so about what it portends for the future of the Russian Federation. Did Putin win? Did the world lose? Are Putin and the Russian Federation weaker now?

Many Western analysts suggest that Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the Wagner Group mercenaries, has been upset with Putin for months over a lack of support for his troops and physical attacks killing them. To date, the only significant military advances into Ukraine have come from Wagner Group efforts. Putin appears distressed in recent months due to his loss of control over the actions of Prigozhin’s troops, while his official Russian Army remains less capable and weaker than the Wagner Group. There is also a debate over who in Moscow ordered the recent attack on a Wagner Group military site which Prigozhin says ended with 2,000 of his soldiers dead by Putin’s hand. 

Many of Prigozhin’s men are former Russian Special Forces, while he recruited others directly from Russian prisons. Their brutality is legendary, but it isn’t a new scenario. The country’s history is full of ruthless leaders and their enforcers. Many are familiar such as Ivan the Terrible, Vladimir Lenin, and Joseph Stalin. There are many other similar, less well-known, figures like the “Ice Queen” Anna Ivanovna, and Lavrentiy Beria, director of the Soviet Secret Police, that fill the pages of Russian history books. Fear of Beria’s henchmen was so great among the general population that it kept a broken Russia from surrendering to the German Nazis in WWII. 

The Russian Empire, Soviet Russia, and today the Federation, were all led a times by cruel characters that failed to govern well, with one proclaimed worse than the last. This is the norm across Russian politics and how it has operated throughout the ages. Prigozhin and Putin are cut from the same mold. The Sufi mystic and poet Rumi once wrote “This is strange business. You’re the strange business….” Applied to Russian politics is understandable to see how events appear out of kilter to those outside Moscow’s purview. For the Russian population, life goes on as it has through the millennium with cruel dictatorial leaders enforcing their will with force.

It may not matter in the long run that an insecure Putin and ill-tempered Prigozhin appear to be punishing the other this week for acts deemed unacceptable. What is different now than in earlier centuries is that a non-state actor was able to quickly conquer an area believed to be the location of nuclear missiles. This raises the ante from that of a typical internal leadership conflict, or even civil war, to a dangerous scenario in which the result could be a regional or global nuclear conflagration should weapons of mass destruction (WMD) fall into unstable hands. This lesson extends beyond the Russian Federation. Today there are Russian nuclear missiles stored, possibly in silos, in Belarus, the country where Prigozhin has taken refuge under the protection of his buddy President Alexander Lukashenko. Concern extends beyond the European continent. Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party are paying attention to last year’s events in Russia and Ukraine. While Beijing may in the short run enjoy watching limited chaos erupt in Russia, it recognizes that events could morph into lessons for those opposing the CCP rule in China. Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister flew to Beijing last weekend for talks, or perhaps, more accurately to get a “talking to.” The political temperature may be cooling for the moment but analysts in capitals around the world in the coming weeks and months should continue to ask “why it happened” and “what are the future implications?” Hopefully, some will look at the nuclear security issue instead of concern only over the political integrity of the Russian Federation.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

Photo: Pixabay

Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has exposed a crucial weakness in the defense posture of the United States and its allies: the inability to produce the weapons and ammunition required to successfully prosecute a war.

The U.S. Naval Institute has found that “United States no longer has the capacity to quickly produce needed wartime assets, like 155 mm artillery shells, or to repair vital sophisticated systems, like radar, rapidly in theater…“If you want to lose a war, ignore the calculus of contested logistics,” said Harold Valentine, deputy director for plans and operations in Naval Supply Systems Command.

A Heritage Foundation review notes that “In providing vital military aid to Ukraine, the U.S. has depleted some of its own stockpiles of munitions and must act, both to replenish them, and put in place a system to reduce future risk. Manufacturing replacements for these munitions will take years: production capacity for key munitions is limited…”

From ships to artillery shells, the once-mighty defense industrial base, what was once called the “Arsenal of Democracy,” no longer has the capability to respond to urgent needs. The “defense industrial base” refers to the collection of businesses, large and small, that the U.S. military relies upon to provide the materials, equipment and weapons systems needed to defend the nation.  

 Some elected officials have attempted to make the dilemma even worse.  During the Obama Administration, the then-president sought to close down the one and only plant capable of building tanks.  Fortunately, he did not succeed.

A report recently released by the Pentagon notes that In recent years, the number of companies within the defense industrial base has shrunk dramatically. The decrease in participation decreases the diversity of suppliers and at the same time decreases the kind of competition that spurs innovation and lowers prices paid for defense materials by the taxpayer, the report says. “Since the 1990s, the defense sector has consolidated substantially, transitioning from 51 to 5 aerospace and defense prime contractors,” the report states. “As a result, DOD is increasingly reliant on a small number of contractors for critical defense capabilities.”  

Over the last 30 years, the report continues, the number of suppliers for things such as tactical missiles, fixed-wing aircraft, and satellites have all declined dramatically. For instance, 90% of missiles now come from just three sources, the report says.  

According to a NY Times study, “From Rockets to Ball Bearings, Pentagon Struggles to Feed War Machine. The flow of arms to Ukraine has exposed a worrisome lack of production capacity in the United States that has its roots in the end of the Cold War… Industry consolidation, depleted manufacturing lines and supply chain issues have combined to constrain the production of basic ammunition like artillery shells while also prompting concern about building adequate reserves of more sophisticated weapons including missiles, air defense systems and counter-artillery radar… If a large-scale war broke out with China, within about one week the United States would run out of so-called long-range anti-ship missiles, a vital weapon in any engagement with China, according to a series of war-game exercises conducted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank.”

The Navy has been particularly hard-hit. American Military News reports that “U.S. shipyards cannot build destroyers fast enough to meet Congress’ push for three Arleigh Burke-class Flight III warships each year, according to a top Pentagon official.  Defense Department comptroller Mike McCord told United States Naval Institute News that shipyards can’t even produce two warships a year, making Congress’ request for three unrealistic.

Increased use of small businesses may produce more flexibility One way to do that is through the use of acquisition authorities such as “other transaction authority,” as well as commercial solutions openings that will allow the department more flexibility to better operate in the commercial space and make it easier for contractors who haven’t worked with DOD to become involved, and to increase supply chain resiliency in areas designated as priorities. These areas include casting and forgings, missiles and munitions, energy storage and batteries, strategic and critical materials, and microelectronics.

Photo: U.S. Department of Defense

President Biden’s reckless disregard for America’s national security is a crisis that will lead to disastrous results.

Most chief executives enter office with a tendency to concentrate more on one area, and perhaps less on others. Rarely, however, has a commander-in-chief so totally disdained and ignored defense issues. 

There have been stunning errors. A few examples include the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan leaving vast quantities of military equipment behind; the President telling Putin, essentially, that he wouldn’t mind a “minor” invasion of Ukraine, and failing to take down Chinese surveillance balloons that have reaped intelligence bonanzas.

These deadly missteps present only a small portion of the current Administration’s utter failure to protect the nation.

Systemic assaults on the budget, by failing to account for the inflation the Biden White House is responsible for, have created severe shortfalls.

 Its politicalization of the military has produced a massive recruitment crisis. A key reason is the accurate perception that the military, rather than being a distinguished, “mission first” institution, is now seen as being just another over-politicized government bureaucracy.  Young people who previously viewed joining the armed forces as a way of proving their valor and patriotism look aghast at the White Houses’ use of the Pentagon as an outlet for its social programs and culture war initiatives. Not many youngsters inclined to signup will be happy with the constant nonsense of drag queen recruitment programs and extremist drumbeating of racial propaganda.

According to the military information site War on the Rocks, “…a perilous recruiting crisis began just after the United States fully withdrew from Afghanistan … and it shows no sign of abating anytime soon… …that may have enormous implications for the U.S. strategic position in an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world… During the last fiscal year, the Army missed its recruiting goal by 15,000 active-duty soldiers, or 25 percent of its target. This shortfall forced the Army to cut its planned active-duty end strength from 476,000 to 466,000. And the current fiscal year is likely to be even worse. Army officials project that active end strength could shrink by as much as 20,000 soldiers by September, down to 445,000. That means that the nation’s primary land force could plummet by as much as 7 percent in only two years.”

The prospect of joining an armed force that is deprived of sufficient funds due to the inadequate budgets Biden proposes, and being rapidly outclassed by foreign adversaries (Russia has a better nuclear force, China’s navy is expanding as America’s shrinks) is equally discouraging.

Add to that is the accurate perception that the current White House is reluctant to defend the country and the military at all.  The Navy was ordered to withdraw from the Black Sea. Russians shoot down U.S. drones, and Biden simply ignores the challenge. Iran is on the verge of a nuclear breakout, with no real pushback from the Oval Office. Indeed, the Islamic State has waylaid oil tankers destined for American shores and receives no punishment for the piracy. Despite the terrorist takeover of Afghanistan, Washington continues, amazingly, to funnel cash to that nation.  America’s nuclear arsenal is slipping into obsolescence while Russia adds new nightmare weapons, and China has surpassed the U.S. in launchers and soon will do so in warheads. The Navy continues to shrink.  Absurd plans to replace effective key weapons systems with “environmentally friendly” substitutes that have major inadequacies abound.

A look at who gets promoted in the Pentagon leads to the accurate perception that personnel that fit a political profile, rather than a demonstration of skill and courage, have the definite edge.

During his tenure in office, Biden has eliminated vital anti-espionage efforts. Why?

Capping it all is the perception that the Administration is reluctant to address very real and immediate threats to nation.  Over five million illegals  have entered the U.S. under Biden. Many are just seeking a better life, but a significant number, according to most estimates, have crossed over for nefarious purposes. The Congressional Committee on Homeland Security notes that “an unprecedented number of people on the terrorist watchlists are attempting to cross the border, and all semblance of law and order has been lost. President Biden’s dangerous and reckless policies are responsible …”

Rather than attempting to mitigate the threat, Biden has chosen to harass U.S. Border Patrol agents who are merely doing their job.

If there is one truth borne out by the recent spate of mistaken identity shootings, it’s that when push comes to shove, Americans will protect themselves. In three separate shootings in April, homeowners took no chances when they believed their lives were in danger. The most tragic case involved the killing of an upstate woman when the car in which she was a passenger, pulled into the wrong driveway. That elicited a deadly response from the 65-year-old homeowner who is charged with second degree murder for railing off two shots from a 12-gauge shotgun.

In Kansas City an 84-year-old man shot a teenager who knocked on the wrong door looking for his younger brothers. The teen has been hospitalized while the shooter has not been charged.

Meanwhile, in South Florida a man shot at two Instacart delivery workers who inadvertently drove to the wrong address. No one was injured in that incident, although the car was left with bullet holes a flat tire. The shooter told police that when he saw a vehicle on his property, he asked his son to tell the occupants to leave. The homeowner said he came out armed when he heard his son calling for help. The resident said he fired after the car ran over his foot.

The media has tried to make the last two incidents racial. In both cases the shooters were white, their targets, black. Naturally, the Left, in addition to racism, is blaming the easy access to firearms for the shootings. But at the root of the problem is fear – fear on the part of citizens who see their government as either unwilling or unable to protect them. Of course, patriots understand that ultimately, WE are responsible for our own safety and the safety of our families.

There are defund the police movements and soft on crime policies in place across the country. Here in New York, progressive lawmakers, in an effort to reduce the number of young black men behind bars, set about to reform the state’s criminal justice laws. In 2019 democrats forced through no-cash bail laws which has resulted in criminals being turned back out on the streets for misdemeanor or non-violent felonies. Often, these low-level offenders get rearrested for similar or more serious crimes.

The George Floyd killing, and the pandemic made matters worse. Many of our nation’s cities resembled war zones in third world countries, not cities in the freest most prosperous nation on earth. The Leftist agitators of Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA, orchestrated riots that resulted in dozens of deaths and millions of dollars in property damage.

City-Data.com claims that Washington D.C.’s crime rate is roughly twice the national average. The overall crime rate in Washington state is up 25% from a year ago, with a 29% increase in property offenses alone. Places such as Detroit and Chicago are like shooting galleries in which young black men and gang bangers snuff out each other’s lives without giving it a second thought.

If people begin losing faith in government’s ability to maintain public order, civil society will break down. Americans must demand criminal justice policies that punish law breakers and free law enforcement to do what they are constitutionally tasked with doing: protecting life and property. If not, we will continue to see more innocent people have their lives cut short simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Mr. Flint has moderated numerous political talk shows and currently hosts the PAC-Man Podcast on the BMG Network. For nearly two decades, he’s worked as a Producer in the NYS Assembly Republican Radio-TV Department.