Author: Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.

Never before in American history has a President so thoroughly ignored national security.

From border controls and defense budgets to anti-espionage efforts and preventing threats from a foreign power to originate on U.S. soil, the Biden Administration has disregarded key measures necessary to keep the nation secure.

The White House has eliminated safeguards on the southern border. It has repealed existing programs to stop enemy spying. It proposed inadequate defense budgets. It has opened the door to China’s purchase of land near vital military installations.

Singularly, any one of these actions would be dangerous and short-sighted. Combined, they constitute a stunning abrogation of duty to protect America from very real, very significant, and rapidly growing threats.

The White House’s actions have been breathtakingly absurd.  One example: Gordon Chang, writing for Gatestone, reports that “The Biden administration just cleared a Chinese company to own 370 acres of land within 12 miles of Grand Forks Air Force Base in Grand Forks, North Dakota. As a result, China will be able to use a proposed $700 million corn milling plant on the site to spy on military communications and even disrupt them.

That inexplicable decision comes on the heels of other bizarre actions. The Biden Justice Department has scrapped the urgently needed “China Initiative,” a measure designed to respond to the massive spying performed by Beijing on American soil.  It was established to stop the theft of military secrets, as well as roadblock the billions of dollars lost by U.S. companies in intellectual property theft.  Desperate for an excuse for this strange decision, it was announced that targeting Chinese spies was, somehow, a civil rights violation of Chinese-Americans, a decision that itself casts aspersions on loyal Chinese-Americans.

Clear and immediate danger has resulted from the decision to ignore the massive illegal immigration across the southern border. In 2021, 71,000 deaths resulted from fentanyl, much of which came up through the unprotected border. 15,000 to 50,000 women and children are forced into sexual slavery in the United States every year, mostly placed into such condition by Mexican cartels up from the southern border. According to a Newsweek study, “Final fiscal year 2022 numbers show Border Patrol apprehended a whopping 98 watch-listed terrorists at the southern border, six times the record 15 caught there in 2021 (three were caught in 2020 and none in 2019). That’s also five times the number it took to carry out the 9/11 attacks that took America to war in overseas theaters for 20 years.”  Not only has the Biden White House failed in its border duties, it has aggressively lied about its actions and unfairly punished border patrol agents for merely doing their duty.  

It has moved against the state governments most directly affected, when they sought to address the hazard. American Military News notes that these anti-state government actions  come as  more than “500,00 illegal immigrantw crossed the US-Mexico border in just the first 74 days of the 2023 fiscal year.”

The neglect of danger extends to cyberspace, as well.  As overwhelming evidence mounts that TikToc is being used by Beijing to gather data on Americans for nefarious purposes, According to some members of the House Committee on Armed Services, there is a possibility that Washington may approve an agreement that would allow China to retain significant influence over TikTok and control of its core technology, most importantly its algorithm despite significant objections from national security agencies.

Looming over all of these issues is the growing danger from Russia and China, and the Biden Administration’s inadequate proposed defense budgets.  The Atlantic notes that “Russia has invaded a country on NATO’s borders, its leader has repeatedly invoked the specter of nuclear war, and its military is mercilessly bombing civilian targets. China, meanwhile, is ramping up its defense spending, has overtaken the United States in some important areas of defense technology, and just signed a treaty of ‘friendship’ with Russia. Elsewhere, North Korea is testing missiles that can reach the U.S., Iran continues to be a malign actor in the Middle East, and terrorist groups have not gone away. Yet in its latest budget request for defense, the Biden administration has sought to downplay the U.S. military’s role in national security, and the resources it has asked for are insufficient for even that reduced role.”

Photo: Warships from Chinese and Russian navies are pictured after a joint naval exercise, Joint Sea 2022, in the East China Sea on Dec. 27, 2022. Chinese and Russian navies concluded the seven-day joint naval exercise Tuesday in the East China Sea. (Photo by Sun Fei/Xinhua)

China has been allowed to gain massive influence throughout the United States, particularly in our economy, education, and politicians.

As February drew to a close, a new Congressional group, “The Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party,” chaired by Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis) began operations.  It’s stated mission is to work on a bipartisan basis to build consensus on the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party and develop a plan of action to defend the nation.

It’s a tough task, considering how deeply entrenched the CCP has become.

Each new month brings new and disturbing revelations about how deeply Beijing has penetrated American institutions. The latest involves the odd case of Dominic Ng.

President Biden has appointed Mr. Ng to serve as the U.S. member on the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Business Advisory Council in July of 2022. According to Congressman Lance Gooden (R-Texas), ““It is unfathomable that a man like Dominic Ng would ever be appointed to a government position given his extensive ties to CCP officials and intelligence front groups. Mr. Ng is compromised at best and a traitor at worst, but his donation of over $100,000 to President Biden’s re-election campaign has been rewarded with a position to represent U.S. business interests in Asia. The president should immediately rescind his appointment and the FBI should launch an investigation into whether Mr. Ng has passed sensitive information to Chinese officials.” the Daily Caller News Foundation confirmed Dominic Ng served as the executive director of the China Overseas Exchange Association and now serves as the executive director of the China Overseas Friendship Association. Both organizations are front groups for Chinese intelligence operations and members of the organizations are considered likely Chinese influence operatives.

The Chinese communist spy who compromised Congressman Eric Swalwell, (D-CA) Fang Fang, also “socialized, networked with Rep. Judy Chu and then-Rep. Mike Honda, campaigned for now-Rep. Rho Khanna, volunteered for Bill Harrison, the mayor of Fremont, California at the time and in some cases, developed romantic or sexual relationships with politicians to gain intelligence and send it back to her handlers, who were believed to be stationed in mainland China.” 

Political corruption is just one aspect of the problem. Samantha Aschieris reports that “Confucius Institutes, founded in 2004, are China-funded ‘cultural’ centers that operate on college campuses. In the past few years, these centers have come under increased scrutiny as operations of Chinese state influence. ‘For years, the Chinese Communist Party has been using Confucius Institutes as a Trojan horse to push their propaganda and revisionist history in American universities. Their goal is to control what we see, hear, and think about China,’ [said] Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn, who introduced related legislation called the Transparency for Confucius Institutes Act in 2021”  An estimated 500 K-12 schools in the U.S. have had Confucius Classrooms, according to a National Association of Scholars report, “After Confucius Institutes: China’s Enduring Influence on American Higher Education.” 

A Free Beacon analysis warns “In 2015, a member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, which serves as the Chinese Communist Party’s political advisory board, purchased Donald Trump’s alma mater, the New York Military Academy, for $16 million dollars. Conference member Mo Tianquan secured the purchase after a bidding war with another Chinese conglomerate. Two years later, a Chinese education conglomerate purchased the Florida Preparatory Academy as part of its plan to create “a global educational alliance system.” The organization partnered with a CCP-controlled regional government agency on the initiative. Both the New York Military Academy and Florida Preparatory Academy operate Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) programs, which train future military officers.”

The problem extends beyond the United States.  As has been observed, China has managed to deflect blame for its COVID disaster through its financially-purchased influence at the United Nations. Radio Free Asia

China’s government has “penetrated” the United Nations, undercutting its oversight functions by stacking bodies like the U.N. Human Rights Council with its own people, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman told a Senate hearing.

Illustration: Pixabay

One of President Biden’s first acts upon taking office was to eliminate the Keystone XL pipeline, an 875-mile project that would extend from the Canadian border at Morgan, Montana, to  Steele City, Nebraska.  

It was only the opening salvo of his Administration’s war on energy, which is the root cause not only of the increase in gasoline prices but also the rampant inflation that is wreaking havoc on the U.S. economy.

Biden has been open about his disdain for fossil fuels, despite the uncomfortable reality that alternative sources, for the foreseeable future, can only replace about 20% of energy needs. 

His views completely disregard the economic hardship to the American people, and the reality that alternative sources can only produce about 20% of energy needs.

One study reports that “While renewables continue to underperform in the generation of electricity, crude oil continues to be targeted for elimination along with coal and natural gas, even though oil is seldom used for generating electricity. Today, Biden supports allowing banks and investment giants to collude to reshape economies and energy infrastructure with their Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) divesting in fossil fuels. ESG is a very dangerous precedent as the American people never voted to give banks this sort of control over our country.”

A Cfact study has found that “The unintended consequences of attempting to rid America and the world of crude oil usage are being realized in supply shortages and soaring prices resulting from the elimination of products and fuels manufactured from crude oil that support: Asphalt for roughly 65 million miles of roads in the world, Tires for the 1.4 billion vehicles in the world, Fertilizers to feed the world on this increasingly resource-stretched and crowded earth, Medical supplies that are primarily made from oil derivatives Jets that comprise more than 50,000 for military, commercial, and private sector, Merchant ships that comprise more than 53,000 that move products throughout the world, Vehicles that are mostly made of plastics, and even renewables of wind turbines and solar panels that are made from oil derivatives.”

A Heartland analysis reveals that “Energy prices are skyrocketing under President Joe Biden’s radical energy and climate agenda. The latest official government data show large year-over-year price hikes for all forms of energy. During the past year, overall electricity prices rose 8 percent, industrial energy prices increased by 15 percent, home heating oil prices rose 43 percent, conventional oil prices surged by 60 percent, natural gas prices increased by 61 percent, and gasoline prices rose nearly $1 per gallon. The average U.S. household in 2021 spent an extra $600 in higher gasoline costs and $70 in higher electricity costs. Further, households that use natural gas spent an extra $300, on average, and those using home heating oil paid $1,000 more. Cumulatively, the average American household paid about $1,000 in higher energy costs in 2021 compared to 2020. It’s also important to note that these higher energy prices have been baked into the costs for all goods and services bought and sold in the economy, contributing to across-the-board inflation.”

There is also the uncomfortable reality that alternatives such as wind and solar are not good for the environment.

Wind power is dangerous to wildlife, noisy, expensive and unreliable. Simply put, sometimes the wind just doesn’t blow. Solar panels destroy vast tracks of land.

A Scientific American analysis outlined the environmental problems of solar power. “the ecological footprint of solar power development could grow to more than 27,500 square miles—roughly the land area of South Carolina—if the U.S. were to adopt a more ambitious climate goal. When thousands of solar panels are built in undeveloped natural areas, the panels crowd out wildlife and destroy their habitat.”

There appears to be no logical reason for Biden’s energy policies, leading to an uncomfortable question, recently raised by the Heritage Foundation. “With reports that classified documents were found at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement at the University of Pennsylvania, questions arise about the potential connection between the university’s receipt of $54 million in Chinese donations and President Joe Biden’s promotion of energy policies that are strengthening China’s economy at the expense of our own. Under Biden’s anti-fossil fuel energy policies, Americans have been left with higher costs and a weaker economy while China has gained a larger market for its “green energy” wind turbines, solar panels, and electric vehicle batteries. Could the money and the policies be related? The New York Post reported that tens of millions in donations to the University of Pennsylvania came from Chinese donors after the Penn Biden Center was first announced in 2017.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Indonesia’s growing economic power is often understated in discussions about the future of Asia. Yet by 2045, it is likely to become the world’s fourth largest economy. It already is the world’s largest Muslim-majority state. President Joko Widodo, known as Jokowi, points out that his cabinet not only estimates that the economy will continue growing, but that his country’s population will also expand from its current 273 million to reach 309 million within the next two decades. In comparison, demographers at the Global Coalition on Aging predict China’s population will dramatically age during the same period, with those over age 50 increasing by 250 million as its working-age population simultaneously shrinks. The Coalition on Aging concludes that this presages the end of China’s era of “heroic economic growth.” Some analysts suggest this is also a strong indicator that Indonesia could become an emerging superpower within the next 25 years. 

Today Indonesia is a middle-income nation and a member of the G20. In 2022 it logged its strongest  economic record in the last nine years, growing by 5.31%, and supported by a record-high number of exports. Last November the country’s Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs announced that Indonesia is targeted to become a developed country by 2043. “While Beijing has pulled back its overseas BRI lending—and Xi has exhibited some notable reticence toward hosting a third Belt and Road Forum—Indonesia challenges the broader narrative that the BRI is somehow fading away,” according to William Yuen Yee of the Jamestown Foundation. 

China has invested heavily in the country and intends for Indonesia to serve as an economic cornerstone for its BRI. The CCP leadership touts its megaprojects in Indonesia as a win-win for both countries. That leaves Jakarta caught precariously between leaning on China and standing with the democratic West. The government in Jakarta needs the development funds, although the Indonesian population is not favorable toward China’s involvement in the country.

Understanding Indonesia’s experience with the BRI, says Yee, requires a closer examination of the history behind infrastructure cooperation, major projects beyond the oft-discussed Jakarta-Bandung High Speed Railway and their impacts on the Indonesian public, and the extent of economic engagement between Jakarta and Beijing. Indonesia is the third-largest recipient of Chinese investments at about $560 million, behind only Cambodia and Pakistan. Jokowi created the Global Maritime Fulcrum (GMF) in 2014. It is a strategy to leverage Indonesia’s strategic location in the Indo-Pacific and status as the world’s largest archipelagic state in order to prioritize maritime connectivity and infrastructure development, says Yee. Both Xi’s BRI and Jokowi’s GMF highlight infrastructure development. Since 2008, China has used the BRI in Indonesia as a type of “infrastructure diplomacy” to strengthen cooperation and the development of economic corridors. In 2019 the two governments reaffirmed in writing that there is a “strategic alignment” between the BRI and Indonesia’s GMF. Last year marked ten consecutive years of Beijing being Indonesia’s largest trading partner.

Jakarta needs Beijing to continue on its path to becoming a developed nation, despite tense people-to-people relations and extensive corruption. Yee points out that nine of Indonesia’s BRI projects, worth a total of $5.2 billion, involve scandals, controversies, or alleged violations. Earlier this year escalating racial tensions among employees at a nickel smelter in Morowali turned deadly, causing the deaths of one Chinese and one Indonesian worker, with many more injuried. The joint project enabled Indonesia to become the world’s second-largest, stainless-steel producer, churning out 3 million tons each year. It is ironic that the project also transformed the nation into a primary rival for domestic-made products in China. Last summer, ten years after Xi launched the Maritime Silk Road in Indonesia, Jakarta’s commitment to Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative is steadfast, suggests Yee. Jusuf Wanandi, a Sino-Indonesian politician who co-founded the Jakarta-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies think tank noted last year that “…Indonesia-China cooperation is not only beneficial to Indonesians and Chinese, but also to all the peoples of East Asia.”  

Bilateral relations have continued expanding since Chinese leader Xi Jinping came to power in 2013. Although Indonesia is not permanently locked in a Chinese “debt trap,” Jakarta’s debt is rising. It is, in part, a consequence of Jikowi’s vision for large infrastructure projects to help Indonesia to emerge as the world’s fourth or fifth largest economy in the coming decades. What is uncertain is the destabilizing impact of Indonesians who view themselves as distinct from China, although racially similar. They may not tolerate Beijing’s growing influence in the country as Indonesia’s economy  matures and China faces unsurmountable demographic challenges at home.

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

Illustration: Indonesia National Emblem (Pixabay)

The US Army is hedging its bet that China won’t invade Taiwan, by laying out a detailed, multi-pronged strategy for deterring a future war in the Pacific. It may, however, be too little and too late. DOD’s budget cuts under the Biden Administration do not bode well for advances in American preparedness for war in the numerous flashpoints existing in today’s world. During a talk on China this week at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), US Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth told the gathering “… obviously [we] have to prepare, to be prepared to fight and win that war.” She then added a mixed message signaling that she personally was “not of the view that an amphibious invasion of Taiwan is imminent.” Officials in Beijing analyzing her words might take this message to imply the US is not concerned about the threat, or that such an act would be below the threshold requiring a response from Washington. Translated into Chinese the word imminent can mean “working towards something.” It doesn’t have the same sense of urgency or intensity as the English word.  

Secretary Wormuth’s use of “imminent” is significant. By Western definition the concept of an imminent threat is traditionally understood in a temporal sense to mean that a state is faced with a physical danger that is both real and could occur within an immediate time frame. Under those conditions a state, or a partner of a threatened state, understands the threat to be at the center of the timeline extending into both the past and near future. 

One issue related to the Chinese threat toward Taiwan is that the United States and China have very different concepts of linear time. The US measures time in very short periods or “events,” while Chinese leaders talk in terms of decades and generations. If the CCP leadership believes Secretary Wormuth’s use of the word suggests the US is not seriously concerned about Beijing “working towards” a war with Taiwan, it may alter the timing of the CCP’s military and political policy toward Taipei.

The nexus of two opposing great powers, both commanding advanced weaponry, means that every single word spoken by leaders gets digested and analyzed in both capitals so that analysts can brief their leadership on the threat environment. What serves as a calming domestic political statement spoken in Washington, can act as a military permission slip in Beijing. If the United States puts weapons systems in place in Asia but the leadership in Washington talks about the lack of an imminent threat, Beijing will consider three possible conclusions about American political willpower. First, it could conclude the United States is serious about defending Taiwan because it is moving to reinforce the US Pacific command. Second, the words spoken by American military and political leaders are simply political theater and can be ignored. The third consideration is the most dangerous. Beijing could misinterpret the words to mean that Washington doesn’t see a serious near-term threat in the Pacific. This interpretation provides China more leeway in how it carries out its Taiwan policy and may embolden Xi Jinping to act.  

If Xi concludes Washington doesn’t see the danger and will not choose to become involved despite military sales and training exchanges with Taiwan, the Chinese leader may choose to force Taiwan’s hand at the most convenient time for Beijing. It may not be in the form of kinetic warfare as China’s influence operations in Taiwan are extensive, but it could tilt toward a calculated action to force Taiwan under Beijing’s control.

Many military and political analysts in Washington who understand the nuances of the Chinese language and the country’s political culture suggest that their briefings are falling on deaf ears inside the Biden Administration. They argue that the US leadership must improve its understanding of how China perceives the world and responds to comments, like those of Secretary Wormuth. 

It is not the first time a few words made a mark in US-China relations. When President Carter recognized mainland China as the legitimate government of the country and formally opened relations, the US renamed its Embassy on Taiwan the American Institute in Taiwan. Essentially it performs the same tasks as any US embassy. The word change allowed Beijing to save face.

In April 2001, a US Navy EP-3A ARIES reconnaissance aircraft collided with a Chinese jet midair. The Chinese pilot was attempting to intimidate the American plane flying in international airspace 70 miles off China’s coastline. The Chinese pilot died when his plane fell into the ocean after hitting the US aircraft. The US plane was damaged and forced to make an emergency landing on China’s Hainan Island. The plane and its 24 crew members were detained. For 11 days the two countries worked to develop the “Letter of the Two Sorries.” The United States in English stated that the country was “very sorry” for the death of the Chinese pilot. In English the wording does not insinuate culpability. For its domestic audience, Beijing translated the sentiment to mean the US took responsibility and made a formal apology. Words matter.

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

Illustration: Pixabay

As Putin’s war in Ukraine extends into its second year, there are few signs the conflict will be winding down in the near future. What Russian leaders once thought would be a fast operation taking only a few weeks, has left Moscow with few safe avenues for egress. Lev Gukov, former head of the leading Levada Center polling organization, says that unless the average Russian citizen learns of the true level of defeats on the front, the Russian people will continue to support the war. The regime retains support by tightly controlling information to maintain a positive image of the war effort. Putin ordered more than 600,000 Internet pages blocked and closed dozens if not hundreds of print outlets. 

Despite this censorship, overall domestic support for Putin’s war has declined. Radio Svoboda, in Spring 2019, reported support for the Russian president personally was in a multi-year decline. Since the invasion of Ukraine about 70% of the population believe in the war and by extension their leader; although simultaneously 50% of the same respondents want it to end. Gudkov points out that public support is “not very clearly expressed, but quite tangible for the authorities and the war itself in society.” Paul Goble, writing in Eurasia Review this week, says this duality is partly due to the fact that “many Russians are deeply aware of the war’s criminal nature but prefer to isolate themselves from the unpleasant truth and avoid receiving objective information.” 

Last fall the Russian publication Readovka News suggested that there is an additional factor that ensures passive support for the war, “…the constant stream of propaganda that paints a harrowing future in the case of Russia’s defeat.” Although the human cost of the extended war has a negative impact on the population, the desire to trust those inside the Kremlin to maintain stability remains and “does not affect the ratings of trust in the country’s leadership, since the prolongation of the special military operation means the prolongation of the effects of the consolidation of society and power.” One consequence of this view is that Putin appears content to drag out the war and pull in the country’s population to support it. Goble says that, at the regional level, the government has created volunteer organizations to help those mobilized obtain supplies, including forcing participation by schoolchildren. 

Despite government attempts to coerce workers and students to help, there is a steadily declining level of involvement, according to the publication Russica2. A Levada Center study recently confirmed that the population is no longer following news of military operations in Ukraine at the previous levels. There is, however, a small and important radicalized group of Russians who, together with those in the general population who succumb to the massive pro-war propaganda effort, that are emerging as the new supporters Putin needs to continue the war. These new “national patriots” are the second reason why Putin cannot and will not end the war, according to analysts studying the situation. 

Growth in the number of beneficiaries, if not of the war itself, is the third reason the war will continue, according to Goble. Today, he says, “the public ratings of not only federal but also regional as well as local authorities depend on their degree of involvement in the war.” Internal politics is transferred from internal socioeconomic problems to the level of international politics. The impression left is that the war is protecting the national interests of Russia. Political support at the local level helps guarantee votes in elections and the popularity of patriotic governors who support the war effort. News reports out of Russia indicate that politicians are attempting to outdo each other in attempts to be seen as the strongest of patriots. “Some Russian State Duma deputies propose involving these officials in teaching at schools in the occupied territories and promise to support them when they are nominated for elections,” adds Goble.

A fourth reason for the unlikelihood of ending the war soon is a result of the expanding number of radicalized patriots across the country. They have increased influence in Russian society. This propaganda cult is demanding a lot from the non-radicalized portion of the population. It may at some point create further domestic schisms between apolitical segments of Russian society and the more radicalized Putin supporters returning from military service in Ukraine. Many political analysts see the only viable solution for Putin as one that delays the impending social upheaval by prolonging the war, with the goal of smoothing out external manifestations of the social conflicts. Goble suggests this will only exacerbate the causes of social conflict and that at some point the Russian people will learn the truth about Kremlin politics. When that occurs, the world could be witness to an implosion of the Russian Federation. 

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

Photo: Pixabay

Vladimir Putin, a former career USSR KGB agent, is engaging in a brutal assault on the civilian infrastructure of Ukraine, particularly energy and water.  It is not a new tactic for Moscow or for socialist regimes across the planet. Starvation has been a key result of left-wing governments for a century, in Europe, Asia, and Latin America.

Ukraine has been victimized before, as it is now. Stalin decided to collectivize agriculture. Communist Party officials stole land from their owners.  This 1932-1933 holocaust was known as the “Holodomor.” At least 3.9 million died as a result. An additional million died in Kazakhstan and in parts of Russia that rebelled against forced socialization.  

Following the Second World War and the Soviet domination of Eastern European nations, collectivization was to varying degrees imposed on the captive nations. Predictably, production diminished sharply.

That was barely a warm-up for what occurred when Mao Zedong and his Communist Party took over China. “Mao’s ‘Great Leap Forward’ in agriculture, beginning in 1958, led to the deaths of an astounding 45 million human beings. The brutal intent behind his implementation of socialist economics was made clear by a truly disturbing fact, noted by the Dispropaganda site: “Mao Zedong aimed to rapidly transform the China from an agrarian economy into a Communist modern society through rapid industrialization and collectivization, and he meant to do it at all costs, and regardless of human suffering. Much like Stalin, Mao used famine a weapon to murder, terrorize and subdue the population of rural China, and bring them into the fold of the Chinese Communist party.”

The terrible record was continued in Cambodia after Communists took over that nation. From 1975 to 1979, 500,000 to 1.5 million people, representing up tp 20% of that nation’s whole population, died of starvation and disease as a result of socialist policies.

The record doesn’t end there. Venezuela is a nation that should be awash in wealth, sitting as it does atop a sea of oil.  Instead, its population is enduring terrible food shortages. According to the Borgen Project, “Across the country, poor and middle-class Venezuelans are unable to afford food and often must wait in long lines known as “colas” to find basic food like flour and rice. The government subsidizing of food in the country is limited, but the only affordable option. Malnutrition has increased. In the poorest segments of the population, especially in slums and areas of Caracas, malnutrition has increased greatly… Often, families cannot afford two or three meals a day and those meals consist of just bread or banana.”

In the Caribbean, Cuba is facing its worst food shortages in decades.  Apologists for the Communist regime seek to blame an American embargo, but, similar to all other socialist regimes, the assault on private property rights is the true culprit. In a scene familiar to totalitarian socialist regimes, long lines for meager rations of food. A third of the entire nation’s land mass is suitable for farming, with highly fertile land.

Over the past century, these consistent food shortages in socialist regimes have been falsely blamed on weather conditions, citizens protecting their property rights, or other extraneous factors.

The problem is likely to get worse as advocates of extreme environmental policies, which tend to be trojan horses for socialist economics with little relevance to global temperatures, gain ground.  The latest tirade is against agribusinesses and their production of $175 billion worth of chemical fertilizers.  They recently won a major victory in Sri Lanka, where the substances were banned.  As a result, food production collapsed. Despite the disastrous result, advocates are working diligently to enforce the concept throughout the world.

Illustration: Pixabay

Yesterday, we discussed a series of cases in which individuals who were clearly engaged in self defense were arrested and prosecuted for purely political reasons.  Recently, a new case has been brought by prosecutors who also appear to be unconcerned with the law or justice, this time in Arizona.

According to Fox News, “George Alan Kelly, 73, was charged with first-degree murder in relation to the Jan. 30 death of Mexican national Gabriel Cuen-Butimea. Authorities are remaining quiet about specific details surrounding the shooting, but Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Deputy Chief Gerardo Castillo told Nogales International that law enforcement authorities were called to Kelly’s ranch located in Kino Springs regarding a report of shots fired. Upon arrival, deputies found a deceased Hispanic male around 100 to 150 yards away from Kelly’s home, according to the outlet.” 

Kelly was immediately arrested for First Degree Murder, and is currently being held in custody, unable to post a one million dollar bond. 

Under Arizona law, “(a) person commits first degree murder if…(i)ntending or knowing that the person’s conduct will cause death, the person causes the death of another person…with premeditation…”

To date, the Arizona authorities have not provided any factual basis to believe Kelly “intended” or “knew” that his conduct would cause the death of another person, let alone that Kelly acted with “premeditation.”  But some facts are provided in a Motion for Reduced Bond filed by Kelly’s attorneys; “On January 30, 2023…Mr Kelly had completed chores on his ranch and had come to his house to eat lunch with his wife.  As they ate, Mr. Kelly heard a single gunshot…he saw a group of men moving through the trees around his home.  They were armed with AK-47 rifles…he had not given any of them permission to come on his land…Mr. Kelly then went onto his porch with his rifle. The leader of the armed group of men saw Mr. Kelly and pointed an AK-47 right at him.  Mr. Kelly, fearing for his life and safety, fired several shots from his rifle…the group then began running into the desert surrounding his home.” 

Later that day, after calling Border Patrol Agents (who searched the property and found nothing), “Mr. Kelly noticed that his dogs were focused on something on the ground…Mr. Kelly approached his dogs, and observed a body lying face down in the grass.,,(w)hen law enforcement arrived, Mr. Kelly helped them find the body and he cooperated with their investigation.”

Most significantly, according to the Defense motion, “(i)t remains unknown what kind of bullet caused the wound to the person, what the time of death was, how long the body had been at that location, or where and in what position the person was in prior to receiving the fatal wound.”  

Let us assume for the sake of argument that Kelly is the one who shot Cuen-Butimea, a fact that is not clearly established at the present time.  Kelly was on the front porch of his home, on his own property. Nothing contradicts Kelly’s statement that he was confronted by armed men. trespassing on that property.  

Under Arizona Rev. Statute Sec. 13-405 (A), “(a) person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another…(w)hen and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.”  According to Section B, “(a) person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force pursuant to this section if the person is in a place where the person may legally be and is not engaged in an unlawful act.”  

In other words, Arizona is a “stand your ground” state.  But Arizona law goes even further in allowing for the use of deadly force in the protection of property.  Under Arizona Rev. Statute Sec. 13-407(A) “(a) person or his agent in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in threatening to use deadly physical force or in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent that a reasonable person would believe it immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises.”  Note the use of the word “threatening” in the statute.  That language is modified by Subsection B, which states that “(a) person may use deadly physical force under subsection A only in the defense of himself or third persons.” 

According to the Daily Mail, the deceased “tried multiple times to enter the US illegally…(r)ecords indicate he was deported several times, most recently in 2016,”  activities which would indicate that Cuen-Butimea  was engaged in criminal activity at the time of his death. If Cuen-Butimea was in the company of armed men trespassing on Kelly’s property while brandishing weapons, then under Arizona law, Kelly is well within his rights to have shot Cuen-Butimea – if that is what actually happened.

It is just as likely that Cuen-Butimea was shot by members of his own party (which would explain the gunshot Kelly heard) and left for dead before the group encountered Kelly on his front porch.

The District Attorney of Santa Cruz County is Jeffrey Rosell, who “graduated from UC Santa Cruz in 1984, and earned his law degree from the University of Southern California in 1988.  He practiced civil law for two years in southern California and spent four years as a prosecutor in Hawaii, before returning to Santa Cruz, where he has practiced ever since.”  Rosell served as the Chief Deputy District Attorney until he was appointed in 2014 by the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors to replace District Attorney Bob Lee upon Lee’s death.  

Unlike St Louis’ Kim Gardner or Atlanta’s Paul Howard, Rosell is not obviously motivated to prosecute Kelly by overt racial politics or a desire to curry favor with potential voters. In fact, to date, the Santa Cruz District Attorney’s Office has not released a Press Release of any kind regarding Kelly’s arrest.

What then would be the political motivation for the arrest and prosecution of a 73 year old rancher who has a strong case pointing to self defense? 

As described by Phil Boas of The Arizona Republic, Kelly  “is living next to one of the most violent nations on earth, where narco-bosses and their heavily armed wolf packs roam the borderlands, trafficking people and drugs. He is living in a time when parts of the border are pure chaos. Illegal immigration is at a record high and waves of humanity are overwhelming border towns such as Yuma and El Paso. The U.S. federal government has done little to solve the problem… Kelly, however, sees strangers crossing his property and can’t know who they are and whether they pose a threat…Living in the remote desert Southwest, he probably can’t depend on law enforcement to get there quickly in an emergency.”

Despite a strong presumption in Arizona law allowing for defense of self and property from criminal activity, Kelly was arrested and charged with First Degree Murder.  Further, despite there being little evidence to connect Kelly to the death of illegal trespasser Gabriel Cuen-Butimea, other than Kelly’s own admission that he fired a shot in the direction of unknown armed men on his land, Kelly is being held in prison on one million dollars bond.

You would think that Arizona authorities would investigate this matter more thoroughly before arresting a 73 year old rancher with Arizona self defense law on his side.  But in fact, Arizona has been discouraging property owners along the border from enforcing their property rights against illegal alien trespassers for years.

According to the Arizona Daily Sun, in August of 2005, “(a)An Arizona ranch that once served as the headquarters for a civilian group watching for illegal immigrants has been turned over to two people caught trying to enter the United States illegally. The ranch was conveyed to satisfy a judgment against its owner, Casey Nethercott, a member of a self-styled border-watch group that seeks to protect private property from illegal immigrants crossing the border from Mexico…(i)n March 2003, Nethercott…was accused of pistol-whipping an illegal immigrant as he and other people…patrolled a ranch in Hebbronville, Texas…Edwin Alfredo Mancía Gonzáles, the man who accused Nethercott of hitting him, and another immigrant traveling with him from El Salvador, Fátima del Socorro Leiva Medina, filed a civil lawsuit…saying they were harmed while being held… a Texas judge issued (a) default judgment of $850,000 against Nethercott… (the) Nethercott (family) gave up ownership of the ranch to settle the judgment when challenged by the immigrants’ lawyers.”

As stated by Chris Simcox, president of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corp. in 2005, “If the federal government was doing its job, ranchers would not be living in fear…They can’t even protect their own property for fear of these frivolous lawsuits when people are trespassing on property,’ he said. Ranchers ‘are held captive by the federal government who tells them, ‘Well, we can’t protect you but you can’t do anything to protect yourself.”‘

The prevailing view on this issue is expressed by Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation; “(A)s a former trial attorney who practiced law for many years along the border in Texas, I..advis(e) these conservatives and right-wingers to not shoot and kill these undocumented immigrants…if they…shoot these immigrants…they will find themselves indicted, convicted, and incarcerated for murder. Moreover, no judge is ever going to permit them to defend against the murder charge by claiming that they had the right to kill ‘invaders’ of our country.”

Of course, Hornberger admits that “it’s not clear yet that Kelly did, in fact, commit the shooting.”  Nonetheless, Hornberger expresses the belief that “this shooting in Arizona…is a direct consequence of the socialist immigration-control system that both right-wingers and left-wingers have foisted upon our land…(with) open borders – genuine open borders – people would be free to cross back and forth between nations without any restrictions. Thus, Mexican citizens would be crossing the border by simply driving on a public road and entering the United States. In other words, there wouldn’t be any need to trespass onto people’s property as a way to avoid getting caught by the Border Patrol…under a system of genuine open borders, Gabriel Cuen-Butimea would be alive today, no doubt working peacefully for an American employer wishing to hire him.” . 

Given this history of punitive legal action taken against ranchers along the Southern border who try to protect their families, livestock and property from illegal activity, it is no wonder that Kelly was arrested and incarcerated before any real investigation of Cuen-Butimea’s death was even begun.

But, as we have argued throughout this series of articles, justice is accomplished through a vigorous defense, and the assertion of the rights of the accused.  Kelly may be in a very difficult position now, but unless there is evidence discovered to contradict his version of events, the presumption of innocence remains with Kelly, and the prosecutor is still obligated to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.   

Judge John Wilson served on the bench in NYC

Illustration: Pixabay