Author: Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.

Russia’s ties with Central Asia continue to worsen as the war in Ukraine drags into its eleventh month. Countries in the region are growing more unsure that Moscow remains capable of protecting them in the event of a security threat. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, in particular, are cooling their relations with Moscow this fall. Bishkek recently cancelled its joint military exercises with the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in protest over Putin’s support of Dushanbe’s border claims, its opposition to the rail project connecting the country to Uzbekistan and China, and Russia’s colonial-like history in the region. Tajikistani President Emomali Rahmon directly accused Putin last month of ignoring the welfare of the smaller Central Asian states. As the war turns in Ukraine’s favor, regional publications and leaders are speaking out more touting their independence from Moscow. Some argue that Russia failed them during internal strife earlier this year.

Rahmon also accused Russian businessmen of caring only about their hydrocarbons and claimed Moscow is failing to help develop Tajikistan’s economy for the population. “These signs of common disapproval of Russian policy and the willingness to reprimand Russia and Putin publicly clearly derive inspiration from Kazakhstan’s example, which, like these actions of regional assertiveness, also continues to affirm [a] more independent course,” according to Stephen Blank of the Jamestown Foundation. Russia is losing the support of states once considered firmly in its sphere of influence. Media articles increasingly blame Russia for their problems. The website 365info.kz took it a step further recently saying Kazakhstan owed Russia nothing. As a fully independent nation, Kazakhstan today is courting leading US corporations, urging them to invest in the country. What does it mean for Russia and Putin when the leadership and media in Central Asia speak out against it?  

An October TASS report links the regional unease of Russian relations with the Central Asian states to local governments’ skepticism over Russian economic assistance and guarantees. They view Putin as delivering only economic lip service. Astana, now called Nur Sultan, is the capital of Kazakhstan. The government there harbors  a lot of resentment “against Moscow’s charges that Astana [now Nur Sultan City] is supplying weapons to Kyiv and that Washington is trying to sever Russo-Kazakhstani relations, especially as these charges could serve as the basis for a casus belli against Kazakhstan,” says Blank.

While there is no one set of events in Central Asia that can serve as a demarcation point, Putin’s ability to economically, and militarily, influence the region is rapidly declining. The political vacuum leaves room for China to step in and exploit new opportunities offered by the region. China has long sought to control any terrorist groups, or freedom fighters, in Central Asia that support the Islamic, Uyghur population in western China.

As Kazakhstan moves further from Moscow, it appears that its neighbors are following. Blank points out that “…we are also seeing increased mutual attention being paid to Central Asia by both Turkey and Iran.” Tehran operates a drone production facility in the region and recently admitted it is selling them to Russia for use in its war in Ukraine. Iran has inked a number of military deals in Central Asia in recent years. Blank also suggests that Putin’s pretensions of hegemony in Central Asia are far from accurate. These trends look like they will definitively lead to the European Union and US showing an increased interest and bolstering their presence in Central Asia. The region could end up a new target of interest for Putin if Moscow settles the conflict in Ukraine. 

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

Illustration: Pixabay

The elections are finally over. Now comes the hard part—delivering on all those promises. 

The challenges facing the nation are extensive and serious, headlined by a massive increase in crime, significant inflation, failing schools, and a deteriorated national security situation.

There is an upside, however.   Those serious dilemmas are the result of bad policy decisions, mostly over the past two years. A great start towards correcting those issues involves reversing past mistakes.

Skyrocketing crime comes from the absurd decision in numerous jurisdictions to eliminate or reduce the use of bail, accompanied by the insanity of not incarcerating recidivists or giving them inadequate sentences.  The evidence is clear: when repeat offenders are kept in prison, crime plummets.  Sources notes that, depending on the state, recidivist rates are as high as 52%.  Keeping repeat offenders in jail sharply reduces the crime rate. A repeat offender caught on a new charge should not receive bail.

To further improve safety, cease the insanity of defunding the police. Noteworthy studies  have found that “an increase in police presence … leads to a statistically and economically significant decrease in the level of crime … Most of the decrease in crime comes from decreases in the street crimes”

Inflation can be directly linked to the blockage of major fuel sources, as well as overspending.

 Everything that is produced, transported, marketed or used requires energy, including food. Alternative fuels can produce barely 20% of needs. Even that 20% cannot be produced in a cost-effective manner. Restoring American energy independence will slash the inflationary cycle, not just at the gas pump, but in all other activities, as well. 

Common sense has a key role to play, as well. Individuals know that they cannot spend more than they make.  Governments pretend they can, but they can’t either, without devaluing currency. Politicians fund giveaway programs by overprinting money, and lots of it. That devalues the currency, which is inflationary.

According to a Balance report, The U.S. national debt grew to a record $31.12 trillion in October 2022. “It has grown over time due to recessions, defense spending, and other programs that added to the debt. The U.S. national debt is so high that it’s greater than the annual economic output of the entire country, which is measured as the gross domestic product.”

U.S. students fall behind our international trading partners, despite spending far more. Our students rank 38^th out of 71 countries in academic achievement, despite spending much more.

America spends $14,400 per student on elementary and secondary education, which was 34 percent higher than the average of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development member countries of $10,800 At the postsecondary level, the United States spent $35,100 per student, which was double the average of OECD countries ($17,600). Where does the money go? Not to traditional subjects, but to a host of propaganda-heavy activities.  Enlightened by what was discovered during the COVID remote learning, enraged parents are demanding an end to nonsense, such as discussing sexual practices in the classroom.  It’s also time groups such as teachers’ unions were reminded that children, not pressure groups, should be the focus of spending.

National Security seems to be a reduced priority over the past two years.

Since the election of 2020, Russia has invaded Ukraine, China has ramped up its threats towards Taiwan, North Korea has resumed its atomic and missile development, and the Taliban now has a vast supply of U.S. weapons. China has the globe’s largest navy, at 355 vessels, compared to its U.S. counterpart’s 296, an enemy advantage that continuously grows due to the underfunding of our maritime service. America does not have the most servicepeople in arms. China has 3,355,000; Russia has 3,014,000; India has 2,610,550; the U.S. comes in fourth at 2,233,050. America is not the world’s pre-eminent nuclear weapons power.  That title belongs to Russia, with 6,267 warheads, compared to America’s 5,550, courtesy of a deal made by President Obama. Both China and Russia have an apparent lead in hypersonic weaponry.

All of these issues are resolvable, as long as those elected have the will to actually do so.  

America is facing an existential threat from the rising power and aggressiveness of Russia and China. There is a key misconception that clouds this imminent hazard: the illusion of American military supremacy.

China now has the globe’s largest navy, at 355 vessels, compared to its U.S. counterpart’s 296, an enemy advantage that continuously grows due to the underfunding of our maritime service.

America does not have the most servicepeople in arms. China has 3,355,000; Russia has 3,014,000; India has 2,610,550; the U.S. comes in fourth at 2,233,050.

America is not the world’s pre-eminent nuclear weapons power.  That title belongs to Russia, with 6,267 warheads, compared to America’s 5,550, courtesy of a deal made by President Obama.

Estimating China’s smaller but growing nuclear force is difficult. Unlike The Kremlin, which enjoys boasting about its atomic prowess, the PRC has hidden its assets. In 2011, a group of Georgetown students discovered that China  has a 3,000-mile-long tunnel system to protect and store its missiles and nuclear weapons. Quite bluntly we have no way of knowing how many nuclear weapons are hidden in those vast subterranean passageways. It is disturbing that the U.S. media showed so little interest in this sensational story.

Nuclear weapons limits and restrictions simply do not apply to China. Its nuclear force exists outside the realm of any significant arms treaty.

While Russia and China have modernized nuclear weaponry, the Heritage Foundation notes that the U.S. has largely elected to maintain aging nuclear warheads based on designs from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.

As both adversary nations modernize and expand their nuclear forces, the Biden Administration continues to ignore the danger. A Congressional Research Service Report found that The Biden Administration, in its Interim National Security Strategic Guidance,   indicated that the United States would “take steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy…”

Perhaps the most overplayed canard is that Washington commits vastly more resources to its armed services than its rivals.  Neither Moscow nor Beijing needs to deal with a private sector that must make a profit. Therefore, their funds buy a lot more that they would in America.  Both enemy states are unitary; they don’t have to divide up contracts to satisfy the political needs of politicians from different states. Nor is there a free press in either of those two nations, exposing “hidden” expenditures.

A major military analysis website  reports that “…the gap between U.S. expenditure on the one hand and that of Russia and China on the other has closed dramatically over the past 15 years. Today, when taken together, spending by Russia and China is roughly equal to U.S. defense expenditure, with Russia representing a much larger share than previously recognized.”

A study from The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)  outlines that the cost of military goods and services in Russia is substantially less than in the USA or most of Europe. That indicates that Moscow has improved purchasing power, quite literally getting far more bang for its buck.  A significant part of that is the Kremlin’s reliance on conscription. The fact that Russian soldiers receive far less pay must also be taken into consideration. SIPRI provides an example:  In 2019 a Russian lieutenant colonel received approximately $1330 per month, whereas a (lower-ranked) captain in the British Army received more than $4000 monthly.

Perhaps more important than comparisons of weapons and expenditures are actions. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and China’s aggression towards Taiwan, India, the Philippines, and others leave no doubt as to the intentions of both nations. Ignoring these actions are the 21^st century equivalent of overlooking the radar reports of Japanese planes heading towards Pearl Harbor.

Frank Vernuccio serves as editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy and Government. 

Photo: An Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter assigned to the 1st Squadron, 214th General Support Aviation Battalion, 12th Combat Aviation Brigade conducts overwater training at Tampere, Finland, Aug. 4, 2022. The 12th Combat Aviation Brigade is one of the units supporting the U.S. European Command strategy by demonstrating U.S. commitment to European allies and partners to highlight U.S. capabilities to diverse audiences. (DoD photo)

The most important global issue of the still-young 21^st Century is the growing military axis of Russia and China.  Unlike the NATO alliance, this is not a defensive partnership.  It is one which squarely has the United States in its cross-hairs, and it is actively to demolish the concepts of national sovereignty and individual rights that were won at such great costs during the prior hundred years.

Both nations have pursued territorial claims considered unlawful by most nations. Beijing’s assault on the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone was condemned by the World Court at the Hague.  The Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine has been widely opposed.

The South China Morning Post reports that the two nation’s Defense chiefs have agreed to expand cooperation through strategic exercises and joint patrols in the Asia-Pacific, according to the Russian Ministry of Defence.

Eric Jacobson, writing for the Center for Strategic and International Studies reports that the early 2000s rise in oil and energy prices and the growth of the PRC’s economy allowed for increased investments in the militaries of both Moscow and Beijing. He notes that “The U.S. military dominance in the 1990s sparked interest in Russian and Chinese military circles on how to develop theories of victory that would enable them to achieve their objectives against the United States.”

Developments are progressing rapidly. American Military News reports that in August China sent troops to Russia to participate in joint military drills.

According to the report, “The Chinese Ministry of Defense states that the aim is to deepen practical and friendly cooperation with the armies of participating countries, enhance the level of strategic collaboration among the participating parties, and strengthen the ability to respond to various security threats.” Russia’s military announced the latest iteration of its Vostok drills last month. The operations come even as Russian forces are heavily focused on the ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

China has purchased some of Russia’s most advanced military equipment, while also developing its own naval weapons systems, some of which are unmatched anywhere, including a missile which, launched from land, can disable ships almost 1,000 miles away.

There are reports that China, along with North Korea, may be preparing to assist Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. According to the Associated Press, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has warned that China’s support for Russia’s Ukraine aggression is complication relations with Washington.

Japan is also specifically targeted by the Moscow-Beijing Axis.  The United States Naval Institute notes that “Japan is concerned with the activities of both countries’s ships in its vicinity. Japan’s recent 2022 defense white paper, released on July 22, detailed the threats posed to Japan by Russia, China and North Korea. Japan Defense.” Minister Nobou Kishi has said several times that Japan would continuously monitor the three countries’ military activities in its vicinity.

North Korea is emerging as a junior partner in the Axis. According to Russia’s semi-official RT news agency Russian President Vladimir Putin had exchanged letters with Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un. both countries had agreed to “expand their comprehensive and constructive bilateral relations with common efforts.” There have been as yet unsubstantiated reports that North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un has offered the use of North Korean troops for use in the Ukraine.

Former U.S. State Department official Daria Novak, writing for the New York Analysis of Policy and Government, explains that “The Russo-Chinese relationship, once filled with mistrust from earlier times, is presently tactical and highly opportunist. Controlling the flow of oil and gas means money for Russia’s failing economy and more Russian missiles and technology in support of China’s aggressive foreign policy agenda.”

Frank Vernuccio serves as editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy and Government

Photo: Chinese State Councilor and Defense Minister Wei Fenghe delivers a speech via video link at the 10th Moscow Conference on International Security on August 16, 2022. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Li Xiaowei)

The Correlates of War Project (CWP) is an academic study of the history of warfare. Since 1963, CWP  researchers have examined various hard factors that differentiate wars. Quantitative data is extremely useful in making predictions about military troop strength and types of hardware, but can’t easily quantify the predictive value provided by psychological profiles of the senior leaders who order and carry out the wars it studies. At a time when Russia is in a prolonged kinetic conflict in Ukraine; North Korea is lobbing missiles into South Korean territorial waters and over Japan; and China is threatening the stability of the international rules-based system, we need to more closely examine these soft contributing factors to improve our predictive ability to identify the level of aggressive behavior of foreign elites. How do these up-and-coming leaders make the policy decisions that lead to major wars or a fragile peace? 

In light of the war in Ukraine, one such leader in need of examination today is Nikolai Patruchev. He is a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. As Secretary of the Security Council of Russia and formerly one of the longest serving heads of the Federal Security Bureau (FSB) from 1999-2008, he helped put and keep Vladimir Putin in office. His son, Dmitry Patruchev, serves as the current Minister of Agriculture and is mentioned as a potential successor to the Russian president. A recent report from the Robert Lansing Institute says it is “Putin’s country, Patrushev’s regime.” As a close confidant to Putin, Nikolai wields great influence in Moscow and is seen as the informal leader of the country. Who is this “influencer” we hear about in the news? The report says Putin and Patruchev share ambitions, but not a friendship. After the bloody Chechen conflict, one became president and the other head of the FSB. Each holds information on the other as insurance against a coup. Combined they make a treacherous pair.

As children both men suffered deep psychological traumas. The consequence is that as adults they continue to strive for absolute power to control their own destiny. The report points out the Kremlin is filled with such disturbed hawks waiting to take over, one worse than the next. “The opinion that Patrushev adheres exclusively to the despotic power, absolute totalitarianism with elements of conditional democracy, and not even hidden tyranny, obviously proves a psychologically sick worldview, formed by these very hawks.”

People become tools for these types of men, a means to achieve an end goal, and thus as individuals are disposable. “Having such a worldview and psychological attitude, the lust for power is still the main motivation; money and enrichment are dominant values,” according to the report. Although horrifying to imagine, such leaders could unleash a nuclear device on an unsuspecting population and justify it as the collateral damage necessary to remain in power. 

In the east there is also an important authoritarian leader in office. Chinese President Xi Jinping was elected recently to a third term as president after accumulating a historic number of titles and unprecedented power not seen since Mao Zedong held office. Military analysts in Washington count missiles, review China’s military technology, and some even review psychological profiles. But do we know enough about Xi Jinping to predict the level of aggressive behavior he could achieve in the future? Like Putin and Patruchev, he also experienced deep childhood trauma. “After his [Xi’s] father was jailed during the Cultural Revolution, Xi – only 14 at the time – was expelled from high school in Beijing and then arrested by the Red Guards, who accused him of crimes,” according to Kenneth Dekleva, writing in The Cipher Report. As a young teen Xi was threatened with execution. He wrote that “…to my mind there was no difference between being executed a hundred times or once, so why be afraid of a hundred times?” 

Ten years ago, in his election speech to the National People’s Congress, Xi said that “in the future, the Chinese nation will forge ahead like a gigantic ship breaking through strong winds and heavy waves.” It is a message to the world that he will do what needs doing, no matter how difficult the political environment. His announced goal is to reframe the rules-based international order to support China’s view of it. How far will Xi go to install himself as that hegemon? He is considered ruthless by colleagues and opponents alike. The world witnessed it recently when he had his elderly and frail predecessor, former president Hu Jintao, physically removed from the National Congress meeting after the cameras were turned on. Xi maintains power by eliminating his enemies or removing them from office. What if China stalls in its ascent? How far will Xi go? The free world needs to be concerned when such a state is armed with nuclear weapons. The free world can’t afford to use western logic and say It is too horrible a thing to ever happen again.

Can Russia, China, or any other authoritarian state be saved from the fate of such leaders? The Lansing report suggests that the only viable solution is the “fragmentation and dismantling” of such a country. Until such time as the indigenous populations of these states rise up against their authoritarian leaders, the democratic world needs to remain on high alert. Such leaders may not disappear from our world, but one day perhaps the populations of those nations will discover the value of a constitution like that of the United States’, which puts the people in charge and protects it population from tyrants. 

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

Photo: China war statue (Pixabay)

The repeated assaults on free speech can no longer be ignored.

Investigative reports have clearly demonstrated that despite widespread public outcry, anti-First Amendment moves by the Biden Administration and leading Democrats are ongoing.

Tactics include attempts by federal agencies to coerce social media to censor stories unfavorable to the current White House, the development of agencies designed to intimidate political opponents, “outing” of those donating to organizations with differing views, and weakening the interpretation of the First Amendment.

Early in the Biden Administration, the White House revived a much-reviled attempt by President Obama to influence how the news is reported. A so-called “Disinformation Governing Board” was proposed.  The idea was widely opposed, and, supposedly, the concept was shelved. 

Undaunted, the Biden Administration employed another tactic. According to investigative journalism by the Intercept , The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous. “Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms…Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt…discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.

One tactic involve the creation of a special “portal”  for DHS and government partners to report disinformation directly.

An analysis by the Daily Mail based on the Intercept’s investigation revealed that the FBI official tied to suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story remains involved in influencing social media to avoid publishing stories the Biden White House dislikes. According to the article, FBI Foreign Influence Task Force Chief Laura Dehmlow is still briefing social media sites on foreign disinformation threats. Dehmlow is tied to the decision that led Facebook and Twitter to suppress the New York Post Hunter Biden laptop story in October 2020. Revelations were part of a lengthy report from The Intercept report notes that DHS continues  its efforts to ban particularly embarrassing contrary  political news

Unfortunately, the attempts aren’t limited.

Playing on the fear of intimidation created by pressure by progressives, there have been attempts to make public the names of those who contribute to organizations that oppose leftist causes. As reported by USATODAY in 2021,

“The issue of donor disclosure by nonprofit groups has once again surfaced in legislative form, as HR1, a bill passed by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives…applies new disclosure regulations to groups engaging in political speech.”

The developments are not new.  In 2014, Democrats introduced  S. J. Res. 19, which would amend the Constitution of the United States to allow the Congress to regulate free speech and activity in federal elections. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), the current Senate Majority Leader,  along with Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D.-Ill., backed Sen. Tom Udall’s (D-NM) proposal to amend the First Amendment.

It’s not just heavy-handed intimidation of social media outlets or attempts to weaken Constitutional protections. Outright violence is frequently employed. On college campuses throughout the nation,  Republican or conservative guest speakers are frequently subjected to mob assaults. At a recent event at the University of California, ANTIFA maced attendees. The incident wasn’t an outlier. Violent threats and actions in response to speakers who do not kowtow to the Left are a common occurrence.

Particularly on college campuses, the concept of “political correctness” has been used as excuse to condone the suppression of nonleftist ideas. A CATO Institute study found that Nearly three‐​fourths (71%) of Americans believe that political correctness has done more to silence important discussions our society needs to have. The consequences are personal—58% of Americans believe the political climate today prevents them from saying things they believe.

Illustration: Pixabay

In the past, Federal agencies, despite occasional lapses of ethics, mostly concentrated on doing their assigned tasks, rather than harassing Administration opponents.

That changed sharply during the Obama Administration. The criminal use of the IRS and the Department of Justice to harass groups that were critical of the President was horrific. Attempts to use the Federal Communications Commission to censor opponents were inexcusable.

It has only gotten worse during the Biden Administration. To cite just one example, A study by the Hillsdale College publication Imprimis found that “the DOJ [has been] in the midst of a … campaign of spying on (the Conservative investigative journalist group) Project Veritas—a campaign that involved no fewer than 19 clandestine subpoenas, orders, and warrants obtained from nine magistrate judges. The secrecy of this spying campaign was maintained through the use of wide-ranging gag orders, including at least two that were obtained without notice to the judge overseeing the Project Veritas case. Through this spying campaign, we now know that the DOJ obtained approximately 200,000 Project Veritas emails from Microsoft and countless text messages (and heaven knows what else) from Apple, Google, Uber, and other still unknown companies.”   

Heavy-handed Biden Administration efforts to subdue political opposition can also be found in the use of the FBI to persuade social media sites to censor the politically embarrassing news of the Biden Laptop scandal. Clear evidence on the laptop could lead not to criminal charges of tax evasion and punishment for  not registering as a foreign agent for China, America’s most serious enemy.

The politicization doesn’t stop there, or with the Department of Justice.  There has been an intensive effort to use military leadership to force-feed woke politics down the throats of service members.  That has caused a major crisis, as potential recruits shy away from the hyper-partisanship.  The Army has missed its recruiting goals by an astounding 25%, and the other branches are falling short as well.

The Pentagon has entered into the realm of elective politics, a serious legal violation. One example comes from American Military News, when it noted that “The Air Force has taken ‘full responsibility’ for leaking a confidential personnel file of a service member and Republican congressional candidate, which revealed a sexual assault she suffered on duty in Iraq, according to Indiana Reps. Jim Banks and Larry Bucshon. The Air Force leaker gave the files to a Democrat research firm in the lead-up to the midterm elections.”

The State Department has misused its assets to sponsor woke ideology as well. A recent Wall Street Journal report found that “The exportation of American culture has long been one of our nation’s greatest soft-power assets. But instead of using it to affirm Western values and U.S. interests, the Biden administration is proselytizing for woke ideology. In an effort to ‘promote diversity and inclusion,’ the State Department is funding ‘drag theater performances.’

The Department of Energy, according to a National Review study, will, begining in fiscal year 2023, require applicants for research funding to explain how their research projects will incorporate the tenets of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

The list goes on and on. These acts are not only criminal acts of embezzlement, an offense defined by Cornell law school as “the fraudulent taking of personal property by someone to whom it was entrusted. It is most often associated with the misappropriation of money. Embezzlement can occur regardless of whether the defendant keeps the personal property or transfers it to a third party.” The personal property in this case is the taxpayer’s funds.  This is dangerous to the nation, weakening our defenses, harming our foreign relations, violating the First Amendment, and further placing the government in debt.

Photo: U.S. Treasury Building

Objective reviews of how prepared the U.S. military is to defend the nation reveal the deeply disturbing conclusion that Americas’ armed forces are insufficient to meet the dire threats facing the nation.

The result shouldn’t surprise anyone.  After years of underfunding and numerous wars that drained the strength of American armed forces, the strength of the nation’s guardians has been severely drained. In addition to attrition by fighting in the Middle East and Afghanistan, significant underfunding during the Obama Administration, the Biden White Houses’ Inflation has taken its toll on the Pentagon, in the same way it has hit American families.

Numerically, the Army should have 50 brigade combat teams.  It has only 31.  The Navy should have 400 ships.  It has about 290.  The Air Force should have 1,200 fighter and ground attack aircraft.  It has only 1,174.  The Marine Corps should have 30 battalions.  It has 27.

Putin’s confidence in rattling his nuclear saber is buoyed by his lead in nuclear armaments. It’s not just in numbers, (5,977 nuclear warheads, compared to Washington’s 5,428) it is also in the reality that his force is more modern.  Moscow’s ally China has at least 350, although it is strongly suspected that it has far more.

Just one example, from Rep. Tom O’Halleran (D-AZ) of how lack of financial support is affecting one service: “Moderate Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., a retired Navy commander whose Norfolk district includes the world’s largest naval base: “I have delayed putting out a statement about the Defense Budget because frankly it would have been mostly full of words you might expect from a Sailor, but here goes: It sucks,” Luria said in a scathing Twitter thread objecting to Biden’s plan to decommission two dozen warships. “HINT: If you want to grow the Navy, stop decommissioning more ships than you build,” she said, adding that the Navy “has no strategy. Stop saying you do, because if you did you would be able to explain how this Fleet size will allow us to defend Taiwan.”

The crisis is getting worse. The Army has fallen short of its recruitment needs by 25%. The Air Force has barely met its personnel needs, and the Navy is lacking officers. Observers note that the emphasis on woke politics by politicized Pentagon leaders and what many believe to be a White House disregard for traditional American values and the has discouraged many likely recruits.

Writing in Real Clear Defense, Darin Gaub notes that “The Commander in Chief of the armed forces leads an administration targeting its own forces with friendly fire… The typical patriotic American signing up wants to be the wolf but is trained to be a sheep today.  Those conservative and often rural families where a large number of America’s servicemembers originate also provide the true warfighters in our military. They are the ones saying, “no thanks.”  Why join an organization to be told that your patriotic American beliefs are the problem and spend the term of an enlistment as a target of the chain of command?”

A study by the authoritative Heritage Foundation found that “As currently postured, the U.S. military is at growing risk of not being able to meet the demands of defending America’s vital national interests. It is rated as weak relative to the force needed to defend national interests on a global stage against actual challenges in the world as it is rather than as we wish it were. This is the logical consequence of years of sustained use, underfunding, poorly defined priorities, wildly shifting security policies, exceedingly poor discipline in program execution, and a profound lack of seriousness across the national security establishment even as threats to U.S. interests have surged.”

Photo: Members of the National Guard train at Fort Bliss, Texas, Sept. 13, 2022. (DoD)