Author: Daria Novak

Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong is touring the Pacific and she is not alone.

Chinese Foreign Affairs Minister Wang Yi also is Island-hopping across the Indo-Pacific, visiting eight states in 10 days between May 26 and June 4, in a political influence competition between the two large Asian nations. He is working simultaneously to limit the US role in the Pacific east of Singapore. Beijing is not succumbing to the Biden’s Administration’s attempt to contain China but, instead, ramping up its efforts to contain democratic efforts. Wang Yi on Thursday arrived in the Solomon Islands to discuss the role of smaller states in the Pacific and how they can avoid the “domination” of the United States and other democratic countries. The Foreign Minister made the Solomon Islands government promises of extensive economic aid and security from Beijing without many of the restrictions demanded by western largesse. Wangi Yi  repeated his mantra at each stop that less free countries are not required to follow democratic practices to receive Chinese aid. Beijing’s offers are enticing to more authoritarian leaders with records of human rights abuses, corruption, and other issues of concern to the West that might eliminate their ability to receive aid from democratic states.

Wang Yi, along with an entourage of 20 other Chinese officials, are traveling to the Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, and East Timor. Although small in size, these islands are strategically located at ground zero in Indo-Pacific great power competition. Leaders of these countries see it as an opportune time to bargain for millions in aid from China to build infrastructure projects. Western aid tends to be centered more on humanitarian needs, including health care, education, and housing. Pacific leaders appear lately to be more intrigued by Chinese offers to build airports, stadiums, and cities. 

The region lies less than 1,200 miles from Australia and is vitally important to Canberra’s trade and maritime commercial transportation routes. The Australian Foreign Minister is dealing with Indo-Pacific states receiving lucrative Chinese offers that are difficult to match. While some leaders, such as David Panuelo, president of the Federated States of Micronesia, remain distrustful of Beijing’s motives for offering aid, others are tempted by the size of the funding and lack of restrictions. Reuter’s Kirsty Needham reports that “China will seek a region-wide deal with almost a dozen Pacific Island countries covering policing, security and data communication cooperation when Foreign Minister Wang Yi hosts a meeting in Fiji next week.” 

The Chinese government sent a draft communique to 10 Pacific Island states ahead of the May 30 Foreign Ministerial meeting in Fiji. It contained the China-Pacific Island Countries Common Development Vision, a five-year action plan that has raised concerns among some of the states who fear Beijing’s moves will destabilize the region and lead to conflict. Needham notes that “In a letter to 21 Pacific leaders seen by Reuters, the president of the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), David Panuelo, said his country would argue the “pre-determined joint communique” should be rejected, because he feared it could spark a new “Cold War” between China and the West. State Department spokesman Ned Price said the US is concerned about the lack of transparency and rushed process. “We don’t believe that importing security forces from the PRC and their methods will help any Pacific Island country,” he pointed out. “Doing so can only seek to fuel regional and international tension and increase concerns over Beijing’s expansion of its internal apparatus to the Pacific.”

At a press briefing in Beijing prior to his departure Wany Yi refuted the idea that Chinese aid could lead to confrontation and insisted instead that it would “consolidate mutual political trust, expand practical cooperation, deepen people-to-people ties and jointly build a closer community of destiny among China’s Pacific Island countries.” In Washington, Price responded that “It’s worth noting that PRC has a pattern of offering shadowy, vague deals with little transparency or regional consultation in areas related to fishing, related to resource management, development assistance and more recently, even security practices.” 

Such a plan would intricately link the Pacific states to Beijing. The proposed action document itself is extensive and contains sections on law enforcement capacity and police cooperation, the development of Chinese forensics laboratories, cooperation on data networks, cyber security, smart customs systems. According to Needham, “The action plan outlines a ministerial dialogue on law enforcement capacity and police cooperation in 2022, and China providing forensic laboratories. The draft communique also pledges cooperation on data networks, cyber security, smart customs systems and, according to Needham, “a balanced approach” on technological progress, economic development, national security, a China-Pacific Islands Free Trade Area, and action on climate change. 

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

Photo: Pixabay

As Russian missiles rain down on Ukraine’s oil and fuel sector infrastructure, tensions between Moscow and the Circassians, both those living inside Russia and abroad, have reached a boiling point, according to Paul Goble of the Jamestown Foundation. Located in territory inside Russia, north of Georgia, and extending down toward Armenia and Turkey, the indigenous Circassian population has longed for their freedom for well over a century. Last Saturday Putin prohibited the annual celebration commemorating the deportation of Circassians from their homeland inside Russia 168 years ago and threatened to arrest anyone who participated in events marking the date.

In 1864, the Russian Czar committed what the Circassian people call an ethnic cleansing or “genocide” of the minority population. Later, under the Soviet Union, the population was divided into various subgroups and multiple, artificially contrived administrative territories in an effort to suppress the Circassian’s desire for their own national identity in a single Circassian Republic. Today, Putin fears he is facing a reinvigorated population supported by overseas Circassians. He is determined to ensure that the 5 million living abroad cannot return to their homeland and change the ethnic mix in the North Caucasus region. Putin is using the Duma to try to pass legislation to keep the area permanently divided and the diaspora from returning home under the guise of maintaining stability in the region.

Circassians living inside Russia recently made strong public declarations of solidarity with the Ukrainian people who are resisting Putin’s “special military operation.” The population also is growing increasingly angry over Putin’s suppression of the identities of other minority peoples living inside the Russian Federation. Goble argues that the risk of armed conflict in the region is growing more acute and may develop into an outright clash in the coming weeks. “…the Circassians have fought back, viewing the much-delayed 2020 Russian census as a means to reunite Kabards, Cherkess, Adygeys and other parts of the Circassian nation under a single “Circassian” umbrella,” he says. 

Fewer than 700,000 Circassians live inside Russian territory today. In 1864 many fled to Syria to avoid genocide. Putin is concerned now that those Circassians living inside worn-torn Syria want to return to their homeland and will emerge as a long-term threat to Russian control of the territory and ultimately lead to its de-Russification. Stanislav Ivanov, a senior historian at IMEMO in the Russian Academy of Sciences, noted that “the project of a Greater Circassia has real support and a sufficient number of supporters abroad and in the North Caucasus.” In a February 22, 2022, Jamestown Foundation report, Goble pointed out that “If the two come together, he [Stanislav] warns in the influential Voyenno-Promyshlenny Kuryer, it will almost inevitably create serious problems for Russian rule.” 

Fatima Tlis, a longtime Circassian activist with the Voice of America, recently shared a copy of her remarks made in a video presentation to the European Parliament, notes Goble. She argued that “it is imperative for the restoration of peace and security in Europe that we understand the roots of Russia’s brutality and violence” in Ukraine “because the seeds of Bucha had been planted in Sochi and hundreds of towns and villages of Circassia that exist no longer… Russia shattered the Circassian territory into different artificial provinces to further marginalize the nation and break its unity and political significance.”

The new emerging political energy generated by movements in- and outside Russia concerns Putin, who fears that calls for independence will incite other populations to rebel against Russian authority. Putin is wrong in believing that inside the body of every Ukrainian beats a Russian heart. He also is wrong that he can suppress Circassians who view themselves, like Ukrainians, as a people distinct from Russians. As Russophobia spreads across the world, Western leaders must consider how far Putin is willing to go to achieve his territorial objectives. If the Russian leader cannot conquer Ukraine, he may choose instead to move east and south into the Caucasus and attempt a second annihilation of the Circassian population. Russia’s other “special military operation” in Syria cost hundreds of thousands of lives. It is not beyond the ken to be gravely concerned that Putin could move the war east and commit a new genocide. Strategically positioned between the European and Asian oil export markets, the region bridges the East with the West. NATO abuts Russia’s sphere of influence there and it is an oil-rich area which Chechen-trained fighters, along with their financial networks, are aiding jihadi groups fighting in and around Syria. Its importance to Russia is not lost on Putin.

Daria served in the U.S, State Department

Photo: Caucasus mountains

While the existential threats in the Indo-Pacific and Europe command the headlines, there are other significant hotspots across the globe that cannot be ignored.  Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr., commander of U.S. Central Command, and Army Gen. Stephen J. Townsend, commander of U.S. Africa Command recently outlined threats in the Middle East and Africa.

They stressed that China, Russia, Iran and terrorist organizations continue to engage in malign activities in the Middle East and Africa.

In the Middle East, “Iran continues to pose the greatest threat to U.S. interests and the security of the region as a whole,” General McKenzie said. “They supply weapons to proxies and client states in an arc from Yemen through the Arabian Peninsula, across Iraq and Syria into Lebanon, and up to the very borders of Israel. Saudi Arabia endures regular attacks from the Houthis, who — courtesy of the Iranians — have some of the most advanced unmanned aerial systems and cruise missiles in the region. Recently, the Houthis have expanded these attacks to include urban centers and bases where U.S. forces reside in the United Arab Emirates.”

Iran’s ballistic missile forces can constitute a threat to the security of every state in the region, and perhaps globally, as well.  There are estimates that the terrorist state could soon have nuclear weapons.

U.S. intelligence sources note that “Iran will continue to threaten U.S. interests as it tries to erode U.S. influence in the Middle East, entrench its influence and project power in neighboring states, and minimize threats to regime stability.Tehran will try to leverage its expanding nuclear program, proxy and partner forces, diplomacy, and military sales and acquisitions to advance its goals. The Iranian regime sees itself as locked in an existential struggle with the United States and its regional allies, while it pursues its longstanding ambitions for regional leadership.

Tehran has a long-term vision of molding itself into a pan-Islamic power that will threaten U.S. persons directly and via proxy attacks, particularly in the Middle East. Iran also remains committed to developing networks inside the United States—an objective it has pursued for more than a decade.Iranian-supported proxies will launch attacks against U.S. forces and persons in Iraq and Syria, and on other countries and regions.

China and Russia are also watching closely for any sign that the U.S. commitment to the collective security of the region is wavering, and they’re poised to capitalize on whatever opportunities emerge.

Further south, Russia and China see Africa’s rich potential in terms of resources and strategic partnerships, note Department of Defense officials. Both countries seek to convert soft- and hard-power investments into political influence, strategic access, and economic and diplomatic engagements. They also seek to buttress autocracies and change international norms in a patient effort. The Pentagon notes that “terrorism has metastasized to Africa.”

Threats include terrorist groups al-Qaida and al-Shabab in East Africa and al-Qaida and ISIS in West Africa and elsewhere, representing one of the world’s fastest growing, wealthiest and deadliest terrorist groups.  They remain grave and growing threats that aspire to kill Americans, both abroad and within the U.S. itself.

Over 1 billion people reside in Africa, a figure that may double by 2050, when the continent will represent a quarter of the world’s population. 60 percent of that vast population will be under 25 years old.

Photo: Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy Harth 55 vessel, (background) conducted an unsafe and unprofessional action by crossing the bow of the U.S. Coast Guard patrol boat Monomoy, as the U.S. vessel was conducting a routine maritime security patrol in international waters in the southern Persian Gulf, April 2, 2021. (DoD photo)

Despite his recent comments on protecting Taiwan, serious questions are being raised about President Biden’s disturbing softness on China. The issues in which this problem manifests itself are significant, but little emphasized by a largely supportive media.

Wyoming Senator John Barasso notes that “As president, Joe Biden has been soft on China. And this is no surprise given the fact that Joe Biden has been soft on China for 50 years. When he was vice president, he said, quote, ‘a rising China is a positive development.’ He said, ‘not only for China, but for America and the world at large.’ “During his run for president, candidate Joe Biden said China was not a threat to the United States. During his announcement speech, when he was announcing that he was going to be a candidate for president, he said ‘they’re not bad folks. They’re not competition for us.’”

It’s not just elected officials who are expressing concern. A Foreign Policy study stresses that “The Biden Administration from a combination of arrogance and ignorance—is preparing to tie its own hands on China policy.”

A National Review examination notes that “…the Biden administration is proving more and more reticent to confront the Chinese government in substantive and consequential ways… Biden nominated Reta Jo Lewis to run the U.S. Export-Import Bank. Senator Marco Rubio contends that, ‘Reta Jo Lewis is currently a strategic advisor for the U.S.-China Heartland Association, which is a conduit for the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) United Front Work Department (UFWD), which aims to influence key Americans at the subnational level and ultimately undermine America’s national interests…'”

Under the Biden Administration, the US has granted licenses authorizing suppliers to sell chips to China’s blacklisted telecom company Huawei for its growing auto component business, according to Reuters. “The license applications are said to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars …

All of these concerns are coming to a head, as the Biden Department of Justice has moved to end the existing program established to respond to China’s intense espionage efforts against the United States.

In a scorching examination, a National Interest found that Biden gave a green light to Chinese spies.  “For nearly two years now, the FBI has nabbed dozens of Chinese Communist Party spies who, while posing as graduate students and research scholars at top academic institutions, siphoned out America’s most cutting edge national defense material for untold years. The spies, many secretly members of China’s military services, had to get in close to do damage this grave and found an unguarded path through America’s largely self-babysitting cultural exchange and student visa programs. But … President Joe Biden has canceled the repair and instead bestowed a priceless gift on People’s Liberation Army intelligence services: continued American vulnerability.”

The issue concerns the 1.5 million “J” and “F” visas, frequently employed by Chinese espionage agents to gain access to American research. The Department of Justice under the Trump Administration found that Beijing’s spies used these to infiltrate U.S. institutions doing advanced technical work.  After a review, the Trump Administration enacted regulations putting a stop to the practice, part of a “China Initiative” to stop the espionage.

One example: in 2020, the Justice Department brought criminal charges against a Chinese agent due to visa fraud in connection with a scheme to lie about her status as an active member of the People’s Republic of China’s military forces while in the United States conducting research at Stanford University.

 But Biden’s Homeland Security Department, with little to no fanfare or notice, eliminated the measure.

An intensive examination must be conducted concerning the financial interaction of the Biden family with China and the President’s reluctance to address Beijing’s espionage.

Illustration: Pixabay

There are substantial and legitimate questions about inappropriate influences affecting decision-making concerning climate change policy. Both Russia and China have been credibly implicated.

Energy is clearly the basic foundation of Russia’s power, particularly in Europe. The Kremlin clearly benefits from limiting production of energy in other nations. An American Military News analysis notes that “[There is an] indisputable fact that energy is the foundation of Russia’s power and influence. And that a hesitancy has existed by some of our allies in Europe and elsewhere to take truly bold actions against Vladimir Putin because they depend on Russian oil and gas.”

Moscow’s need to dominate the world’s energy supply has led to its extraordinary measures to limit production in other nations. The Gatestone Institute believes that Russia has been financing western environmentalism. It reports that Fogh Rasmussen, former NATO Secretary General, stresses that Russia, “as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called non-governmental organisations – environmental organisations working against shale gas – to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas.”

Influence over American environmental groups exists as well. “On March 11, 2022,” notes Gatestone,  “US Representatives Jim Banks and Bill Johnson sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, asking for an investigation into the reported Russian manipulation of American “green groups” that are seemingly funded with “dark money” (anonymous donations). “Russia spent millions promoting anti-energy policies and politicians in the U.S. … Unlike the Russia hoax, Putin’s malign influence on our energy sector is real and deserves further investigation,” Banks said to Fox News Digital.”

“Hence the interest, for the Russian government, in mounting a vast disinformation campaign against shale gas and nuclear power in the West, by massively financing the groups most likely “naturally” to oppose it: environmentalist organizations.”

In 2017, Representatives Lamar Smith and Randy Weber asked then-Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to act against Russia’s funding of anti-fracking campaigns in the U.S.

 Influencing western movements is a tried and true tactic for the Kremlin. A Warontherocks article notes that “…the Soviets used front organizations to influence the anti-nuclear movement, the initiative that most visibly put Western leadership on the defensive. West German Interior Ministry and FBI reports concluded that Soviet-linked organizations were successfully swaying local peace movement initiatives to conform to Moscow’s positions. In 1982, the U.S. affiliate of the World Peace Council, a Soviet front, showed Moscow’s ability to secretly influence a United Nations special session on disarmament by persuading the committee coordinating the massive protests to focus the movement on U.S. and NATO rather than all (read: Soviet) missiles as the real threat.”

Russia’s interest is matched by China. China is the major builder and exporter of wind turbines.   An EVWIND analysis notes that . “In Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) 2020 ranking of global wind turbine manufacturers, 7 of the top 10 wind turbine manufacturers are Chinese companies…In addition, China commissioned 98% of the newly installed capacity from wind turbine manufacturers.”

It’s not just wind turbines. A Foreign Policy Review notes that “In 2019, China made 80 percent of the world’s supply of solar panels.”

A CSIS study notes that “the international community should be assured that China is … leading the world in one particular sector: deployment and investment in renewable energy. China is already leading in renewable energy production figures. It is currently the world’s largest producer of wind and solar energy,⁹and the largest domestic and outbound investor in renewable energy.Four of the world’s five biggest renewable energy deals were made by Chinese companies in 2016. As of early 2017, China owns five of the world’s six largest solar-module manufacturing companies and the world’s largest wind turbine manufacturer.^”

An American Military News analysis notes that “[There is an] indisputable fact that energy is the foundation of Russia’s power and influence. And that a hesitancy has existed by some of our allies in Europe and elsewhere to take truly bold actions against Vladimir Putin because they depend on Russian oil and gas.”

Moscow and Beijing have warped environmental concerns into a partisan weapon, leading to bad decisions that harm both individuals and nations.

Photo: Pixabay

In an effort to portray itself as a stabilizing force in the Middle East, the UAE is attempting to normalize its relations with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria. “US focus on the Middle East had already begun to drift since President Biden took office in January 2021, and the conflict in Ukraine has ensured its focus remains away from Syria,” according to Andrew Devereux of the Jamestown Foundation. That is creating a competitive opportunity for other states in the region to strengthen their ties with the regime in Damascus. In March, al-Assad made a ceremonial trip to the UAE where he met briefly with Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum and the de-facto UAE leader and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince, now President, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan. The day-long trip marked the first time since the Syrian war began in 2011 that al-Assad visited an Arab country. The State Department called the trip “disappointing and troubling.” 

Shifting from opposition of al-Assad in recent years, to one of gradual support, the UAE today is supporting Syria’s potential readmission to the Arab League. “Attempts to reintegrate Syria into the Arab world,” notes Devereux, “are part of the UAE’s wider strategy of diversifying global relationships.” With much of the world concentrating on events unfolding in Ukraine, the UAE leveraged the opportunity to quietly expand its commercial interests in Syria. The UAE already has strong trade relations with China and India. It is highly unlikely the US will sanction the UAE for its actions as Abu Dhabi provides an alternative supply to Russian energy at a critical time. Washington also is ignoring the UAE’s refusal to support the Biden Administration’s position in Ukraine. Washington and Abu Dhabi still work close together in other areas areas, including bilateral-terrorism and security issues. “Maintaining working relations with multiple major powers and hedging bets that the US will remain distracted appears to be working for the UAE,” says Devereux. 

Despite the chill in relations between 2012-2018, UAE-Syrian relations are strong. It was Dubai that urged the UAE to further strengthen the bilateral relationship this spring, according to Kamal Alam, a journalist writing in The Middle East Eye. He points out that “Business and trade links remained active despite the war in Syria and even before the formal reopening of the UAE’s embassy in Damascus, with informal meetings through middlemen in Dubai.” In February Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited the UAE in a move that analysts in Washington say indicates that Turkey has dropped its confrontational stance to former opponents in Syria. This comes after al-Assad used the Kurdish issue to link up with Abu Dhabi’s security establishment and put pressure on Ankara. Alam writes that a former Syrian leader told him: “”Our embrace never loosened. It just froze, and now the summer has arrived again, and the ice has melted [with the UAE].”  

The UAE’s moves toward normalization with Syria are likely tied to future plans rather than trying to force al-Assad into immediately decoupling from Tehran. “Iran is a major player in the Syrian melting pot, providing billions of dollars of assistance and material support, but the UAE is able to offer advantages that Tehran cannot,” says Devereux. UAE-Syrian relations encompass a complex network of motivations. For the UAE they are driven primarily by Abu Dhabi’s longing to reach out across the Middle East and be seen a stabilizing force with enhanced influence. Syria in return received humanitarian aid from the UAE along with a promise of investment in solar powered energy plant. In recent months, improved bilateral relations have served as a safety valve for Syrian youth trying to escape the poverty and dangerous environment in their country. Many moved to the UAE after Abu Dhabi removed many of its travel restrictions. 

UAE overtures to Syria have lit a hot debate over the morality of normalizing relations with Syria given its long history of extreme human rights abuses. “At the center of the discussion are arguments about the best way to end Syria’s long civil war, and whether the country’s isolation — enforced in part by crippling Western sanctions — furthers that goal,” according to Sarah Dadouch of the Washington Post. The war in Ukraine may be catalyst that brings Syria in from the cold after a decade of civil war. Questions remain… Is this a positive given al-Assad’s brutality… that he remains in power… and even if deposed in the future, there is no viable alternative leadership inside Syria.

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

The Hudson Institute launched a new China Center this week specifically “dedicated to crafting policy responses to keep America’s strategic focus on China and [to] foster a national and global dialogue rooted in the values of freedom and democracy.” With many in the international community focused on the war in Ukraine, not much attention is centered on Chinese influence operations in the United States. It is not a new phenomenon but, it is important to recognize that as Chinese propaganda is aiding the Russian war effort, Beijing remains active on US soil. 

What do Harvard, Yale, and the University of Pennsylvania have in common? They are among the elite American universities that receive large monetary donations from China. While claiming they are not soliciting the tens of millions they receive, nor doing anything wrong, the universities continue to decline to disclose the source of their funding. Records, however, reveal that from 2014-2019 Harvard received $75 million, Yale $43.5 million, and UPenn $54.6 million from China. The Biden Center at the University of Pennsylvania, beginning in 2016, received over $23 million in “confidential gifts” from China. During this period, the then former Vice President was listed as a professor and was set to lead the Center. When Biden decided to run for president, a fact known to the Chinese government, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken took over at head of the Center, prior to being named to Biden’s cabinet. In one month alone, in May 2018, China donated $14.5 million to the Biden Center. This largesse is not lost on President Xi Jinping. 

These are only a few examples of China’s vast and sophisticated overseas influence operations over the last few years. Tom Anderson, director of the watch dog group National League and Policy Center’s (NLPC) Government Integrity Project, said:  “We’ve asked … [United States Attorney] Weiss to pursue the larger network of individuals and institutions who benefited from millions doled out by foreign interests connected to Hunter Biden’s work in China and Ukraine.” US Department of Education officials admit that combined, China and Russia, may have doled out well over $6 billion to US schools in the last five years.

Reed Rubinstein, general counsel at the Department investigating the donations, pointed out that “Some IHE [institute of higher learning] leaders are starting to acknowledge the threat of foreign academic espionage and have been working with federal law enforcement to address gaps in reporting and transparency…However, the evidence suggests massive investments of foreign money have bred dependency and distorted the decision making, mission, and values of too many institutions.” As far back as February 2020 the Wall Street Journal reported  that “Harvard and Yale were under investigation as part of a review that found US universities failed to report at least $6.5 billion in foreign funding from countries such as China….” Yale did not report a single foreign sourced donation. Harvard officials told an FBI agent meeting over the issue that it did not see a problem and did not want to cooperate with the FBI in determining if research professors at the school were influenced by communist China funding.

In January 2021, just prior to President Biden’s swearing in, the Free Beacon reported that “The American Council on Education (ACE), a lobbying group led by former Obama-administration official Ted Mitchell, is asking President-elect Joe Biden to ‘halt expanded reporting requirements” for contracts and foreign donations to universities. ACE represents nearly all of the major universities in the country, including top Democratic donors such as Harvard University, Stanford University, and the University of California system.’” The Center for Responsive Politics says that Chinese foreign agent spending has “skyrocketed from just over $10 million in 2016 to nearly $64 million” in 2020, making it the top spender on foreign influence operations inside the United States.

It took the US Justice Department three years to force the Xinhua (New Chinese News Agency) to file its first Foreign Lobby Report. The media organ is a propaganda mouthpiece run by senior Chinese Communist Party officials. From March 2020 to May 2021, its initial filing disclosed direct spending of $8.6 million in Washington, Los Angeles, Houston, San Francisco, and Chicago areas.

A 654-page report issued by the French Institute for Strategic Military Studies last October noted: “Beijing is also increasingly comfortable with infiltration and coercion: its influence operations have become considerably tougher in recent years and its methods are resembling more closely the ones employed by Moscow. This is a “Machiavellian turn” inasmuch as the Party-State now seems to believe that “it is much safer to be feared than to be loved,” in the words of Machiavelli in The Prince. This is a clear Russification of Chinese influence operations.” It certainly is a development Washington needs to pay attention to despite Russia’s war in Ukraine. 

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

Conventional war costs money and lives. Russia is losing on both fronts as the war passes the 80-day mark. Putin’s military expenditures have increased over 40% since the beginning of his “special military operation” in Ukraine. As Putin ramps up spending on conventional warfare in Ukraine evidence also indicates that Russia is developing a second “agricultural front” that may be more dangerous the the kinetic warfare inside Ukraine. Officials in Kyiv estimate that Russian military forces have seized between 400,000-500,000 tons of the country’s grain, mostly wheat, while its navy is blockading it from exporting 90 million tons of cereal from its ports as of this week. Ukraine is known as the bread  basket of Europe. Putin knows destroying its agricultural economy will also wreak havoc on global food security.

The Russian President is pursuing a dual course on the agricultural front, according to Jamestown Foundation’s Sergey Sukhankin. First, six weeks ago Putin ordered the destruction of all agriculture-related infrastructure inside Ukraine. The Luhansk Oblast, center of the “most advanced production farms and largest food storage/preservation sites—has sustained the worst harm due to the war,” according to Sukhankin. In one air strike, Russia obliterated a modern grain elevator capable of storing 30,000 tons. Sergei Gaidai, chairman of the Lugansk regional military administration, said “The goal is the Holodomor. The occupiers bombed the grain elevator in Rubizhne with planes.” From 1932-1933 Soviet Russia created a man-made famine in Ukraine that caused mass starvation in grain-growing areas of the country. The term Holodomor is derived from the Ukrainian words for hunger (holod) and extermination (mor). Millions died during the famine. 

Putin’s second angle of agricultural attack centers on stealing grain and other foodstuffs and farm machinery to sell overseas to marginalize Ukraine’s role as a global supplier. In April Russia, failed in an attempt to offload stolen grain in Cairo, Egypt. The Russian-controlled ship then sailed on to Syria, which accepted the shipment despite warnings from the international community. Other shipments of Ukrainian-grown grain were seized and sent to Siberia for distribution. The European publication UNIAN last week reported that GPS was able to track modern farm machinery being transported by Russian forces to Chechnya from Melitopol. Of the 106 million tons of grain produced by Ukraine in a record-breaking year in 2021, most remains stuck at seaports, depriving the country of needed revenue. 

Over the last 15 years Russia has emerged as one of the top grain exporters and third largest exporter of fertilizer. Grain production and fertilizer make up Russia’s fastest growing raw-materials sector. With Putin’s “special military operation” he may intend to secure his country’s position in the global food market using his “Back Sea Pool,” according to a report by the Jamestown Foundation. Oleksander Perehozuk, of the Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies, suggests Putin only can succeed if he controls Ukrainian grain and also that coming out of Kazakhstan. Perehozuk points out that Russia first attempted this in 2007, when Moscow called for the creation of a Black Sea “grain OPEC” consisting of Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan. Ukraine refused to comply in 2007. This year Putin didn’t ask Ukraine if it objected to his plan. 

If successful this time, Putin would gain near hegemonic control over grain heading to parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Asian markets. The potential starvation and instability that could occur should Putin decide to further weaponize food production, could send the world economy into a tailspin in the coming years. He could end up recreating the empire he desires even if he suffers a great loss in the war in Ukraine. Although the possibility remains that Putin could “go nuclear” in the future according to one Washington analyst, “it isn’t necessary for him to use WMD” to achieve his long-term objective of recreating the Russian empire and forcing the West to capitulate on sanctions against his country.

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

Photo: Pixabay

The advent of mass communications through multiple channels, including internet, satellite radio and other means, has made it harder for governments to censor news that leaders do not want their populations to access.

Officials seeking to limit news to their citizenry have been forced to find other methods to combat unwanted information.  A key solution they are resorting to is through the implementation of “anti-disinformation” campaigns.

While one would have assumed that this tactic was restricted to the usual suspects, nations such as Russia, China, Iran or North Korea, the reality is that even the United States, globally renowned for its unique First Amendment guarantee of free speech, is falling victim to the disturbing trend.

America’s Homeland Security Department’s “Disinformation Governance Board” (DGB)is a key example.   The name has already been mocked due to its initials which are similar to the old Soviet “KGB,” which ruthlessly suppressed political dissent in the former USSR.

According to a release, “The working group is co-chaired by the DHS Office of Policy and Office of the General Counsel, and includes other DHS leaders from CISA, FEMA, CBP, the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Office of Intelligence and Analysis, Science and Technology Directorate, and Privacy Office.”

The actual purpose of this move, which has been justifiably been called unconstitutional, can be seen by examining who was selected to head it.  Executive director Nina Jankowicz is a deeply partisan politico who has been a leading spokesperson for some of the worst propaganda moves by leftist Democrats. She was part of an effort to coverup the Hunter Biden Laptop story.

Ms. Jankowiscz was a leading advocate of the demonstrably false charges of “Russian Collusion” with Donald Trump.

The timing of this censorship effort is highly suspect. The social media Twitter cite played a key role in the last election, by not only censoring specific news stories that discussed the wrongdoings of leading Democrats, but by also closing down the accounts of major news sources that discussed them.  The New York Post’s coverage of the Hunter Laptop is a key example.

While allowing noted terrorists to use their service, Twitter censored the account of Donald Trump.  It’s not just limited to big names. Non-leftist users find many of their contacts deleted after posting tweets that do not dovetail with the organization’s left-wing philosophy.  Another social media giant, Facebook, places users “in jail,” temporarily banning or limiting their accounts, for similar reasons. One of the most popular search engines intentionally downplays websites that

The overwhelming capability of these services to black out contrary views was challenged when Elon Musk began the process of purchasing a controlling share of Twitter. The establishment of the Disinformation Board was a direct result.

The development  of the DGB, led by the deeply partisan Ms, Jankowicz, sends a clear message: the power of the federal government will be used to suppress those who dissent from the views of leftist Democrats.

It is a follow-up to efforts by the former Obama-Biden Administration. That White House used the IRS to assault the Tea Party. The Department of Justice attacked critics of the president, which issued subpoenas to think tanks for merely disagreeing with Obama on climate change.   The Federal Communications Commission attempted to commence an effort entitled “critical information needs” (known as CIN) involving Washington oversight of broadcasters and journalists throughout America. It would have placed government employees in the private internal conversations and meetings of journalists, media organizations, and even internet sites.

The DGB is part of the larger Progressive attempt to shut down opposing arguments, an attempt that often involves violence and threats of violence.  Examples of that are clearly seen on college campuses, where conservative speakers are chased out with force, and in the urgings of some elected officials such as Rep, Maxine Waters, (D-Ca.) who called on followers to confront Trump appointees.

All of these efforts are a direct assault on the First Amendment.

Photo: Nina Jankowicz

Top U.S. intelligence officials, Army Lt. Gen. Scott Berrier, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and Avril Haines, Director of national intelligence testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 10, providing deeply disturbing insights into threats from China, Russia, Iran and various terrorist organizations. 

General Berrier stressed that “The [Ukranian] invasion has demonstrated Russia’s intent to overturn the U.S.-led, rules-based, post-Cold War international order, expand its control over the former Soviet Union and reclaim what it regards as its rightful position on the world stage.” He noted that Russian military capabilities pose an existential threat to U.S. national security and that of our allies.  

While some in the U.S. mistakenly think of China as a “competitor” rather than a military threat, the ruling Chinese Communist Party considers America  a strategic enemy.

General Berrier reported that China’s military, which has already fielded sophisticated weapons and instituted major organizational reforms to enhance joint operations, is a credible, peer competitor in the Indo-Pacific region, He also emphasized that “China’s current nuclear force expansion is historic.”

“The United States faces military and intelligence threats from competitors, particularly Russia and China, who have, and are developing, new capabilities intended to contest, limit or exceed U.S. military advantage,” Berrier said. “State and non-state actors are selectively putting these capabilities into play globally and regionally. These capabilities also span all warfighting domains — maritime, land, air, electronic warfare, cyberspace information and space.” 

The Senate Armed Forces Committee was informed that Russia’s and China’s capabilities include more lethal, ballistic and cruise missiles. China is growing nuclear stockpiles of modernized conventional forces and a range of gray-zone measures, such as the use of “ambiguous unconventional forces, foreign proxies, information manipulation, cyber-attacks and economic coercion.”

Director Haines told the Senate that China remains an unparalleled priority for the intelligence community. “The governments of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea have all demonstrated the capability and intent to promote their interests in ways that cut against U.S. and allied interests. ”  

She reported that “The PRC is coming ever closer to being a peer competitor in areas of relevance to national security and is pushing to revise global norms and institutions to its advantage… They are challenging the United States in multiple arenas — economically, militarily and technologically.”

Russia’s failure to timely defeat Ukrainian forces could lead to escalation flashpoints, including increasing Russian attempts to interdict Western security assistance, and retaliation for Western economic sanctions. 

Haines stated that “We believe that Moscow continues to use nuclear rhetoric to deter the United States and the West from increasing lethal aid to Ukraine…if Putin perceives that the United States is ignoring his threats, he may try to signal to Washington the heightened danger of its support to Ukraine by authorizing another large nuclear exercise, involving a major dispersal of mobile intercontinental missiles, heavy bombers strategic submarines…[However] We otherwise continue to believe President Putin would probably only authorize the use of nuclear weapons if he perceived an existential threat to the Russian state or regime.”  

Haines said the danger from Moscow goes beyond Ukraine. “Moscow presents a serious cyber threat, a key space competitor one of the most serious foreign influence threats to the United States.”

A Department of Defense summary of the testimony warned that the “Russian government seeks to not only pursue its own interests, but also to divide Western alliances, undermine U.S. global standing, amplify discord inside the United States, and influence U.S. voters and decision making.”

Russia and China are not the only threats. Haines warns that the ” Iranian regime continues to threaten U.S. interests as it tries to erode U.S. influence in the Middle East and trench its influence, … project power in neighboring states and minimize threats to regime stability. Meanwhile, Kim Jong-un continues to steadily expand and enhance Pyongyang’s nuclear and conventional capabilities, targeting the United States and its allies, periodically using aggressive potentially destabilizing actions to reshape the regional security environment in his favor, and to reinforce its status quo as a de facto nuclear power.”  

Photo: A fighter jet attached to an air force aviation unit under the PLA Southern Theatre Command takes off in an around-the-clock flight training exercise on April 18, 2022. (eng.chinamil.com.cn/Photo by Huang Rongkai)