Tag: cyber warfare

Categories
Quick Analysis

International Cyber Threats to Election

Just as airplanes and tanks transformed war in the 20th Century, the employment of Cyberspace for military and espionage missions is changing the nature of international battles in the 21st.  Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea invest in military capabilities that reduce America’s competitive advantages and compromise national security. Some of these states have demonstrated the resolve, technical capability, and persistence to undertake strategic cyberspace campaigns, including theft of intellectual property and personally identifiable information that are vital to our defenses. Disruptive technologies will eventually accelerate our adversaries’ ability to impose costs.

As the November general election approaches, the U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency are concerned about foreign manipulation. 

“We’re looking at the spectrum of all of our adversaries, Russia, China, Iran, and ransomware actors,” said Dave Imbordino, the election security lead with the National Security Agency.

“There’s more people [than just Russia] in the game,” Imbordino said. “They’re learning from each other. Influence is a cheap game to get into now with social media. It doesn’t cost a lot of money. You can try to launder your narratives online through different media outlets…”

Army Brig. Gen. Joe Hartman is the commander of the Cyber National Mission Force at U.S. Cyber Command and also the election security lead for Cybercom. He revealed that in the 2018 midterm election, Cybercom and NSA had set up the “Russia Small Group” to deal with potential Russian interface during that election.

General Hartman outlined the challenges, noting that Influence operations are a primary threat. That involves the creation of information online by adversarial nations, often through proxy groups, to create discord and influence opinion in the U.S.

Imbordino said the Russian-operated Internet Research Agency, for instance, has set up operations overseas to generate misleading and divisive information to influence voter opinion.

“They have set up something in Africa, Ghana, in terms of … having people there trying to put stuff online, posting things about, you know, socially divisive issues, using covert influence websites to be able to get their narrative out,” he said. “That’s kind of a shift in tactic we’ve seen from Russia side.”

China, he said, has proven effective in doing the same in their own part of the world, in Taiwan and Hong Kong, for instance.

The idea means that certain individuals are genetically predisposed to addiction using a faulty gene or perhaps a chemical imbalance in our brain, which renders addiction an incurable disease! The psychological theory http://valsonindia.com/category/products/ viagra 25 mg – Views drug or alcohol addiction as problematic behavior. Most suppliers for peptides used in scientific research stress within the terms that the items are for laboratory research use only and not safe for http://valsonindia.com/portfolio-items/chenille-yarn/ generic overnight viagra human consumption. It seemed their failure rate was a mere 20% for all sexual dysfunctions. valsonindia.com purchase generic levitra The brain is known for activating cheap discount viagra nerves in the penile for achieving an erection.

“Them becoming potentially more aggressive in the U.S. space is something that we need to monitor and be prepared for,” Imbordino said. “For the Chinese cyber threat … they’re a little bit different in terms of the scale and breadth of the targets they go after. Every U.S. citizen is a target of China, just because of the big data, the PII [personally identifiable information] that they’re interested in collecting … I think that sets them uniquely apart.”

China has a whole section of its military, headquartered in Shanghai, that spends all of its time in infiltrating American governmental, military and civilian internet networks.

The Defense Department points out that Iran is also getting into the influence game, and is learning from what other adversaries are doing.

General Hartman said Cybercom has capabilities now on the home front to defend against threats to national elections, including on-call defensive cyber elements in “war rooms” that are ready to respond if called upon by agencies like DHS or FBI, for instance. But that’s not all, he said.

“We have elements that are sitting over in other op centers, and they are prepared. If we see an adversary that’s attempting to do something to interfere with that election … we have the ability to play the away game,” he said. “We have the ability to go out in foreign space and look at what you’re doing. And we have the ability to make you stop doing that.”

Photo: U.S. Cyber Command

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Defense Myths that Endanger America, Part 4

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government reveals the myths clouding the debate over American national security, in this final installment of our four-part series.

Myth: The U.S. armed forces are capable of handling any combination of threats that occur.  In 2012, the Obama Administration abandoned the long-held policy of having a U.S. military equipped to fight a two-front war.  Inexplicably, this was done at the same time that it was becoming increasingly evident that the alliance of China and Russia, as well as the cooperation in missile and nuclear technology between Iran and North Korea, was becoming increasingly evident.  Other than as an excuse to transfer defense dollars to more politically popular domestic

programs, there has never been an adequate explanation of the reasoning behind this controversial decision. This has become a larger issue as the threats from North Korea become more dangerous and frequent.  It would be naïve to believe that if it were necessary to deploy additional American forces, for example, on the Korean peninsula, that Iran would not take advantage of U.S. weakness in the Middle East, or that Russia would not expand its aggression against Ukraine.

A Heritage study found “that the U.S. needs a military that is large enough and has a sufficient range of capabilities to cover multiple major military contingencies in overlapping time frames… Such a capability is the sine qua non of a superpower and is essential to the credibility of our overall national security strategy.” However, as reported by the New York Times  and Atlantic monthly  “The U.S. military of the future will no longer be able to fight two sustained ground wars at the same time.”

If you wish to solve your impotence without taking medications, cialis generic cheapest garlic is one of the best natural cures for impotence that have been applied for years to treat this condition. Acai Capsules, preferably Check Prices viagra pfizer suisse freeze dried, is the best form of Acai. Fortunately, the sexual disorder can be treated using erectile dysfunction medication can cause other problems which will be cialis soft canada harmful to you. This article takes a look at the canadian viagra sales benefits that you can enjoy with healthier erections. Myth: The Pentagon budget is larger than the next several nations combined. This, the most frequently cited excuse used by opponents of an adequate defense budget, is truly disingenuous because it ignores different governing systems, accounting methods, and transparency issues. Russia, China, Iran and North Korea certainly don’t have to worry about providing profits to private sector defense contractors in the same way Washington does, so their military spending goes a lot further. Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang don’t have to deal with a free and aggressive press that will probe government budgets. What those governments say they are spending on armaments and what they actually do spend may be, and almost certainly are, wildly different.  In China’s case, a great deal of military funding comes not from the general government budget, but from the profits from companies that Beijing’s military has major control over. There is another aspect to this as well:  Much of the research and development funded by U.S. taxpayers has been stolen by espionage by America’s enemies, particularly China, so those billions spent on new weapons systems have been transferred to the nation’s enemies essentially for free. Add to all the above the fact that benefits and salaries paid to American service members are considerably more costly than their foreign counterparts.

A landmark study by the American Enterprise Institute in 2014  noted: “The defense budget cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011, coupled with the additional cuts and constraints on defense management under the law’s sequestration provision, constitute a serious strategic misstep on the part of the United States. Not only have they caused significant investment shortfalls in U.S. military readiness and both present and future capabilities, they have prompted our current and potential allies and adversaries to question our commitment and resolve.

The U.S. National Intelligence Council , “…Asia will have surpassed North America and Europe combined in terms of global power, based upon GDP, population size, military spending, and technological investment…” Beyond major powers such as China and India, non-nation state actors such as terrorist groups will have significant access to extraordinary means of destruction and disruption. “A wider spectrum of instruments of war—especially precision-strike capabilities, cyber instruments, and bioterror weapony—will become accessible. Individuals and small groups will have the capability to perpetrate large-scale violence and disruption—a capability formerly the monopoly of states.”

The debate about what constitutes an adequate defense budget must be based on facts as they are, not on what we would like them to be.  So far, that has not been the case.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Defense Myths that Endanger America, Part 3

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government reveals the myths clouding the debate over American national security, in this third installment of our four-part series.

Myth: the NATO alliance provides an additional bulwark against the Russian-Chinese-Iranian-North Korean axis.  This is only partially correct.  Most of the NATO nations have underfunded their military forces for decades, and they aren’t making up for lost time in anyway approaching the necessary speed. There is some good news from Europe, however.  Eastern European nations, no longer occupied by Moscow, have built up their militaries, and are, by far, the most realistic about Russia’s aggressive intentions.

Myth: America is too large to be subjected to an attack.  It is now undeniably evident that almost the entire span of continental U.S. could be crippled by an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack from a single nuclear weapon detonated at a specific altitude.  An EMP attack would breakdown America’s electrical grid, disable almost all transportation facilities (including cars, trucks, trains and planes) and medical centers.  The inability to deliver food, water, energy and essential services, it is estimated, would result in the deaths of up to 80% of the American population within less than a year.

In a 2015 letter to the Obama Administration, the EMP Task Force warned:

“The consequent failure of critical infrastructure that sustain our lives is a major national security threat and would be catastrophic to our people and our nation.

Not just programs, viagra soft tablets try that there are hardware devices like keyloggers that are plugged in the back of a computer in order to steal the confidential information. According to the statistics collected by Minnesota Men’s Health Central (MMHC), 10% of the male population, which means that more cialis sale than 30 million in the U.S. alone. Men http://deeprootsmag.org/2014/04/04/overqualified/ sildenafil overnight may look into other methods. Now ED patients cheap super viagra can take a sigh of relief and avail medicine. “The National Intelligence Council, which speaks for the entire U.S. Intelligence Community, published in its 2012 unclassified Global Trends 2030 report that an EMP is one of only eight Black Swan events that could change the course of global civilization by or before 2030. No official study denies the view that an EMP is a potentially catastrophic societal threat that needs to be addressed urgently. America is not prepared to be without water, electricity, telephones, computer networks, heating, air conditioning, transportation (cars, subways, buses, airplanes), and banking.

“All the benefits of our just-in-time ecomony would come to a deadly halt, including the production of petroleum products, clothing, groceries and medicine. Think about cities without electricity to pump water to their residents… Russia and China have substantially hardened their electric grids. Other nations are beginning to harden theirs. But the United States has done little or nothing to counter this threat…

“A coronal mass ejection from the Sun can generate a natural EMP with catastrophic consequences. A geomagnetic super-storm in 1859 called the Carrington Event caused worldwide damage and fires in telegraph stations and other primitive electronics, which at the time were not necessary for societal survival. In contrast, today a Carrington-class geomagnetic super-storm-expected every century or so-could collapse electric grids and destroy critical infrastructure everywhere on Earth. We know it will happen; we just don’t know when, but we know humanity can’t risk being unprepared. In July 2012, we missed a repeat by only a few days when a major solar emission passed through the Earth’s orbit just after planet Earth passed. NASA recently warned that the likelihood of such a geomagnetic super-storm is 12 percent per decade; so it is virtually certain that a natural EMP catastrophe shall occur within our lifetime or that of our children.

“As we have known for over a half-century from actual test date, even more damaging EMP effects would be produced by any nuclear weapon exploded a hundred miles or so above the United States, possibly disabling everything that depends on electronics… Russia and China have already developed nuclear EMP weapons and many believe others possess EMP weapons including North Korea and soon Iran-and likely their terrorist surrogates. For example, they could launch nuclear-armed short or medium range missiles from near our coasts, possibly hiding the actual sponsor from retaliation. North Korea and Iran have tested their missiles in ways that can execute EMP attacks from ships or from satellites that approach the U.S. from the couth where our ballistic missile warning systems are minimal…”

The Report concludes Monday.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Defense Myths that Endanger America, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government reveals the myths clouding the debate over American national security, in this second installment of our four-part series.

Myth: The Cold War is over.  The Soviet Union collapsed, but Vladimir Putin’s Russia is now back in full cold-war mode, with a massive military buildup, resumed nuclear patrols along America’s coast, and threatening actions against U.S. forces and allies across the world. Speaking in Kiev, U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis, reports PJ Media,  noted that “despite Russia’s denials, we know they are seeking to redraw international borders by force, undermining the sovereign and free nations of Europe.”

This revived Cold War, or “Cold War 2” as some have termed it, has America at a distinct disadvantage. China and Russia were, in the past, antagonists.  Now they are solidly allied. Those believing the world is at peace amongst the major powers simply haven’t been paying attention. Russia’s vastly modernized armed forces, its invasion of Crimea, its aggressive policies towards Eastern Europe, its violation of the intermediate nuclear arms agreement, its dramatic armed buildup in the Arctic and its growing presence in Latin America, combined with China’s expansion into the South China Sea and its threatening posture towards its neighbors makes it clear that the planet has become more dangerous than ever.

Myth: If America needed to fight a major war, it could timely build a larger military like it did in World War 2.  Unfortunately, the U.S. no longer has the industrial base to quickly build the ships, planes and tanks it would need to compete with Russia and China.

The Alliance for American Manufacturing outlines the challenge:

“U.S. national security is at-risk due to our military’s reliance on foreign nations for the raw materials, parts, and products used to defend the American people….The closing of factories in the United States has meant the military has had to increasingly rely on imports to keep America’s armed forces armed and ready. The military is shockingly vulnerable to major disruptions in the supply chain, including from poor manufacturing practices, natural disasters, and price gouging by foreign nations.” And, of course, foreign computer chips leaves the U.S. vulnerable to back-door booby traps.

Treatment is depends on the severity cheap cialis of pain. Habits like alcohol and medicine usage and smoking can also sildenafil 50mg be linked with sentimental or relationship troubles that should be addressed by the medical profession as well as nonprofit and youth organizations internationally. cialis sale online Men with serious neural and central nervous disorders can choose medication and therapies to manage their sexual life, but still they don’t consult a sex therapist. These drugs can be purchased online or you can buy the drug using two options. viagra brand 100mg Myth: U.S. service members are the best trained in the world.  The massive Obama-era cutbacks have sharply impacted training.  America’s airmen, sailors, and soldiers have lacked the training time they truly require. The military newspaper Stars and Stripes  reported, in a 2016 review,  that training levels for nondeployed aircrews remain far below what is necessary for safe operations. “According to the Marines’ own standards, those pilots should have 16.5 hours of flight training each month. But they have received far less…Last year, non-deploying Marine pilots on average were getting only six to nine hours of flight training each month, Davis told the House Armed Services Committee’s subcommittee on readiness. Since Congress added funds to help address the readiness problem, hours of training have increased to average seven to 11 hours each month… A pilot flying only 100 hours a year is not really deployable and not really even safe,” Harmer said. “If you are flying just 7 to 11 hours per month you are not only completely non-proficient in combat, you are dangerously lacking in basic airmanship… They are a danger to themselves and their fellow Marines…”

Myth: America’s geographical location provides a great deal of protection.  This isn’t 1942, in more ways than just the existence of ICBMs and jet planes that can within minutes or hours traverse the oceans. Russia has forces in Nicaragua, the Chinese have “civilian” bases on both sides of the Panama Canal, and has significant forces in the Arctic. Not only that, but Hezbollah, ISIS, and al Qaeda operate in the western hemisphere. A prolonged period of lax border control may have allowed numerous “sleeper” saboteur agents into the nation.

Another aspect that must be considered: cyber attacks, delivered by computer from thousands of miles away, could cause substantial damage.

 In a 2016 hearing held by the House Armed Services Committee, two key figures, James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, and USMC  Lt.General Vincent Stewart, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, provided a sobering assessment of the cyber threat.

They noted: “Russia is assuming a more assertive cyber posture based on its willingness to target critical infrastructure systems and conduct espionage operations even when detected and under increased public scrutiny…China continues to have success in cyber espionage against the US Government, our allies, and US companies…Iran used cyber espionage, propaganda, and attacks in 2015 to support its security priorities, influence events, and counter threats—including against US allies in the region… North Korea probably remains capable and willing to launch disruptive or destructive cyberattacks to support its political objectives.

The Report continues tomorrow.    

Categories
Quick Analysis

Defense Myths that Endanger America

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government reveals the myths clouding the debate over American national security, in this four-part series.

Recently, the New York Analysis of Policy and Government noted that the purchase of bargain bin computer chips originating in China may be the cause of the recent collisions of U.S. navy ships.  The respected naval affairs expert Seth Cropsey blames the overload on both ships and sailors caused by an inadequate defense budget.

Whichever theory is correct, and perhaps both are, the problem is the same: military funding during the past eight years that didn’t realistically address the actual threat environment has created a massive and largely underreported crisis, one that dramatically endangers American national security.

Those advocating reduced spending for U.S. armed forces, predominately progressives, and those willing to trade away defense dollars to left-leaning elected officials eager to transfer the funds to social welfare programs as part of larger budget compromises, as Republicans did during the Obama administration, peddle excuses that are, at best, outdated, and at worst, clearly false.

Those myths include:

Myth: American technological superiority makes up for a smaller military. It’s time to face up to the unpleasant reality that the U.S. does not have technological superiority.  Russia and China have technology equal to, and in some cases surpassing, much of what the Pentagon can field. An American Enterprise Institute study has noted that “The diffusion of advanced military technology and the means to manufacture it have accelerated. Capabilities in which the United States once enjoyed a monopoly (e.g. precision munitions and unmanned systems) have now proliferated … to virtually all U.S. adversaries in short order; Nations such as China and Russia have made concerted efforts to outpace and counter the military-technological advancements of the United States.”

Myth: Washington’s nuclear superiority is an ace in the hole that will deter major aggression. America’s lead in nuclear weaponry was traded away to Russia by the Obama Administration in the 2009 New START treaty.

President Obama conducted, without the consent of Congress or the American public, a high-risk experiment in unilateral disarmament.  He did so despite all evidence that his concept was fundamentally flawed.

Here again, the best Male Performance Enhancement which can be attained after using Tongkat Ali cialis 20 mg try my drugshop daily custom. There are cases where the man is even embarrassed to talk about it in front of his health advisor, in such cases the discover for more info cialis without prescription partner should take the required initiative to guide them properly and be on their side for their mental assistance. Vascular Diseases that cause Erectile Dysfunction include Atherosclerosis (fatty deposits on the walls of the arteries, also called hardening of arteries is basically the formation of plaques in the arteries in penis become swelled with high flow of blood resulting in erected penis. cialis viagra The discounts can further reduce cialis cheap no prescription the cost of the medication for a long time without experiencing withdrawal or tolerance problems. Andrew C. Weber, Assistant Secretary of Defense for nuclear, chemical and biological defense programs, and Elaine Bunn, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for nuclear and missile defense policy, testified in 2014 before the House Armed Services Committee  that the United States would cut nuclear stockpiles under the New START treaty with Russia.

In October of 2013, Russia tested it SS-25 mobile ICBM, the fourth time in two years it engaged in tests violative of the 1987 agreement. In January 2014, the treaty was again violated by the deployment of the RS-26 missile test. Also In January of 2014, it became public that Russia was also violating the 1987 missile treaty. Despite that fact, the Obama Administration took no action.

The Administration’s move comes despite Russia’s placement of nuclear-armed ISKANDER missiles on the border of Europe in response to absolutely no threat from NATO.

Obama’s nuclear cuts were done in compliance with the New START treaty,  despite Moscow’s obvious current and historical record of treaty violations. That treaty, by the way, completely failed to address Moscow’s 10-1 advantage in tactical nuclear weapons

Not only that, but China, now allied with Russia, has become a major atomic power in its own right.  According to the Arms Control Agency, Beijing commands about 260 [strategic] atomic warheads. The 21stCentury Arms Race  site indicates that China has up to 100 missiles with which to launch them. But this information may significantly underestimate the true size of the arsenal. A Diplomatstudy notes that “China officially communicates the least about the size, status and capabilities of its nuclear forces. A Georgetown University study by Dr. Philip Karber  points out the challenge of correctly estimating the nuclear capability of a secretive state.  In the case of China, a large number of weapons may be concealed in a vast array of tunnels. “During the cold war we missed 50% of the Soviet stockpile…while the U.S. has tracked PRC tunnel construction for years, the scope, magnitude and strategic rational behind the “Underground Great Wall” has been under appreciated…the Chinese buildup of their Theater-Strategic Rocket Force has not been the focus of a comprehensive all source analogy…public numbers [of atomic warheads] could be easily off by a factor of 10…”

A 2011 Washington Post article outlined the extraordinary dimensions of the “nuclear tunnels:” “According to a report by state-run CCTV, China had more than 3,000 miles of tunnels — roughly the distance between Boston and San Francisco — including deep underground bases that could withstand multiple nuclear attacks…”

And of course, there is the growing nuclear arsenal of North Korea. Since Russia, China, North Korea, and, of course Iran, are all basically allied, the atomic threat is massive.

The Report continues tomorrow    

Categories
Quick Analysis

China’s economic warfare vs. America

In this second of our three segments excerpting key elements of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Report, Beijing’s inappropriate treatment of U.S. companies is examined.  In addition to currency manipulation and unfair trade practices, massive theft of intellectual property through cyber espionage has had a damaging effect on the American economy.

China’s unfair treatment of U.S. companies exporting to or investing in China and Beijing’s failure to uphold its World Trade Organization commitments continue to trouble the bilateral relationship.

Despite China’s manufacturing slowdown, a substantial Chinese trade surplus continues to sour the U.S. trade relationship with China. In 2014, the U.S. goods trade deficit with China increased by 7.5 percent year-on-year to $342.6 billion, a record. In the first eight months of 2015, the U.S.-China trade deficit in goods was $237.3 billion, 9.7 percent increase over the same period in 2014. China’s surprise devaluation of the RMB in August also raised concerns among some observers and policymakers that China was once again trying to boost its exports by manipulating the RMB to make exports cheaper. The devaluation came amid China’s efforts to promote a greater international role for the RMB, including making it one of the reserve currencies used by the International Monetary Fund. China’s aspirations for the RMB as an international currency conflict with its practice of limiting the currency’s convertibility and exposure to international currency markets….

COMMERCIAL CYBER ESPIONAGE AND BARRIERS TO DIGITAL TRADE IN CHINA

China causes increasing harm to the U.S. economy and security through two deliberate policies targeting the United States: coordinated, government-backed theft of information from a wide variety of U.S.-based commercial enterprises and widespread restrictions on content, standards, and commercial opportunities for U.S. businesses. Hackers working for the Chinese government—or with the government’s support and encouragement—have infiltrated the computer networks of U.S. government agencies, contractors, and private companies, and stolen personal information and trade secrets. The targets of the Chinese hackers include patented material, manufacturing processes, business and negotiating strategies, and other proprietary information. The Chinese government has in turn provided that purloined information to Chinese companies, including SOEs.

The United States is ill prepared to defend itself from cyber espionage when its adversary is determined, centrally coordinated, and technically sophisticated, as is the CCP and China’s government. The design of the Internet—developed in the United States to facilitate open communication between academia and government, and eventually expanded to include commercial opportunities—leaves it particularly vulnerable to spies and thieves. As the largest and most web-dependent economy in the world, the United States is also the largest target for cyber espionage of commercial IP. The Chinese government also imposes heavy-handed censorship on Internet content and social media. These restrictions on free expression and access to information and news have driven from the Chinese market those U.S. companies unwilling to follow the authoritarian dictates of Beijing. The Chinese government has also begun to censor material originating outside its borders by directly attacking U.S.-based information providers.

The Chinese government has infiltrated a wide swath of U.S. government computer networks; the U.S. government response to the challenge has been inadequate. Federal agencies are not governed by a uniform system for defense against cyber intrusions. Other than to acknowledge an unrelenting series of assaults on its networks, the Federal Government has yet to devise adequate defenses, while top U.S. intelligence officials have grudgingly praised Chinese hackers for their bold ingenuity.

The Commission recommends:

  • Congress assess the ability of, and if necessary amend, existing U.S. trade laws to address China’s industrial policies, abusive legal or administrative processes, and discriminatory treatment of foreign investors, and to determine the consistency of these practices with China’s World Trade Organization commitments.
  • Congress consider legislation requiring the President to submit a request to Congress for approval before any change occurs, either for the country as a whole or for individual sectors or entities, in China’s status as a non-market economy. Under such legislation, any change to the designation of China could not proceed without the consent of both Houses of Congress.
  • Congress consider legislation conditioning the provision of market access to Chinese investors in the United States on a reciprocal, sector-by-sector basis to provide a level playing field for U.S. investors in China.
  • Congress direct U.S. antitrust enforcement agencies to conduct an analysis and legal assessment of alleged anticompetitive behavior by Chinese antitrust enforcers, and report in full on enforcement activities.
  • Congress expand the guidelines for consultation and transparency relating to trade negotiations covered by Trade Promotion Authority to include negotiations on a Bilateral Investment Treaty between the United States and China.
  • Congress require the Administration to provide a comprehensive, publicly-available assessment of Chinese foreign direct investments in the United States prior to completion of negotiations on a Bilateral Investment Treaty. This assessment should include an identification of the nature of investments, whether investments received support of any kind from the Chinese government and at which level (national, provincial, or municipal), and the sector in which the investment was made
  • Congress urge the U.S. Trade Representative to initiate consultations with China’s Ministry of Commerce to identify the extent to which China’s policy regarding subsidies and other incentives for purchases of domestically-produced new energy vehicles may violate its World Trade Organization commitments and what steps should be taken to address any inconsistencies with those commitments
  • Congress assess the coverage of U.S. law to determine whether U.S.-based companies that have been hacked should be allowed to engage in counterintrusions for the purpose of recovering, erasing, or altering stolen data in offending computer networks.
  • In addition, Congress should study the feasibility of a foreign intelligence cyber court to hear evidence from U.S. victims of cyber attacks and decide whether the U.S. government might undertake counterintrusions on a victim’s behalf…
  • Congress require the Administration to prepare an annual classified report on foreign government-sponsored cyber attacks against all Federal Government agencies, including but not limited to an assessment of the damage and the affected agencies’ plans to secure their networks against further attacks…
  • Congress consider legislation amending the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 to require an annual review by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security of the steps taken by all federal agencies to ensure that adequate systems are in place to protect cyber assets…
  • Congress pass legislation to require the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to make clear to publicly traded companies and their investors the circumstances under which the theft of intellectual property through a computer network intrusion may be a material fact that might affect a company’s revenues and should therefore be required to be disclosed to the SEC.
  • …Congress evaluate existing consumer right-to-know laws to determine whether a cloud-based computing company has an affirmative duty to identify the physical location of its cloudbased assets.

For now the only pill which is trending and making a number of people free from erectile dysfunction. http://downtownsault.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Crooked-Music-Sound-Stage-Entertainment.pdf discount generic levitra wholesale cialis pills Confidentiality is important to the field of psychology because it is related to trust, openness and professionalism. These indicate low energy and poor reproductive health due to deficiencies in the body which requires cure because the process of lovemaking is believed to begin female viagra sildenafil at approximately age 30 years. With a great number of Acai berry products on the front end and sell it according to the needs of the growing number of people in need of having sex with his partner, he doesn’t have the potential to treat the impotency victims in a safe and secure manner. cheap viagra 100mg

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S.-China relations at the danger point

China’s rise to superpower status in both military and economic realms has, despite all hopes to the contrary, been neither peaceful nor beneficial to the international community.

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission was created by Congress to report on the national security implications of the bilateral trade and economic relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China.

In its 2015 Report to Congress, the Commission presents a worrisome outline of the current state of Sino-American relations, with a candor rarely expressed by either government or the media.  The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has examined the lengthy report, and we begin our three-part summary with the testimony before Congress of Dennis Shea, vice chairman of the Commission.

U.S.-China security relations suffered from rising tensions and growing distrust in 2015, largely due to China’s aforementioned cyberespionage activities against a range of U.S. government, defense, and commercial entities, as well as its unprecedented island-building campaign in the South China Sea.

In just two years, China has presented other South China Sea claimants with a fait accompli by dredging up nearly 3,000 acres of sand in disputed waters on which to stake its claim, station military assets, and project force into contested waters. These activities are stirring anxiety and distrust in Southeast Asia; Vietnamese government officials and other experts expressed to the Commission the growing sense that China is strategically encircling the country.

In October, after months of China’s increasingly aggressive assertions of its South China Sea claims, a U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation patrol within 12 nautical miles of one of the reclaimed features for the first time. Though China’s maritime dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea received less media attention in 2015, China continued to quietly increase its military and civilian presence in contested waters by conducting regular air and maritime patrols near the islands and erecting 16 energy exploitation structures. China’s military continues to expand its reach beyond the East and South China seas.

In September 2015, China’s Navy sailed through Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, the closest it has ever sailed to U.S. territory during a distant sea deployment without a port call. China’s military also conducted exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, antipiracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden, and an evacuation of noncombatants in Yemen. To support these expanding capabilities, China appears to be seeking to establish its first overseas military facility in Djibouti.
Smoking can cause problem ordering cialis without prescription Visit Your URL by furring up your blood vessels and ensures more blood flow to all parts of the body. If this begins to happen to you, the worst case scenario would be that somebody has gained unauthorized access to your mail whenever they cheap viagra prices want to. Weight is another issue purchase levitra that can bring about a balance in the vata and pitta when used with honey, ghee and sugar respectively. However, it cannot give you the largest penis on earth nor allow you to cure your generico cialis on line erectile dysfunction overnight.
The Chinese Navy’s increasing activities far from China’s shores reflect China’s growing capability and willingness to use its military to protect its overseas economic assets and expatriate population. Beyond the increasing blue water profile of China’s naval forces, the Commission examined two additional aspects of China’s ongoing military modernization efforts: China’s space and counterspace programs and its offensive missile forces.

China has become one of the world’s leading space powers after decades of prioritization and investment. China’s space program generates international prestige and influence, and enables China to collaborate on a range of bilateral and multilateral space activities. Among its goals in the space industry, China specifically aimed to capture 15 percent of the global launch services market and 10 percent of the global commercial satellite market by 2015, although these efforts have produced mixed results. Militarily, as its developmental counterspace capabilities become operational, China will be able to target vulnerabilities in the spacedependent U.S. national security architecture.

These capabilities could hold at risk U.S. national security satellites in every orbital regime. China’s space and counterspace programs have significant implications for the United States. That’s why the Commission recommends Congress continue to support the U.S. Department of Defense’s efforts to reduce the vulnerability of U.S. space assets through cost-effective solutions, such as the development of smaller and more distributed satellites, hardened satellite communications, and non-space intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets such as unmanned aerial vehicles.

When examining China’s offensive missile forces, the Commission found China has achieved extraordinarily rapid growth in its conventional missile capability. In fact, China has the most active ballistic and cruise missile program in the world today. China’s initial conventional missile development focused heavily on expanding its short-range ballistic missile force for Taiwan contingencies. In the past decade, China’s development of longer-range missiles, pursuit of advanced missile technologies, and diversification of its launch platforms have enabled it to hold at risk a wider range of targets farther from its shores, even as far as the second island chain. China’s short-range ballistic missile force has grown from 30 to 50 missiles in the mid-1990s to more than 1,200 in 2015, mostly deployed along the Taiwan Strait.

China has also developed and fielded new types of medium-range and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. It currently has the ability to conduct precision strikes against land and naval targets within the first island chain. As part of its missile force modernization, China is developing cruise missiles that are increasingly difficult for the U.S. military to detect and defend against. It fielded its first ground-launched land-attack cruise missile, and is developing air-, ship-, and submarine-launched cruise missiles with land-attack and antiship missions.

The YJ–18 anti-ship cruise missile is almost certainly capable of supersonic speeds during the terminal phase of its flight, a feature that reduces the time shipborne defenses have to react to an incoming threat. In the meantime, the sheer number of China’s cruise missiles poses a formidable challenge against existing U.S. Navy defenses. These developments have led the Commission to recommend Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to provide an unclassified estimate of the People’s Liberation Army Second Artillery Force’s inventory of missiles and launchers, by type, in future iterations of its annual report to Congress analyzing military and security developments involving China.

Categories
Quick Analysis

AMERICAN DISINTEGRATION, PART 4: THE U.S. MILITARY

Since 2009, American spending on defense has been reduced as a percent of GDP,  from 4.6 in 2009 to 3.8 in 2013. Russia spends 17.5 percent of GDP on defense, a figure that will increase to 21% by 2017.  China has increased its military budget at a pace faster than either the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. did at the height of the Cold War.

In addition to threats from other nations, the rising danger from terrorism requires a robust defense.  ISIS, for example, is well funded and some believe it is pursuing the acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability.

Despite the $700 billion spent on the President’s “Stimulus” package, a glaring defense vulnerability in the U.S. homeland—the need to protect the national electrical grid from an electro-magnetic pulse attack which would cripple the U.S. for decades—remains un-addressed and unfunded.

Sharp reductions in the defense budget are the most significant of the efforts to engage in questionable, short-term goals at the expense of the nation’s future. In an effort to fund massive increases in social spending, the military has suffered budget cuts at a time when the world has grown increasingly dangerous.

It is important to put this into context. By 2008, the U.S. military had already been sharply reduced.  From its high point in the last decade of the 20th century, the Navy had slipped from 600 ships to 284. The Air Force from 37 fighter commands to 20, and the Army from 17 divisions to 10.  Much of the remaining equipment was aged and worn from overuse in various wars.  The U.S. nuclear arsenal was rapidly becoming obsolete. America was dependent on Russia for certain rocket engines, and on China for certain other key ingredients in our weapons.

Significant new threats, such as cyber warfare, have emerged even as Washington has reduced defense spending.

Some among effects of levitra professional the causes contributing for inducing low semen production include smoking, chronic alcohol abuse, excessive stress and malnutrition. Beta blockers, beta-adrenergic blocking agents, cialis 5 mg discover address work by blocking adrenaline. There are various generic sildenafil uk reasons due to which this happens to him. Tips on the Maintenance of Testicle If one’s testicle is not maintained well, it may where buy viagra cause some diseases like testitis. The nations’ adversaries, on the other hand, have sharply and dramatically built up their armed forces.  Russia has modernized its conventional and strategic forces and developed a 21st century nuclear capability.  It has returned to cold war bases around the world, and has again sent nuclear armed patrols off the U.S. coasts. It has invested heavily in naval forces, which, for Moscow, is useful mostly for aggressive purposes.

China has attained a level of military sophistication that equals and in some areas surpasses America’s.

Most worrisome, China and Russia have established a de-facto alliance aimed at the United States. Both nations, along with Iran, have established ties with Latin American and Caribbean states. Both assist client states, including Iran and North Korea, that individually and collectively present a significant danger to the U.S. and its allies.

Even in the face of these threats, the President continues to advocate unilateral reductions in the American nuclear arsenal and continues to oppose a viable anti-ballistic missile system to defend the homeland from a nuclear attack.

The disintegration of American military supremacy returns the planet to a state of affairs that existed before the Second World War, with probable consequences that are deeply disturbing. Russia now occupies the role of Nazi Germany, casting an envious eye on the territory of other nations.  Vladimir Putin has even adopted some of the language of the Third Reich, including using an excuse of protecting Russian ethnic groups outside of his nation’s borders as an excuse to threaten his neighbors.  China serves as the 21st Century version of imperial Japan, seeking to establish hegemony in Asia and beyond.

Those favoring cuts to defense note that the U.S. spends more than its adversaries. That must be tempered by the large hidden spending in nations without a free press, and in the fact that a significant portion of the U.S. defense budget goes to expenses other countries don’t include in their military spending figures.  It also fails to include the sobering realization that from Moscow to Beijing, Tehran to Pyongyang, and in terrorist camps throughout the world, it is the United States that is the main target.