06/24/2021 News & Commentary – National Security

News & commentary by Dave Maxwell. Edited and published by Daniel Riggs

 

1. Validating America’s Core Values and Vital Interests to Recraft its Grand Strategy and Grand Strategic Assumptions

2.  Biden’s Pentagon chiefs tell lawmakers flat budget is enough

3. CJCS Milley Pushes Back On GOP Criticism Of Racism Training

4. Biden's domestic terrorism strategy marks a change in course for national security

5. Cross-strait peace is U.S. national security interest: top general

6. It’s more than chips: Other risks exist in defense electronics supply chain

7. U.S. can win battles, but needs better strategy to win wars

8. Chinese diplomat calls for true multilateralism, diversified forms of democracy

9. The Marxist, Maoist Invasion of American Education, Government, Military and Culture

10. Critical race theory and loving America are not mutually exclusive. My journey with CRT.

11. SECDEF wants you to know that supporting Donald Trump isn’t extremism

12. The military’s top officer schools congressmen on critical race theory, ‘white rage’ and communism

13. H.R. McMaster Resigns From Atlantic Council Board of Directors in Protest Over Koch Funding

14.  FDD | Hold Hamas Accountable for Human-Shields Use During the May 2021 Gaza War

15. FDD | How Deceptive Techniques Enhance the Capabilities of Cyber Defenders

16. DoD should reinstate programs granting citizenship through service, Army veteran senator says

17. McCaul, Blumenauer, Kinzinger, Crow: The Biden Administration Needs to Act Quickly to Bring Our Afghan Partners to Safety

18. SOCOM Preparing for ‘Omni-Domain’ Battle

19. It’s Now Life or Death for the U.S. Military’s Afghan Interpreters

 

1. Validating America’s Core Values and Vital Interests to Recraft its Grand Strategy and Grand Strategic Assumptions

thestrategybridge.org · by Anthony Buckel · June 24, 2021

I recall the importance of knowing our core values and vital interests from my CGSC notes on strategic studies 27 years ago.

 

Purpose:  expresses a nation’s enduring values.  (in US Dec of Independence and Preamble to the Constitution provide expressions of national purpose).

Interests: a state's wants, needs, and concerns.  They signal a state's desires and intentions to other states. The most common and generic include:

• Survival and security
• Political and territorial integrity
• Economic stability and well being
• Stability and world order

 

Objectives:  subordinate to the nation's interests.  They are activities and situations a nation needs to promote, protect, or attain its interests.  Tend to be more tangible than interests.  Objectives are the ends or desired outcomes of national security strategy.

Policies:  (most abused term!)  A pattern or patterns of actions designed to attain specific objectives.  Policy statements can represent a broad COA or intent.  Examples of policies include:  If a US objective is to contain Iranian radicalism, an appropriate policy would be to provide moderate regimes in the gulf with intelligence and military assistance.  If the objective is to promote regional stability, the US policy might be to prohibit the sale of WMDs to any nation in the region.  Policy represents the ways of national security strategy.

Commitments and programs:  Commitments are expressions of a nation's intention to use its instruments of national power. Commitments sharpen the focus. They clarify policy through action.  A program is tangible proof of a commitment.  It allocates resources in support of objectives, policies, and commitments.  A program usually indicates the precise amount of resources to be used and the time frame in which the program will be in operation.  Commitments and  programs represent the means (available resources)  of national security strategy.

 

2. Biden’s Pentagon chiefs tell lawmakers flat budget is enough

Defense News · by Joe Gould · June 23, 2021

I find this difficult to accept unless the new defense strategy is going to be less ambitious than the previous one and we are going to accept greater risk. It is possible that he is basing his assessment on the upcoming NDS which obviously has not been released or perhaps even completed.

 

3. CJCS Milley Pushes Back On GOP Criticism Of Racism Training

breakingdefense.com · by Colin Clark · June 23, 2021

The SECDEF and CJCS are right to push back on the immature, ignorant, insulting, and grandstanding questions they received from some congressmen. General Milley is right that we need to read and be exposed to all ideas, even those with which we disagree (and especially those with which we disagree). But those who would ban an idea are actually undermining American values and they are admitting their weakness and inability to offer a superior idea. Banning ideas, regardless of how distasteful to some, is simply contrary to American values.

 

4. Biden's domestic terrorism strategy marks a change in course for national security

The Hill · by Gina Ligon and Seamus Hughes · June 19, 2021

Excerpts: “Moving a national security apparatus away from its historic focus on international terrorism and toward domestic extremism will entail serious challenges. The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Forces were set up to address threats from abroad. In even greater terms, the whole Department of Homeland Security was established in response to well-organized, hierarchical foreign terrorist organizations that commit years of planning to single attacks against the United States. With a few exceptions, domestic violent extremists are the opposite, pursuing sporadic campaigns of decentralized, low-budget, and minimal-planning attacks that result in significant death tolls and deepen societal polarization. To be successful, the administration will need to revamp how the counterterrorism workforce is trained and organized against the most pressing threat at home while keeping an eye on the foes abroad.

This new White House National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism is an important step. But it is just that: a step. The funding and organizational decisions that support the implementation of this plan will ultimately decide whether this first-of-its-kind strategy will result in lasting changes or not.

 

5. Cross-strait peace is U.S. national security interest: top general

focustaiwan.tw 

We have to turn to the foreign press for other reporting on the hearing at the HASC for the CJCS and SECDEF. All the US press is focused on is critical race theory. But they made some important statements that should not go unnoticed. 

 

6. It’s more than chips: Other risks exist in defense electronics supply chain

c4isrnet.com · by Chris Peters · June 23, 2021

Obviously defending our supply chains is a national security issue.

I love this quote: “In an oft-told story, the French general, Hubert Lyautey, once asked his gardener to plant a tree. The gardener objected that the tree was slow growing and would not reach maturity for 100 years. “In that case,” the marshal replied, “there is no time to lose. Plant it this afternoon.”

Likewise, America’s dependence on other nations for many of the most crucial links in the defense electronics supply chain is a long-term problem that requires industry-government collaboration now on an unprecedented scale. If the DoD truly wants to rebuild that supply chain, it will require immediate and sustained attention to the entire length of that chain, not just a few links.

 

7.  U.S. can win battles, but needs better strategy to win wars

upi.com  · by Harlan Ullman and Arnaud de Borchgrave

Perhaps. BFO (blinding flash of the obvious) but worth re-emphasizing: 

Excerpts: “Critical strategic thinking must start by defining achievable outcomes and then developing strategy. That is not the U.S. practice. Instead, the United State is prone to allowing a combination of imprecise objectives and technology and tactics to drive strategy. This is precisely backward.

Unless American leadership acknowledges the United States' limited record in winning wars, not just battles, and ascertains why victory has been so elusive, do not expect the current defense strategy regarding China and Russia to yield better results.

 

8. Chinese diplomat calls for true multilateralism, diversified forms of democracy

xinhuanet.com

I wonder if while spouting this Chinese propaganda the diplomat was able to keep a straight face? I wonder if anyone believed him? I wonder what he defines as true democracy?

Excerpts: "The key judgment is whether it fits the particular situation in a country, whether it represents the will of its people, and whether it safeguards people's interests and enjoys their support," he said, noting that "true democracy brings about political stability, social progress and well-being for the people, and contributes to the promotion and protection of human rights."

Speaking on behalf of 15 countries, Jiang said that to impose one's own social system and model of democracy on others under the pretext of democracy, interfere in other countries' internal affairs, and impose unilateral coercive measures are the very opposite of democracy and humanity, as those acts "violate the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

 

9.  The Marxist, Maoist Invasion of American Education, Government, Military and Culture

Newsmax · by Larry Bell

American values are the perfect counter to these ideas. If you are afraid of a marxist maoist invasion then you must not have very much confidence in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence and the Federalist Papers.

 

10. Critical race theory and loving America are not mutually exclusive. My journey with CRT.

USA Today · by Sally Kohn

Another view on CRT.

 

11. SECDEF wants you to know that supporting Donald Trump isn’t extremism

militarytimes.com · by Meghann Myers · June 23, 2021

Excerpts: “Austin added that the feedback he’s gotten from service members and leaders is that his extremism stand-down did not sow division. Gaetz asked if maybe those troops were just telling him what he wanted to hear, given that he had heard a differing opinion from his own sources.

“I get it, but I’m smart enough, and that does happen,” Austin shot back. “Yeah, you know, maybe they’re telling you what you want to hear.”

While Austin doesn’t have an extremism definition in hand, he has asked his experts to come up with one. He stood up a working group in April that is tasked with forming one, in addition to reviewing screening capabilities and training/education. “The issue is performance,” Brian Michael Jenkins, a senior adviser at Rand Corp. and a former Special Forces officer, told Military Times in May. “And that is, to what extent may these beliefs, whatever they are, interfere with the mission of the military? Are they such that they might disrupt unit cohesion? Are they such that they will actually interfere with effective military action, whatever the job is?”

 

12.  The military’s top officer schools congressmen on critical race theory, ‘white rage’ and communism

militarytimes.com · by Meghann Myers · June 23, 2021

There is video at the link. The CJCS responds well to the immature questioning from these congressmen.

 

13. H.R. McMaster Resigns From Atlantic Council Board of Directors in Protest Over Koch Funding

freebeacon.com · by Eliana Johnson · June 23, 2021

"The promotion of human rights undercuts America's strategic interests."  Really? Many were alarmed not only the funding ,but arguments of the "restainers" as well as the strange bedfellows of the Koch brothers and Soros funding research that seems to undercut America's strategic interests.

Excerpt: “McMaster, according to two sources familiar with the situation, was alarmed by the publication in March of an Atlantic Council report arguing that the promotion of human rights undercuts America's strategic interest. The report, authored by Emma Ashford and Matthew Burrows, was a product of an Atlantic Council project, the New American Engagement Initiative, funded by a $4.5 million grant from the Charles Koch foundation, according to a press release issued when the grant was announced.

 

14. FDD | Hold Hamas Accountable for Human-Shields Use During the May 2021 Gaza War

fdd.org · by Orde Kittrie · June 23, 2021

The 7 page memo can be downloaded in PDF here. 

Excerpts: “Implementing the Shields Act would also support U.S. efforts to undermine Hamas and Hezbollah and thereby strengthen their comparatively moderate rivals for power in Gaza and Lebanon. Following the May conflict, Blinken emphasized that while he wants to “rebuild our relationship with the Palestinian people and the Palestinian Authority,” he also wants to “ensure that Hamas does not benefit” from U.S. assistance. Blinken expressed hope that such assistance would “undermine” the terror group so that its “foothold in Gaza will slip.” Holding Hamas accountable for its use of human shields would help achieve that objective.

Humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian Authority and other Hamas rivals will not alone be sufficient to undermine the terror group. It is also essential to counter Hamas’ false narrative about the May 2021 Gaza conflict, in which the group portrays itself as protecting Gazans from Israeli war crimes. To that end, Biden should fulfil his statutory obligation and impose Shields Act sanctions, thereby demonstrating that Hamas terrorists are the real war criminals, including because they deliberately endangered Gaza civilians by using them as human shields.

 

15. FDD | How Deceptive Techniques Enhance the Capabilities of Cyber Defenders

fdd.org · by Dr. Georgianna Shea · June 23, 2021

Conclusion: “Once the live exercise was complete, the defense team stated that it highly recommends using deception practices, and that it plans to expand the use of deception for the participating client and other clients. While the security operations company was aware of the principle of using decoys, the company had not previously deployed them. The defense team had considered deception to be an advanced capability used only by large organizations with sophisticated defensive systems.

Using the decoy account allowed the cyber defenders to identify the event as a priority incident without relying on more subjective analysis, which sometimes leads defenders to dismiss an event as a false positive. The decoy account also enabled identification without relying on the signatures programmed into detection tools triggered by known patterns of malicious activity. This is especially useful when adversaries find new techniques that may not have a corresponding signature in defensive detection tools.

Simply purchasing and deploying defensive tools has never been enough to counter advanced threats. After all, adversaries also have access to the same off-the-shelf tools and can craft attacks to circumvent detection or to blend in with normal traffic. Just as advanced adversaries develop attack strategies tailored to their targets, a sophisticated defense requires a strategy tailored to the organization and the systems it protects.

 

16.  DoD should reinstate programs granting citizenship through service, Army veteran senator says

militarytimes.com · by Meghann Myers · June 22, 2021

We need a real Lodge Act.

 

17. McCaul, Blumenauer, Kinzinger, Crow: The Biden Administration Needs to Act Quickly to Bring Our Afghan Partners to Safety

gop-foreignaffairs.house.gov

 

18. SOCOM Preparing for ‘Omni-Domain’ Battle

nationaldefensemagazine.org · by Mandy Mayfield · June 24, 2021

"Omni-domain?" Mathematically which has "more" - omni or multi?

Seriously, here is the explanation: “However, “multi-domain is really omni-domain,’’ said Thomas Kenney, SOCOM’s chief data officer. “Information is coming from all directions these days, [so] multi-domain is just not enough of a thought process as we think about data and where we’re going.”

SOCOM is focused on how it will manage and leverage the large amounts of information being created, Kenney said in May during the virtual Special Operations Forces Industry Conference, which was organized by the National Defense Industrial Association.

 

19. It’s Now Life or Death for the U.S. Military’s Afghan Interpreters

Bloomberg · by James Stavridis · June 22, 2021

 

--------------

 

The Coming of War 

The First Assaults 

In spite of a year of continuous psychological and political pressure and a number of military false alarms, the actual invasion of South Korea on 25 June 1950 came as a surprise. Many of the KMAG advisors and ROKA officers and men were on passes and spending the weekend in Seoul and other towns. Of the four divisions and one regiment assigned to the defensive positions south of the 38th Parallel, only four regiments and one battalion were actually at the front. The remainder were located in positions well to the rear.1 

 

Early on the morning of the 25th, elements of the ROK 17th Regiment stationed on the Ongjin Peninsula received heavy small arms fire from the North Korean Border Constabulary brigade facing them across the Parallel. (Map I) About 0400 high-explosive artillery and mortar shells began to fall on the ROK lines in increasing numbers.2 For over an hour the North Koreans continued a tremendous barrage. After the initial stunning shock, the ROK defenders rallied and returned fire, but, as dawn broke with overcast skies at 0530, elements of the North Korean (N.K.) 6th Division passed through the Border Constabulary and attacked in force. Soon they had annihilated an entire ROK battalion and had compelled the remnants of the 17th Regiment to fall back toward the sea.3

-Military Advisors in Korea: KMAG in Peace and War, by Major Robert K. Swayer

 

Paik Sun Yup (1920–2020) was only twenty-nine years old when the war broke out in Korea in 1950, but he was already a colonel and the commander of the First Division of the army of the Republic of Korea (ROK; South Korea). On the scene from the first day of conflict, Paik would be one of the principal players in the war until its end three years later. A highly talented military leader, he had been trained as a soldier in Manchuria, a large territory in northern China, and had served in the Manchurian army in World War II (1939–45). During the Korean War, Paik became Korea's first four-star general.

...

On the day of the invasion, however, Paik had been away from the ROK First for ten days, attending infantry school in Seoul. When he learned of the attack, he hurried to ROK headquarters. He soon learned that a good portion of his division had been given leave while he was away. When he got to the battlefront he found his Thirteenth Regiment fighting well, although just beginning an orderly withdrawal. The Eleventh Regiment, which had been on reserve, was beginning to muster its soldiers and appear on the scene. But the Twelfth Regiment had been almost entirely wiped out near the border town of Kaesong.

- From a review of  From Pusan To Panmunjom: Wartime Memoirs Of The Republic Of Korea's First Four-Star General

 

"History teaches that wars begin when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap"

-Ronald Reagan