U.S. National Security and Military News Review

Musk Email Reaches Italian Workers. It Did Not Go Well.

Emma Bubola — Wed, 12 Mar 2025 05:47:33 -0400

Employees at the Aviano Air Base who serve American forces got a familiar demand to list their achievements. Unions say Italy “is not the Wild West like the U.S.”

Unruly Passenger Swallows Rosary Beads on American Airlines Flight

Hank Sanders — Wed, 12 Mar 2025 02:26:29 -0400

The man also kicked a flight attendant, an arrest affidavit said. He and his sister said they were traveling to Haiti to escape “religious attacks of a spiritual nature.”

¿Cuál es el estatus de la operación para migrantes en Guantánamo?

Carol Rosenberg — Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:01:11 -0400

El gobierno de EE. UU. podría estar comenzando a darse cuenta de que la base no es una estación de paso ideal.

Europe Weighs Peacekeeping Role in Ukraine Amid Trump’s Embrace of Russia

Roger Cohen — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 22:59:31 -0400

The deeper discussion of a European force comes amid rising anger and dismay over President Trump’s embrace of Russia and abandonment of traditional allies.

Man Who Shot at Pipeline and Power Station Gets 25 Years in Prison

Adeel Hassan — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 20:35:29 -0400

Cameron M. Smith, 50, a Canadian who wanted to bring more attention to climate change, was also ordered to pay $2.1 million in restitution for damage he caused in the Dakotas.

Canada, allies play a key role in some military AI experiments

Patrick Tucker — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:36:25 -0400

Artificial intelligence could help the U.S. military speed up the process of finding and targeting missile threats, but a recent joint Air Force exercise showed that continuing cooperation through joint military alliances and partnerships is critical to that task—cooperation that is being challenged by continued verbal attacks by President Donald Trump.

A December exercise that included the U.S. Air Force, as well as forces from Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, tested how allied forces using artificial intelligence and new sensor data, could accelerate operations relevant to missile defense, such as identifying or finding adversary mobile missile launchers or command and control sites. The exercise was called ShOC-N, or Shadow Operations Center-Nellis.

Doing such tasks more quickly and accurately with multiple partners requires years of work and cooperation to ensure everyone’s systems and forces can operate together. Because of that challenge, the exercise “places special emphasis on reducing barriers to interoperability and information sharing between the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom,” said Lt. Col. Wesley Schultz of the U.S. Air Force’s 805th Combat Training Squadron. “Unified intelligence and battle management awareness is critical to success in these environments.”

Four more similar exercises are planned for later this year, with Canada playing a key role, Schultz said.

U.S. military officials Defense One spoke to politely declined to comment on the current high-level political drama playing out between the leaders of the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. But they were enthusiastic to discuss the value of the military relationships highlighted in the exercise, and their work to develop faster, smarter AI-enabled techniques for shared military objectives and keep North America protected from attack.

“The coalition collaboration is very important to us, and [Canada and other partners] been part of a lot of our exercises and experiments,” Lt. Col. Micah Graber, the chief of the Air Force’s ABMS Division’s Deployable Systems Branch, told Defense One, adding that the U.S. contributes and benefits from such partnerships.

Joint technology efforts are already underway to create a software co-development space, or sandbox, allowing more partners and operators to contribute to building the system, he said. “We're building that sandbox now… so we can have that more persistent connection with them.”

That’s essential because the pace of operations is accelerating. Adversaries are becoming better at moving command and control centers and weapons, increasing the need for what’s called dynamic targeting.

“We’re really focused on dynamic targeting—not pre-planned and not known in advance. That could be a critical target, something that's really important, or something that's a time sensitive target, where there's a fleeting opportunity,” Lt. Col. Carl Rossini, the deputy chief of the deployable systems branch at the Air Force’s ABMS division, told Defense One.

Distributed artificial intelligence is key to finding those more mobile targets and accelerating the operations. The Air Force is relying on Palantir’s Maven Smart Systems and AI software from Maverick to allow for “tactical control, execution, and assigning of assets in an embedded common operating picture, while also receiving simulated track data.” The participants demonstrated that, with help from AI, they could “ingest and display red and blue tracks within a tactical data link,” meaning real-time sharing on the location of forces along a narrow, secured datalink.

But the system also ingests planning data, “which gives battle managers critical insights allowing them to better handle complex and evolving areas of operation,” according to an Air Force statement about the exercise.

While artificial intelligence is already speeding up business processes in the civilian sector, applying it to something like military command and control across several domains and multiple partners is far more difficult. That’s part of why having partner militaries participate and contribute to exercises is important, officials said.

“It took many years for us to get automation to a point where it can allow our operators to do their job more effectively. And I think we're probably several more years out for AI to improve their ability to get after decisions at an exponential speed compared to where we are today. So it's definitely going to take some time for us to get there in the AI world,” said Steve Ciulla, program manager for the U.S. Air Force’s Tactical Operations Center-Light, an effort to recreate the intelligence and command capabilities of larger headquarters in smaller form, making battle management more mobile.

One of the big takeaways from the exercise, Graber said, is that larger teams are better. “There were still a lot of humans needed in the loop. Even though the AI helped, there was still a lot of task saturation,” he said, meaning a lot of processes and decisions left to human operators. “We're trying to flush that all out, to simplify and make sure that we only filter the messages and targets and things we need…Some of the operators were a little overwhelmed.”

That is part of why continued relationships with allies and partners are essential—to operate faster now and to build the system that will allow them to work even faster in the future. Partners bring more data to train autonomous tools and more human expertise to train them.

Rossini described it as “providing crew.” Those Canadian, British, and Australian operators, working alongside their U.S. counterparts, "provide unique operations expertise from their [area of responsibility] and then from the national security priorities that their respective country is working more broadly in operations.”

They can also bring more satellite data, drones, aircraft, and other things to collect more data, Ciulla said. “There are early discussions of sensor contributions from each of those nations.”

The United States and Canada also recently participated in joint exercises in Greenland.

The Air Force participants’ positive feedback about partner militaries in the ShOC-N exercise stands in contrast to the increasingly antagonistic relationship between the leaders of the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

The U.K.-based Daily Mail, citing defense sources, says U.S. officials have urged their country’s leaders to exclude the United States from the “Five Eyes” intelligence-sharing agreement, which military and political leaders have repeatedly described as highly valuable for detecting emerging threats. The proposal follows the U.S. decision to cut back on intelligence sharing with Ukraine and to prohibit other allies from sharing U.S. intelligence as well, a decision that White House leaders reversed on Tuesday.

And repeated Trump threats to turn Canada into the 51st state have damaged U.S. relations around the globe.

Trump has not suggested that he would resort to military action to achieve that goal, citing instead tariffs and other forms of economic leverage. And White House officials have publicly denied reports that the U.S. might abandon intelligence and military sharing with Canada. But Canadians, and particularly Canadian intelligence professionals, are taking Trump very seriously.

Vincent Rigby, a former top intelligence to the Canadian Prime Minister told Canada’s The National last month: “I’m afraid at one point, intelligence is going to be used as a negotiating tool.”

]]>

Canada, other allies play a key role in some military AI experiments

Patrick Tucker — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:36:25 -0400

Four more similar exercises are planned for later this year, with Canada playing a key role, Schultz said.

They can also bring more satellite data, drones, aircraft, and other things to collect more data, Ciulla said. “There are early discussions of sensor contributions from each of those nations.”

The United States and Canada also recently participated in joint exercises in Greenland.

And repeated Trump threats to turn Canada into the 51st state have damaged U.S. relations around the globe.

]]>

US resumes sending aid, intel to Ukraine; seeks ‘yes’ from Russia on ceasefire

Patrick Tucker — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 18:46:42 -0400

Kyiv and Washington have agreed to pitch a 30-day ceasefire to Russia, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday, adding that the United States will immediately resume delivering vital weapons and intelligence to Ukraine.

“Now we’ll have to go to Russia, and hopefully President [Vladimir] Putin will agree to it also,” U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House. “We’re going to meet with them later on today and tomorrow.”

Steve Witkoff, the U.S. envoy to the Middle East, was scheduled to head to Russia today for those talks.

Rubio and his Ukrainian counterparts met on Tuesday in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his own statement that the day’s discussions began with Ukraine’s key priorities: stopping Russia’s missile and drone attacks, releasing prisoners of war, the return of Ukrainian children taken to Russia, and building confidence in the overall diplomatic process.

“The American side understands our arguments and considers our proposals,” Zelenskyy said. “The U.S. side proposed taking an even bigger first step—a 30-day full interim ceasefire, not only stopping missile, drone, and bomb attacks, not only in the Black Sea, but also along the entire front line. Ukraine is ready to accept this proposal.”

At the Jeddah meeting, the Ukrainian delegation “reiterated that European partners shall be involved in the peace process,” according to a joint statement from Ukraine and the United States—an important point for the Ukrainians and a move that Russia has resisted.

Tuesday’s deal gives the White House much of what it wanted. Ukraine is likely to concede territory to Russia, at least militarily, and enter a mineral deal with the United States.

“Both countries’ presidents agreed to conclude as soon as possible a comprehensive agreement for developing Ukraine’s critical mineral resources to expand Ukraine’s economy and guarantee Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security,” according to the joint statement.

The U.S. cutoff of intelligence put immense pressure on Ukraine to accede to White House demands. Reports from Lithuania-based independent Russian news outlet Meduza indicate the cutoff was already hurting Ukraine’s tenuous hold on the Russian region of Kursk.

One former senior White House official told Defense One “an unconditional ceasefire is probably in Ukraine’s best interest, if it holds.”

But Zelenskyy was able to resist much of what Trump was demanding after the Oval Office showdown, securing a win of sorts. Trump pushed for Zelensky’s ouster—a long-time goal of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who in February referred to Zelenskyy as “the current head of the regime,” and said he “stands in the way” of peace.

Instead, Trump’s efforts to strongarm Ukraine helped unite European partners in support of Zelenskyy and the beleaguered country. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer began to assemble a “coalition of the willing” across Europe, including the possibility of European troops to deter Russia from attempting to expand its territorial hold following a peace deal. French President Emmanuel Macron likewise expressed a willingness to extend France’s nuclear-deterrence umbrella to other European nations to bolster the continent’s security independence from Washington.

The intelligence cutoff also underscored the importance of intelligence sources outside of Washington. “The U.S. halt to military aid and intelligence sharing would have a 'significant operational impact' on Ukraine. But France's own intelligence provided to Kyiv was not reliant on Washington,” French Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu said last week.

The idea of the United States pushing for the removal of a democratically elected head of state alarmed even Trump allies, including Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma.

Putin has also pushed for the demilitarization of Ukraine and said he would never accept the presence of European troops on Ukraine’s soil. European officials told Bloomberg on Tuesday that they don’t expect Russia’s terms to be met.

But it will depend on Russia’s demands to Witkoff, the former senior White House official said: “It’s entirely possible then that Trump tells Zelenskyy that he should meet those demands if wants the ceasefire to hold.”

]]>

Jury Hears Details of Failed Plot to Kill Iranian Dissident in New York

Colin Moynihan — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 18:42:31 -0400

Prosecutors say figures in Tehran hired two men to kill Masih Alinejad, a journalist who had criticized Iran’s head scarf laws.

U.S. Investigation Into Global Antidoping Agency Continues Under Trump

Tariq Panja and Michael S. Schmidt — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 18:21:58 -0400

The World Anti-Doping Agency will report to its board that federal officials questioned one of its U.S. employees last month in the inquiry into the agency’s handling of positive tests by Chinese athletes.

The ‘Chain Saw’ at the Veterans Agency

Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:06:21 -0400

Readers react to the deep staff cuts at the V.A. Also: How State Department reductions will hurt Americans abroad.

Trump administration reverses its cancellation of national-security office leases

David DiMolfetta — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 15:51:00 -0400

The General Services Administration walked back terminations of some privately-owned buildings leased to the Government Accountability Office where employees conduct oversight of sensitive national-security programs, according to an email obtained by Nextgov/FCW.

The GAO’s field offices in Atlanta; Huntsville, Alabama; and Norfolk, Virginia, have been removed from the termination list, reversing a move made last week that would have canceled the leases of those buildings later this year. The Huntsville unit’s lease was set to be canned effective Aug. 31, while the Atlanta and Norfolk offices’ leases would have been canceled effective Sept. 30, Nextgov/FCW previously reported.

The lease termination dates for Atlanta, Huntsville and Norfolk will now remain at August 2029, January 2026, and December 2028, respectively, per the email sent to GAO staff on Tuesday.

GAO, the government’s primary watchdog agency, conducts much of its work on sensitive national-security matters in these buildings, many of which have spaces augmented to securely share and exchange classified information, a person familiar with the cancellations previously said. GAO traditionally obtains office space through GSA, the latter of which holds the actual lease.

The Huntsville office typically focuses on weapons systems, while the Norfolk and Atlanta offices have teams that examine logistics, sustainment and manpower aspects of the Defense Department, the person familiar also added.

A memo viewed by Nextgov/FCW last week said that regional GSA offices no longer have the authority to extend leases and that it’s unclear whether GAO will be able to maintain a presence at its Dayton and Seattle offices, whose leases respectively expire on Oct. 1 and Dec. 31. The statuses of the Dayton and Seattle locations were not immediately known.

The Dayton office, in particular, focuses heavily on the Air Force, including classified research on next-generation flight platforms, the person said.

GAO regularly releases oversight reports that call out dubious or extravagant spending on defense programs. Among several other areas, GAO also examines the cybersecurity of the Defense Department. The watchdog noted last June that one particular DOD agency did not follow standard cybersecurity protocols to protect its IT systems and the sensitive personal data it stores.

The lease cancellations are part of a broader move under the Trump administration and its affiliated Department of Government Efficiency to reduce purported government spending waste. DOGE, a non-agency cost-cutting unit in the White House tied to billionaire Trump ally Elon Musk, has already moved to terminate leases that house weather-forecasting units in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

GAO and GSA did not respond to requests for comment by the time of publication.

]]>

The D Brief: Allies mull nukes; Syrian breakthrough?; Base-refineries proposal; Judge demands DOGE records; And a bit more.

Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 11:14:58 -0400

Experts fear cascade of nuclear proliferation as Trump shakes alliances. U.S. allies around the world are warming to the idea of developing their own nuclear weapons, former senior defense and White House officials told Defense One’s Patrick Tucker. Decades of efforts to persuade countries to forgo such destabilizing arsenals, work led by the United States through security guarantees, are under threat.

Even one new nuclear project by a non-nuclear U.S. ally could draw a military response from Russia or China, which might touch off yet more nuclear development in a self-reinforcing cycle, the officials said.

What’s changed? “The Trump administration's approach to Ukraine and Russia has significantly undercut allied confidence in the United States, including on extended [nuclear] deterrence,” Eric Brewer, a former director for counterproliferation at the National Security Council. “Not only is [Trump] pivoting away from allies but he's seemingly pivoting toward Russia.” Read on, here.

Welcome to this Tuesday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson with Bradley Peniston. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 2012, U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales abandoned his bunk at a remote special forces base in Afghanistan’s Kandahar province and walked to a nearby village in the dark of night, where he shot and killed 16 people, including nine children, and injured six others. The brutal massacre helped hasten the end of an experimental U.S. special forces program to train local police across rural Afghanistan known as Village Stability Operations.

Around the world

An oil tanker and a container ship collided in the North Sea Monday morning, “causing multiple explosions and forcing the crews of both ships to abandon their vessels,” the New York Times reported Tuesday morning as recovery efforts continued. The BBC has video of the apparent damage, which you can view here.

The tanker, Stena Immaculate, was carrying jet fuel for the U.S. military. It was also one of 10 such vessels for the U.S. under the Department of Transportation Maritime Administration’s Tanker Security Program, as Howard Altman of The War Zone explained Monday.

The tanker was anchored when the container ship struck, triggering the explosions off the coast of East Yorkshire. Thirty-six people were recovered safely; but one crewmember from the container ship appears to have perished at sea, the British Coast Guard said Monday evening.

Latest: The fires are still raging. ABC News has a bit more.

Breakthrough in Syria? U.S.-backed forces in Syria are about to merge with the new Syrian military, according to what the Associated Press described as a “breakthrough deal with Kurdish-led authorities in the northeast.”

The deal also includes prisons holding ISIS fighters, which number about 9,000. Those would be folded under the new Syrian administration’s watch as well.

But perhaps most notably, “Syria’s Kurds will gain their ‘constitutional rights’ including using and teaching their language, which were banned for decades under Assad,” AP reports. But that’s not all. “Hundreds of thousands of Kurds, who were displaced during Syria’s nearly 14-year civil war, will return to their homes. Thousands of Kurds living in Syria who have been deprived of nationality for decades under Assad will be given the right of citizenship.” Read on, here.

By the way: Israel’s military is still conducting ground raids inside Syria, including 18 different incursions over the past week, as well as “creating pop-up checkpoints, demolishing buildings & questioning locals,” Charles Lister of the Middle East Institute reports.

Happening Thursday in DC: Lister joins a panel discussion featuring former Pentagon official Dana Stroul entitled, “Reimagining Syria: A Roadmap for Peace and Prosperity Beyond Assad.” That’s hosted by the Middle East Institute, and begins just before 10 a.m. ET. Details and RSVP, here.

Around the Defense Department

Developing: Trump wants to build metal refineries on U.S. military bases “as part of his plan to boost domestic production of critical minerals and offset China's control of the sector,” Reuters reports, citing senior administration officials.

“With the Pentagon controlling about 30 million acres of land, the plan would ensure there is available land for the refining facilities, avoiding the controversy that sometimes occurs in host local communities,” the wire service writes.

Notable: “The order would also seek to reclassify mine waste on federal land, mimicking a step that Rio Tinto (RIO.AX), Freeport-McMoRan (FCX.N), and others have taken to tap piles of old waste rock at U.S. mines previously thought to be worthless,” Reuters reports. We investigated this process of sifting through mine detritus to find rare earth metals in a previous episode of our Defense One Radio podcast, featuring researchers at the University of Kentucky.

On Capitol Hill today: “The State of U.S. Shipbuilding” is under the microscope at the House Armed Services’ Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces. The Navy's Assistant Secretary for Research, Development and Acquisition, Brett Seidle, is attending; Eric Labs of the Congressional Budget Office is also speaking. That began at 10 a.m. ET. Details and livestream, here.

There’s also a hearing to discuss “stabilizing the Military Health System to prepare for large-scale combat operations” in the Senate Armed Services Committee. That one’s ongoing; catch the livestream here.

ICYMI: Anduril has won a potential 10-year, $642.2 million contract to install and deliver systems at Marine Corps bases seeking to counter unmanned aircraft, Ross Wilkers of Washington Technology reported off a notice posted Friday.

Marine Corps officials set up the contract to acquire more capabilities for detecting, tracking, countering and defending their facilities, personnel and assets from small drones and other emerging threats. Read more, here.

And you can learn more about Anduril founder Palmer Luckey via a Wall Street Journal podcast discussion with him last week, as well as a profile published over the weekend by the Journal’s Tim Higgins, who refers to Luckey as “Donald Trump’s original tech bro.”

Trump 2.0

DOGE must release its records, judge orders. In a 37-page ruling issued on Monday, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper said that the vast and “unprecedented” power handed to Elon Musk and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency require it to be subject to open-government laws.

Politico: “It’s the first significant ruling in a growing legal push to pierce DOGE’s secretive veil, a decision that undercuts Musk’s repeated insistence about the operation’s transparency — and the White House’s refrain that Musk is simply a run-of-the-mill presidential adviser with limited decision-making authority. Cooper said this representation is undercut by the weight of evidence that has trickled out in court and in the news.”

Recap: DOGE’s work has been described as a “national-security nightmare.” Critics cite its penetration of many federal databases containing personal and sensitive information; the unclassified distribution of CIA employees’ names; the hasty firing of employees responsible for nuclear safety, long-range air defense, and elsewhere; the gutting of a distributor of soft-power foreign aid, and much more. The Trump administration says Musk’s team is simply cutting waste.

]]>

Musk Calls Senator Mark Kelly a ‘Traitor’ on X After He Urges for U.S. Support of Ukraine

Karoun Demirjian — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 10:19:06 -0400

Senator Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat and former astronaut, visited Ukraine over the weekend and said the United States could not give up on the people there as they fight Russia. Musk responded on X.

Congress Must Stop the Weaponization of Personal Security Clearances

J. William Leonard — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 08:57:48 -0400

As the so-called Secrecy Czar in the George W. Bush administration, I have been a long-time critic of how federal government officials abuse the ability to restrict government information and who can access it. Yet, in a professional career dealing with government secrets dating back to the administration of Richard Nixon, I have never witnessed the personal security clearance process personally weaponized by a president to the extent as it has been in the past several weeks simply to attack perceived partisan enemies. As a result, the security of the American people has been needlessly and recklessly weakened.

The ability to restrict access to information that, if subject to unauthorized disclosure, could result in damage to the national security is a critical tool in protecting our nation and its citizens from harm by foreign actors. Most federal government information that falls into this category is regarded as classified national security information. The rules governing the designation of classified national security information and who can access it are set forth in two executive orders (Executive Order 12968, Access to Classified Information and Executive Order 13526, Classified National Security Information).

That this critical national security tool is set forth in executive orders is a reflection of the president’s Article II section 2 constitutional authority as “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States” and his responsibility for foreign policy. While the governing executive orders make it clear that no one has a “right” to a security clearance, even the Supreme Court in the landmark decision Department of the Navy v. Egan has taken note that the process for granting authorization to access classified national security information includes due process provisions in the event of a denial. These include the receipt of notice as to the reasons for the proposed denial, an opportunity to inspect all relevant evidence, a right to respond, a written decision, and an opportunity to appeal.

For the security clearance process to remain an effective tool in keeping our nation and its citizens safe, it must be implemented in a fair and consistent manner. Should individuals who do not meet the adjudication standards for security clearances be granted access, information that can harm our nation can end up in the hands of adversaries. Likewise, should individuals who otherwise meet the standards be summarily denied or stripped of their security clearance in defiance of longstanding processes, the resulting uncertainty that spreads throughout the system can severely impact the effectiveness of our military, intelligence and diplomatic capabilities to deter or otherwise respond to our nation’s adversaries. We are currently witnessing this very uncertainty take hold in our national security capabilities because of numerous personal security clearances recently suspended or revoked, apparently at the specific direction of the president. These actions appear not to be taken in the interest of national security but rather, in the president’s own framing, to punish the affected individuals. Arbitrarily suspending or revoking security clearances from federal employees will only serve to embolden our nation’s adversaries and make Americans less secure.

How to Reform the System

For the sake of the safety of the American people, it is imperative for Congress to step forward as a co-equal branch to the Executive and ensure that the critical national security tools governing access to classified national security information cannot be used to “punish” individuals for purely partisan purposes.

The Egan Court’s decision is often used to assert unchecked presidential authority over classified information. However, at its core, the Egan decision was primarily an interpretation of congressional statutory intent arising out of a dispute between two executive branch entities. While the decision was in consonance with the traditional deference the courts have extended to the Executive in military and national security affairs, the Court appeared to leave open the role of Congress in establishing processes and setting standards for access to classified information. As noted by constitutional law scholar Louis Fisher in a legal analysis written for the Law Library of Congress, the Egan Court appeared to deliberately limit its deference to the Executive by explicitly stating, “unless Congress specifically has provided otherwise.”

The ability of Congress to insert itself in matters of classification is not without precedent. Pre-Egan, Congress very much involved itself in classification matters with passage of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Post-Egan, Congress passed the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, which included the establishment of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to consider and render decisions when a U.S. government agency sought to postpone the disclosure of classified or otherwise sensitive assassination records. Finally, in 1994, Congress created the Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy (also called the “Moynihan Commission,” after its chairman, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan). The very first recommendation of this bipartisan panel was for Congress to enact a statute “to improve the functioning of the secrecy system and implementation of established rules.”

It’s incumbent upon Congress to step up to its role in this matter as envisioned by Senator Moynihan over 30 years ago. Protecting our nation from actual and potential adversaries is not a partisan issue. In an increasingly dangerous world, critical national security tools such as personal security clearances and safeguarding classified national security information must be free of partisan considerations.

IMAGE: Low angle view of a dome, Capitol Building, Washington DC (Getty Images)

The post Congress Must Stop the Weaponization of Personal Security Clearances appeared first on Just Security.

Israel’s Pager Operation: Not an Indiscriminate Attack But a Strategic Success

Richard Horowitz — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 08:56:19 -0400

The recent 60 Minutes segment on Israel’s pager operation in Lebanon contained an 8-second video clip of a pager exploding on the person of a Hezbollah operative standing in the fruit section of a store. At the moment of the explosion, twelve adults and two children are seen nearby, two adults within a foot or so of the target. Upon detonation, one of them ran away while the other stayed in place. Other than the intended target – the holder of the pager – no one in the area of the blast was injured nor did it cause any damage in its vicinity.

According to 60 Minutes about 3,000 pagers exploded simultaneously on September 17 resulting in some 30 deaths, of which 12 were civilians, including 2 children. Accordingly, approximately 1% of the explosions resulted in deaths, of which 0.4% were civilian deaths, or, 99.6% of the attacks did not kill civilians. There is little data about civilian injuries, most likely indicating a low number of them. And, extrapolating from the ratio of combatant to civilian deaths, it is reasonable to assess that the number of civilian injuries from this attack is similar to a fraction of the 1% death rate. In other words, over 99% of the killed or injured in pager attack were the intended targets of the operation, Hezbollah operatives.

The low civilian death and injury rate is explained by reports that Israel inserted 1-3 grams of explosives in each pager. The pressure of a blast of 3 grams or less of explosives is very low, even at a close distance. Energy or forces decreases from its source according to the inverse-square law

(F=1R2)

, as explained here, “the energy twice as far from the source is spread four times the area, hence one-fourth the intensity (see also here). As

Pressure=ForceArea2

, the greater the distance from the source, the larger the area and lower the pressure.

However, as opposed to other forms of energy, the blast from an explosion begins with the movement of the blast away from the detonation faster than the speed of sound resulting in its initial stages in higher pressure closer to the blast and a sharper decrease in pressure in its initial movement from the blast. Even still the attack’s success rate was 99%.

Hence empirically, as seen from the video clip, and mathematically, it was foreseeable that there would be little or no danger to people in the immediate vicinity of each blast and even less danger at a somewhat larger distance, making the question of whether these detonations were indiscriminate a moot point. The 60 Minutes segment contained a section describing how Israel tested the pagers “to calibrate the grams of explosives needed to be just enough to hurt the fighter but not the person next to him.”

Nevertheless, beginning the day after the pager attack, commentators began ascribing legal fault to the operation’s planners for executing an attack that was indiscriminate and hence a violation of international humanitarian law.

Mapping the Widespread Criticisms under the Law of Armed Conflict

The day after the Israeli pager attack former State Department attorney and senior advisory at the International Crisis Group Brian Finucane questioned in Just Security, “What were the anticipated effects in terms of blast strength and radius of the exploding pagers? Was it anticipated that they would injure or kill their holders? Others in their vicinity?” Finucane answered his own question the next day: “Israel, or whoever was launching this attack, didn’t know where these people were going to be located at any given time, so it makes it really tough to assess proportionality or other precautions.”

In a Deutsche Welle interview, Professor Janina Dill argued that the “proportionality calculation for each of these explosions,” would be “very hard to achieve” absent “intelligence where the pagers would be at the time of explosion;” hence it “wasn’t possible for the attacker to anticipate civilian harm therefore meaningful proportionality calculation wouldn’t have been possible.” Professor Dill argued that “with hundreds of similar small bombs going off at the same time the attackers wouldn’t know in advance whether there would be civilians surrounding these attacks” or “when the attacks should go off in order to minimize civilian harm” and concluded that Israel’s pager attack “is almost impossible to reconcile with international law.”

Lama Fakih, Middle East and North Africa Director at Human Rights Watch published: “The use of an explosive device whose exact location could not be reliably known would be unlawfully indiscriminate, using a means of attack that could not be directed at a specific military target and as a result would strike military targets and civilians without distinction.” Likewise, Amnesty International said: “The evidence indicates that those who planned and carried out these attacks could not verify who else in the immediate vicinity of the devices would be harmed at the time of the explosion, or even whether only fighters had been given the pagers and radios. Therefore, the attacks were carried out indiscriminately, would be unlawful under international humanitarian law and should be investigated as war crimes.”

On Nov. 7, the International Bar Association published a statement quoting several of their committee members. Sara Elizabeth Dill, Co-Vice Chair of its War Crimes Committee said: “The simultaneous nature of the attacks makes distinction of civilian targets or any proportionality analysis essentially impossible.” According to Markus Beham, Co-Vice Chair of its Human Rights Law Committee, “it is hard to see how [the principle of distinction] was not violated by these attacks.” Toby Cadman, a member of the IBA War Crimes Committee Advisory Board said: “Imagine for a moment that a number of those targets had unknowingly boarded commercial jets carrying explosive devices and imagine they boarded those flights with the explosive devices undetected … That could have resulted in countless civilian casualties,” a concern that did not materialize as the operation’s planners might have taken that into account. The IBA statement also quoted Professor Craig Martin: “If you don’t know where each of these explosives are, and who – in fact – is going to be injured, it’s hard to see how a very granular assessment of proportionality could have been undertaken, either collectively or in relation to each of these individual attacks,’

In a statement issued by a group of 22 U.N. special rapporteurs, after referring to the pager operation as a “terrifying violation of international law” and expressing their “deepest solidarity to the victims of these attacks,” the signatories argued that the attack “would inevitably violate humanitarian law, by failing to verify each target, and distinguish between protected civilians and those who could potentially be attacked for taking a direct part in hostilities” and recommended that the matter be investigated “to establish the truth and enable accountability for the crime of murder.”

The Security Council held a meeting on the pager attack on September 20, where U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk said that the attack violates international law since the planners were “without knowledge as to who was in possession of the targeted devices, their location and their surroundings at the time of the attack.” Turk added: “If the attacker is unable to assess the compliance of the attack with binding rules of international law, notably the likely impact on civilians, then the attack should not be carried out.”

State delegates made similar statements at a Security Council meeting. Guyana said the “attacks were apparently aimed at specific targets, but ultimately were indiscriminate in their effect, as many of the detonations occurred in crowded areas.” According to Algeria, “Those acts of aggression amount to war crimes” as they were “deliberate and indiscriminate” in nature, targeting “densely populated areas.” China claimed that “[t]he explosions caused thousands of civilian casualties.” Sierra Leone claimed the attacks “occurred in populated areas” while Iran said the operation “target[ed] thousands of people.” According to Syria, the operation was designed to “kill some of those who hold them [the pagers] without discrimination and cause serious injuries to others.” Russia said that those behind the attack “have deliberately sought to incite a large-scale armed confrontation in order to spark a new major war in the Middle East.”

And, in a February 26, 2025 letter submitted to the U.N. Human Rights Council, the Association of Iranian Jurists Defending Human Rights claimed that the pager attack “specifically targeted Lebanese civilians.”

According to David Sanger of the New York Times: “And while the target was Hezbollah fighters, the victims were anyone standing around, including children.” Michael Walzer, author of Just And Unjust Wars (1977) wrote in an opinion piece entitled Israel’s Pager Bombs Have No Place in a Just War that the pager operation was “very likely war crimes” as “[n]o similar claim of minimizing risk to civilians can be made for the decision to explode the devices.”

But on What Basis? Assessing the Criticisms

Over five months have passed since the pager operation and no evidence or data of civilian injury or death has emerged beyond what was reported immediately following the operation. Similarly, neither has any indication emerged to refute the proposition that Israel knew that the pagers were on the person of Hezbollah operatives. Reports of the Iranian Ambassador to Lebanon’s eye and hand injuries (here and here) indicate he was holding and reading the pager’s message when it exploded; in other words, he presumably had some involvement with Hezbollah’s operational activity. Unlike cell phones that people may lend to others, it is likely that Hezbollah required their operatives to always have their pagers readily accessible. One of the two children killed in the operation was bringing her father’s beeping pager to him when it exploded, apparently the only known example of such an occurrence.

Though Michael Walzer wrote in his opinion piece that Israel “had to know that at least some of the people hurt would be innocent men, women and children,” international law prohibits the “incidental loss of civilian life” and “injury to civilians” only if the attack is excessive to the military advantage anticipated (API Article 51; API Article 57; IHL Rule 14).

In an article on Israel’s 2014 campaign in Gaza, Mark Ellis, the executive director of the International Bar Association, explained, “No matter how appalling, the death of civilians during armed conflict does not in itself constitute a war crime.” Ellis however argued that “Israel’s Iron Dome defense shield has largely neutralized Hamas rockets” and that “[b]y its own admission, the Israeli government says that it intercepts roughly 90 percent of all rockets fired into Israel from Gaza. The Iron Dome shield has essentially rendered useless” rockets launched by Hamas. Ellis concluded that this dynamic makes Israel “quasi-unassailable,” hence Israel “has a greater legal duty to adhere to a higher proportionality standard.”

Beyond the conceptual issues raised by Ellis’s argument that a country’s legal authority to exercise its right to self-defense decreases as its military capability to do so increases, Ellis does not consider two essential facts. First, the warning time to find shelter for Israeli civilians living in southern Israel, meaning close to Gaza, is 15 seconds while for the Tel Aviv region, or central Israel, it is 90 seconds. The Iron Dome’s kill rate in a 15 second window is expectedly lower than in a 90 second window, hence the 90% interception of Hamas rockets may not reflect the actual danger to Israelis in the south. More importantly, because of falling debris from intercepted rockets, Israel instructs Israelis to stay in shelters for 10 minutes after the warning sirens end (here and here). In other words, were the Iron Dome’s interception rate to be 100% Israelis would still need to take shelter because of incoming Hamas rockets, an untenable situation requiring an appropriate military response.

Falling debris is a known risk in warfare. Operation Desert Storm, or the first Gulf war, ended on Feb. 28, 1991. See Patriots Stop Scuds but Israeli Man Is Killed by Debris, New York Times, January 26, 1991: “American Patriot missiles intercepted seven Iraqi Scuds that were fired at Haifa and Tel Aviv this evening. But at least one person was killed and 42 were wounded when the midair explosions spewed heavy, burning shrapnel onto residential areas below. … Thousands of people in Tel Aviv watched, horrified and fascinated, as a shower of deadly debris plummeted toward them”; Los Angeles Times, February 26, 1991: “Flaming debris from an Iraqi Scud missile slammed into a makeshift barracks full of U.S. troops near here Monday night, killing at least 27 soldiers and injuring 98.”

Perhaps some pattern can be seen in commentaries not considering the risk of falling debris from intercepted rockets or the pressure of a blast of 3 grams of explosives even at a short distance. Legal arguments should not ignore factual reality.

Facing Up to the Strategic Purpose

In addition to the claims that Israel’s pager operation was an indiscriminate attack, David Sanger wrote, “The explosions had little strategic purpose,” citing “one Western diplomat with long experience dealing with the Middle East said, they were hardly about to force Hezbollah’s leaders to give up a cause they have battled over for four decades.” Michael Walzer similarly wrote, “A catastrophic war with Lebanon is now the greater danger.” At the Sept. 20 Security Council meeting, U.N. Under-Secretary-General of the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo informed the Security Council that Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah said that “Israel exceeded all limits, laws and red lines” regarding the pager operation and said Hezbollah would “exact a heavy price and a fair punishment.” She added that Nasrallah “reiterated that the Lebanon front would stop only once the aggression on Gaza ended.”

However, the night before the pager operation, the Israeli cabinet approved a decision to include the return of its displaced citizens in the north, evacuated because of the Hezbollah rocket attacks. On Israel Channel 12 evening news on the day of the attack, veteran Israeli Arab affairs correspondent Ehud Yaari said, “tonight Hezbollah is asking itself if the operation we saw today is preparation” for something else and explained that the operation compromised Hezbollah’s command system which was based on contacting its operatives through pagers which it can no longer do. Two days later the Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said that Israel is in a “new phase” of its war and that Israel’s “sequence of military actions will continue.” The day after the pager attack Guy Barak published in Axios that “[a] former Israeli official with knowledge of the operation” said Israel the pager operation was “a surprise opening blow in an all-out war to try to cripple Hezbollah.” Yossi Melman reported that Israel’s codename for the pager operation was “Opening Blow.”

The days after the pager attack, Israel executed a similar attack in Lebanon, exploding hundreds of Hezbollah walkie-talkies. On Sept. 20, Israel killed Hezbollah senior commander Ibrahim Aqil along with several other Radwan force commanders. Aqil was a principal member of the Hezbollah cell that claimed responsibility for the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut, killing a total of 304 people. On Sept. 27, Israel killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and continued to destroy Hezbollah rockets and tunnels (here, here, and here). On Nov. 27, Israel and Hezbollah signed a ceasefire agreement. Several weeks later commentators reported on the affect Israel’s attack on Hezbollah had on the fall of the Assad regime (here, here and here). On February 28, 2025, Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV based in Lebanon aired an interview with Hassan Nasrallah son and daughter who spoke about how Israel’s pager operation depressed their father given the significant effects of the attack.

Israel’s actions against Hezbollah and Syria weakened Iran. In a Jan. 17, 2025 NPR interview, Amos Hochstein, then U.S. Special Envoy who helped negotiate the ceasefire, was asked the question why Israel’s ceasefire with Hamas “came together now.” He answered: “The real game changer was the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah … When Hezbollah did the deal, it meant a few things. Suddenly, Israel was fighting a one front war, not a two front war, and that was very bad for Hamas. The second was the sense of betrayal. Hezbollah betrayed them. Iran betrayed them. They signed

Jessie Mahaffey, Survivor of Pearl Harbor Attack, Dies at 102

Amanda Holpuch — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 07:59:46 -0400

He was cleaning the deck of the U.S.S. Oklahoma when it capsized under Japanese torpedo fire. Less than a year later, he survived the sinking of another Navy ship in the Pacific.

Early Edition: March 11, 2025

Weronika Galka — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 07:48:45 -0400

Signup to receive the Early Edition in your inbox here.

A curated weekday guide to major news and developments over the past 24 hours. Here’s today’s news:

SYRIA

Syria’s Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have agreed to integrate into state institutions of the new Syrian government, interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa announced yesterday, adding that the landmark deal would also recognize Syria’s Kurdish community as an integral part of the state. Eyad Kourdi and Kareem El Damanhoury report for CNN.

Armed men attacked a position held by Syria’s government security forces in Damascus yesterday, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, with the overnight skirmish raising concerns that the unrest sweeping Syria’s coastal regions could spread. It is unclear if anyone was injured, the war monitor added. Euan Ward reports for the New York Times.

The Israeli army today said it had struck military headquarters and sites housing weapons and equipment in southern Syria overnight. There were no immediate reports of casualties. Reuters reports.

RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR — U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE

Ukraine will have to make concessions over land that Russia had taken since 2014 in an agreement to end the war, with the resumption of U.S. support to Ukraine contingent on progress made during today’s U.S.-Ukraine meeting in Saudi Arabia, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said yesterday. Alan Rappeport reports for the New York Times; Michael R. Gordon reports for the Wall Street Journal.

Military officials from more than 30 countries will take part in Paris talks today on creating an international security force for Ukraine, a French military official said yesterday. John Leicester reports for AP News.

President Trump’s Middle East special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is planning to visit Moscow this week to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, sources said yesterday. Annmarie Hordern and Jenny Leonard report for Bloomberg News.

RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR

Ukraine today attacked Moscow with its largest long-range drone bombardment of the war, Moscow’s mayor said. According to the Russian authorities, at least two people were killed and 14 injured in the attack, which also forced four airports in the area to temporarily suspend flights. Marc Santora and Ivan Nechepurenko report for the New York Times.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy yesterday met with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, ahead of today’s planned Washington-Kyiv talks in Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah. Tim Balk reports for the New York Times.

ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR

Hamas has offered to hand over the governance of Gaza in exchange for a five-to-10-year truce in its war with Israel, Trump’s hostage envoy Adam Boehler said on Sunday. Laura Kelly reports for the Hill.

Any further delay in Israel’s reversal of its block on the supply of aid and electricity to Gaza will “further reverse any progress we have managed to achieve during the ceasefire,” the U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator for the occupied Palestinian territories, Muhannad Hadi, said yesterday. Separately, the head of the U.N. aid agency for Palestinians (UNRWA), Philippe Lazzarini, has accused Israel of “weaponizing humanitarian aid” with the blockade. The Washington Post reports; Robert Greenall and Imogen Foulkes report for BBC News.

U.S. FOREIGN AFFAIRS

The Trump administration is canceling 83% of programs at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and intends to fold the remaining programs into the State Department, Secretary Rubio announced yesterday. Jennifer Hansler and Kit Maher report for CNN.

Iran is open to talks about its nuclear program with the United States if they are restricted to military concerns, Iran’s mission to the U.N. said in a social media post on Sunday. Matthew Mpoke Bigg reports for the New York Times.

The United States is withdrawing from the landmark international climate Loss and Damage Fund, a Treasury spokesperson said in an email yesterday. AP News reports.

OTHER GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS

The Philippine government today arrested former President Rodrigo Duterte after receiving an International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant accusing him of crimes against humanity, according to a statement from the Presidential Communications Office. Kathleen Magramo reports for CNN.

Uganda has deployed an unknown number of troops to South Sudan to support the country’s fragile government amid concerns over a looming civil war, a spokesperson for the Ugandan military has said. Rodney Muhumuza reports for AP News.

Greenland residents are voting today in an election dominated by concerns about Trump’s interest in taking control over the mineral-rich island. Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen reports for Reuters.

Activist groups from Myanmar are calling for the U.N. to investigate its special envoy to Myanmar, Julie Bishop, over her consulting company’s alleged links to Chinese mining and construction companies. David Rising reports for AP News.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ACTIONS

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard yesterday said she has stripped security clearances from dozens of former national security officials and others, including former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Biden’s National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Gabbard added that the daily presidential intelligence briefing would also not be shared with former President Biden. Dan De Luce reports for NBC News.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has cut about $10 million in annual funding for two cybersecurity initiatives housed within the nonprofit Center for Internet Security, including an initiative dedicated to helping state and local election officials, a CISA spokesperson said in an email yesterday. Christina A. Cassidy reports for AP News.

The Trump administration will reverse the Biden administration’s “myopic” focus on climate change in energy policy, Energy Secretary and former fracking executive Chris Wright told the largest U.S. gathering of the energy industry yesterday. Brad Plumer reports for the New York Times.

NASA is eliminating its chief scientist and 19 other roles amid efforts to pare back staff numbers by abolishing the Office of the Chief Scientist and the Office of Technology, Policy and Strategy, according to a notice to Congress the Trump administration sent yesterday. Kenneth Chang reports for the New York Times.

DOGE’s efforts to abolish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have been somewhat reined in by the Trump-appointed agency leadership in recent weeks, Adam Martinez, the CFPB’s chief operating officer, testified in court yesterday. Tierney Sneed reports for CNN.

OTHER U.S. DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS

Trump aims to build minerals refining facilities on U.S. military bases inside the United States in a bid to boost domestic production of critical minerals and counter China’s control of the sector, two senior administration officials said. Ernest Scheyder and Jarrett Renshaw report for Reuters.

The inspector general for the Office of Personnel Management on Friday told lawmakers he is investigating the use of an OPM data system that DOGE used to email federal workers. Rebecca Beitsch reports for the Hill.

The Senate yesterday voted 67-32 to confirm Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR) to lead the Department of Labor. Al Weaver reports for the Hill.

The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights is investigating 60 universities over allegedly failing to comply with obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to protect Jewish students, according to letters sent yesterday. Lexi Lonas Cochran reports for the Hill.

Ruth Marcus, a long-standing Washington Post columnist, resigned yesterday, citing the newspaper management’s decision to not run her commentary critical of owner Jeff Bezos’ new editorial policy. David Bauder reports for AP News.

A Saudi prisoner accused of plotting Al Qaeda’s 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole warship has signed a guilty plea offer to avoid a death penalty trial, his lawyer announced yesterday. Carol Rosenberg reports for the New York Times.

Perkins Coie, the law firm targeted by Trump last week for its role in the 2016 election, has hired an elite Washington firm, Williams & Connolly, to fight the order, sources say. Michael S. Schmidt and Kenneth P. Vogel report for the New York Times.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION LITIGATION

A federal judge yesterday temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to deport pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, setting a court hearing in the case for tomorrow. Khalil has been moved to a federal jail for migrants in Louisiana to await deportation proceedings, according to his lawyers and a detainee database. Jonathan Allen and Luc Cohen report for Reuters.

DOGE is likely subject to the Freedom of Information Act disclosure obligations, a federal judge ruled yesterday, with the preliminary decision handing a major win to watchdog groups and others seeking to scrutinize the Musk-led initiative. Tierney Sneed reports for CNN.

Trump’s pardons of Jan. 6 rioters do not extend to the separate crimes of a rioter who plotted to murder the law enforcement agents who investigated him, a district judge ruled yesterday. Ryan J. Reilly reports for NBC News.

A federal judge yesterday ordered the Trump administration to release foreign aid payments owed under certain existing contracts while declining to invalidate the mass contract cancellations by USAID and the State Department. Ella Lee reports for the Hill.

The Trump administration has improperly frozen a nearly $7 billion “green bank” climate grant, a coalition of three nonprofit groups alleged in a lawsuit filed yesterday. Michael Phillis and Matthew Daly report for AP News.

Did you miss this? Stay up-to-date with our Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions

The post Early Edition: March 11, 2025 appeared first on Just Security.

Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions

Just Security — Tue, 11 Mar 2025 01:40:19 -0400

This public resource tracks legal challenges to Trump administration actions. If you think we are missing anything, you can email us at lte@justsecurity.org. Special thanks to Just Security Student Staff Editors Anna Braverman, Isaac Buck, Rick Da, Charlotte Kahan, and Jeremy Venook, and to Matthew Fouracre and Nour Soubani.

The Tracker is part of the Collection: Just Security’s Coverage of the Trump Administration’s Executive Actions. Readers may also be interested in signing up for our free Early Edition roundup of news and our end-of-day newsletter with Just Security articles from the day (We respect your privacy. We do not use your email address for any other purpose except to automatically send you the requested email.)

The Tracker was first published on Jan. 29, 2025 and is continually updated. Last updated March 11, 2025.

Total number of cases tracked: 114 (including 1 closed case)

Topic	Executive Action	Case Name	Complaint	Date Filed	Case Summary	Last Update
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Donald J. Trump (D.N.H.) Case No. 1:25-cv-38	Complaint	Jan. 20, 2025	Overview: An organization with noncitizen members whose unborn children stand to have their citizenship revoked under President Donald Trump’s Executive Order (“EO”) ending birthright citizenship sued Trump alleging the EO is unconstitutional. A federal court temporarily blocked the EO while the lawsuit is pending on the basis that it likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants on the basis that people in the United States illegally are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The ACLU sued the Trump administration on behalf of individuals in New Hampshire who would have their childrens’ citizenship revoked. The ACLU argues that the plain text of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), explicitly grants birthright citizenship for all people born in the United States. Update 1: On Feb. 10, 2025, Judge Joseph N. Laplante issued a preliminary injunction.	2025-02-10
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	O. Doe; Brazilian Worker Center, Inc; La Colaborativa v. Donald J. Trump et al (D. Mass.) Case No. 1:25-cv-10135-LTS	Complaint	Jan. 20, 2025	Overview: A group of noncitizen pregnant women with Temporary Protected Status whose unborn children stand to have their citizenship revoked under President Donald Trump’s Executive Order (“EO”) ending birthright citizenship sued Trump alleging the EO is unconstitutional. A federal court temporarily blocked the EO while the lawsuit is pending on the basis that it likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Trump has appealed the court’s decision. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants on the basis that people in the United States illegally are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” A group of pregnant women whose children would not receive citizenship sued; the plaintiff identified as “O. Doe” lives in Massachusetts and has temporary protected status in the United States. The suit argues that the plain text of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), explicitly grants birthright citizenship for all people born in the United States. Update 1: On Feb. 13, Judge Leo T. Sorokin issued an opinion granting a preliminary injunction enjoining the government from implementing and enforcing Executive Order No. 14,160, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” against plaintiff O. Doe, or any member of La Colaborativa or Brazilian Worker Center. Update 2: On Feb. 19, Defendants submitted a notice of appeal to the First Circuit.	2025-02-19
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	State of New Jersey et al v. Donald J. Trump et al (D. Mass.) Case No. 1:25-cv-10139	Complaint	Jan. 21, 2025	Overview: A broad coalition of states sued President Donald Trump alleging his Executive Order (“EO”) revoking birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and others is unconstitutional. A federal court temporarily blocked the EO while the lawsuit is pending on the basis that it likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants on the basis that people in the United States illegally are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The attorneys general of 22 states, the District of Columbia, and the City of San Francisco sued to protect residents who would lose their citizenship under the executive order. The suit argues that the plain text of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), explicitly grants birthright citizenship for all people born in the United States. Update 1: On Feb. 13, Judge Leo T. Sorokin issued an opinion granting a preliminary injunction enjoining the government from implementing and enforcing Executive Order No. 14,160, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” Update 2: On Feb. 19, the Defendants submitted a notice of appeal to the First Circuit, and a motion to stay the district court order on appeal. Update 3: On Feb. 26, Judge Sorokin denied defendants’ motion to stay the preliminary injunction pending resolution of their appeal.	2025-02-26
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	Casa v. Donald Trump (D. Md.) Case No. 8:25-cv-00201-DLB	Complaint	Jan. 21, 2025	Overview: CASA and Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (two immigrant rights organizations) and a group of noncitizen pregnant women whose unborn children stand to have their citizenship revoked under President Donald Trump’s Executive Order (“EO”) ending birthright citizenship sued Trump alleging the EO is unconstitutional. A federal court temporarily blocked the EO while the lawsuit is pending on the basis that it likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants on the basis that people in the United States illegally are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The plaintiffs, including immigrant rights organizations CASA and ASAP, as well as individual immigrant parents, argue that the Executive Order violates the Fourteenth Amendment and federal statute 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a), both of which guarantee citizenship to all persons born in the U.S. The complaint asserts that the executive order exceeds presidential authority and causes irreparable harm by stripping constitutionally protected rights from children born to immigrants (e.g., the right to remain in the United States, access public benefits, and participate fully in civic life) and destabilizes their families, potentially leaving children stateless and separating them from their parents. Update 1: On Feb. 5, 2025, Judge Deborah Boardman issued an opinion granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary nationwide injunction blocking implementation of the birthright citizenship Executive Order.	2025-02-05
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	Franco Aleman et al. v. Trump et al. (W.D. Wash.) Case No. 2:25-cv-00163-JCC	Complaint	Jan. 24, 2025	Overview: A group of noncitizen pregnant women whose unborn children stand to have their citizenship revoked under President Trump’s Executive Order (“EO”) ending birthright citizenship sued Trump alleging the EO is unconstitutional. The case was consolidated with State of Washington et al v. Donald J. Trump, combining efforts to block the order on constitutional grounds. Case Summary: Plaintiffs are non-citizen pregnant women whose due dates are after the implementation date of the Executive Order eliminating birthright citizenship. Plaintiffs bring this suit as a class action on behalf of all others similarly situated. They allege that the EO is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and seek an injunction to enjoin Defendants from enforcing the EO. Update 1: On Jan. 27, State of Washington et al v. Donald J. Trump (complaint) was consolidated with this case.	2025-01-27
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	State of Washington et al v. Donald J. Trump et al (W.D. Wash.) Case No. 2:25-cv-00127-JCC	Complaint	Jan. 21, 2025	Overview: The states of Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon sued to block President Donald Trump's Executive Order (“EO”) revoking birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and those with temporary visas, alleging that the EO is unconstitutional. A federal court temporarily blocked the EO while the lawsuit is pending on the basis that it likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Trump has appealed the court’s decision. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants on the basis that people in the United States illegally are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Four states sued to protect residents who would lose their citizenship under the executive order. The suit argues that the plain text of the 14th Amendment, as confirmed in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), explicitly grants birthright citizenship for all people born in the United States. Update 1: On Jan. 23, 2025, Judge John Coughenour of the Western District of Washington issued a temporary restraining order against the Executive Order. Update 2: On Jan. 27, Franco Aleman v. Trump (complaint) was consolidated with this case. Update 3: On Feb. 6, Judge Coughenour issued an opinion granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining implementation of the Executive Order. Update 4: On Feb. 6, defendants appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court (case no. 25-807). Update 5: On Feb. 12, defendants made an emergency motion to stay the district court’s injunction. Update 6: On Feb. 19, the Ninth Circuit issued an order denying the government’s emergency motion to stay the district court’s injunction and leaving the existing briefing schedule unchanged.	2025-02-19
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	OCA–Asian Pacific American Advocates v. Marco Rubio et al (D.D.C.) Case No. 1:25-cv-00287	Complaint	Jan. 30, 2025	Overview: Asian Pacific American Advocates (a non profit organization) sued to block President Donald Trump’s Executive Order (“EO”) revoking birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and those with temporary visas, alleging that the EO is unconstitutional. The lawsuit argues that the EO violates the Constitution, federal statutes, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and for the children of parents on lawful temporary visas on the basis that they are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. OCA sued Marco Rubio and the heads of other departments and agencies on behalf of at least two pregnant women expected to give birth to children denied citizenship by the order. Both women reside in the United States on lawful, temporary, nonimmigrant visas. OCA argues that the order violates the plain text of the Fourteenth Amendment, statutes (8 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq.), and the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2). The suit identifies an injured “subclass” of “Targeted Children” denied the privileges and public benefits afforded to U.S. citizens, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.	2025-01-31
Immigration and Citizenship	Executive Action: Birthright Citizenship (Executive Order 14160)	County of Santa Clara v. Trump, et al (N.D. Cal.) Case No. 5:25-cv-00981	Complaint	Jan. 30, 2025	Overview: The County of Santa Clara sued to block President Donald Trump’s Executive Order (“EO”) revoking birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and those with temporary visas. The lawsuit argues that the EO violates the Constitution, federal statutes, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Case Summary: Trump’s executive order seeks to revoke birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and for the children of parents on lawful temporary visas on the basis that they are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. The County of Santa Clara sued to protect residents who would lose their citizenship or whose U.S.-born children will not receive citizenship and to prevent administrative burdens and loss of tax revenues associated with that prospective loss of What We Know About the Month-Old Migrant Mission at Guantánamo Bay Carol Rosenberg — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 21:42:05 -0400 President Trump said the base would house as many as 30,000 migrants awaiting deportation. But construction of a tent city was halted weeks ago. Justice Dept. Official Says She Was Fired After Opposing Restoring Mel Gibson’s Gun Rights Devlin Barrett — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 21:04:46 -0400 Elizabeth G. Oyer, the former pardon attorney, said that she was not told why she was dismissed, but that as events unfolded she feared they might lead to her firing. WINNING: Ukraine Invades Russia and Chaos Ensues Mon, 10 Mar 2025 20:21:19 -0400 MURPHY'S LAW: Iran Benefits From The Losses of Others Mon, 10 Mar 2025 20:20:15 -0400 Defendant in U.S.S. Cole Bombing Case Signs Plea Offer Carol Rosenberg — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 20:11:29 -0400 The Saudi prisoner agreed to the settlement to avoid a death-penalty trial, his lawyer said, but it has yet to reach the defense secretary. Experts fear cascade of nuclear proliferation as Trump shakes alliances Patrick Tucker — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 19:44:47 -0400 U.S. allies around the world are warming to the idea of developing their own nuclear weapons, the result of a growing sense that U.S. President Donald Trump may abandon key international security commitments and alliances, former senior defense and White House officials told Defense One. Decades of nonproliferation efforts to persuade countries to forgo nuclear weapons, work led by the United States through security guarantees, are on the verge of collapse, the officials said. Should one or two nations launch nuclear projects, others may quickly follow. That could provoke a military response from Russia or China, which might touch off yet more nuclear development in a self-reinforcing, destabilizing cycle. What’s changed in the last two weeks? “The Trump administration's approach to Ukraine and Russia has significantly undercut allied confidence in the United States, including on extended [nuclear] deterrence,” Eric Brewer, a former director for counterproliferation at the National Security Council. “Not only is [Trump] pivoting away from allies but he's seemingly pivoting toward Russia.” The shift has shaken U.S. allies. France—the only NATO member with a nuclear arsenal that doesn’t depend on U.S. technology—hastened to shore up European deterrence by proposing to extend its nuclear “umbrella” to other countries. "I have decided to open the strategic debate on the protection of our European continental allies through our deterrence,” French President Emmanuel Macron said last week. Leaders from Bonn to the Baltics quickly praised the idea. German Chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz on Sunday said, “We should talk with both countries [France and Britain], always also from the perspective of supplementing the American nuclear shield, which we of course want to see maintained.” But the French proposal leaves many questions unanswered. If France is to convince other nations to huddle under its nuclear umbrella, said one former senior White House senior official who worked on nuclear issues, Paris will need to launch a diplomatic campaign and be willing to share a great deal more information, including classified information, about nuclear decision-making and capabilities—much as the United States did in the 1960s. In the past, similar proposals have led NATO allies to begin talks, but they collapsed over issues such as who would control the weapons, a former senior defense official said. “There's just a lot of questions here about what the French are offering, whether they may really be willing to provide a dual key with Germany for weapons if they put them on German territory for instance. I suspect not,” they said. Indeed, soon after his initial announcement, Macron clarified that France would not share its warheads with other countries. Uncertainty France’s nuclear arsenal of about 290 warheads is larger than Britain’s (under 225) but far smaller than Russia’s (nearly 6,000). Neither has Russia’s diversity of warhead sizes and delivery systems. The U.K.'s small and expensive nuclear submarine fleet is undergoing modernization. France has air-launched cruise missiles. Russia has land-based mobile launchers, siloed ICBMs, bombers, and submarines. There’s a reason Europe made no attempt to keep up with Russia’s weapons development. Western Europe has always relied on the vast U.S. arsenal to deter Russia. But, the former senior defense official explained, France had a different deterrence strategy: hold just one or two major targets, like Moscow or St. Petersburg, in jeopardy. The U.S. idea “was that we were going to develop counter-force capability”—that is, weapons to disable or destroy an enemy’s nuclear capability—“try and take out Soviet weapon systems, command and control, leadership; and try and not go after cities if we could avoid it. The French have never had that kind of compunction. The basis of their strategy was ‘tear an arm off the bear.’ They never thought they could really take on the entire Soviet nuclear force.” In other words, Paris and London can’t destroy Russia’s ability to wage nuclear war—even enough of it to prevent the obliteration of both countries and more of Europe as well. That isn’t particularly reassuring to European leaders who believe that their countries would be a secondary priority for France should Russia attack. That may be why Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Friday that his country must “reach for opportunities related to nuclear weapons”—perhaps hinting at launching its own development effort. Proliferation triggers But the real trigger for a new arms race may sit outside of Europe, the officials warned. All of the former officials we spoke to said that South Korea is the U.S. ally that is furthest along in pursuing a new nuclear weapons program. The country feels “the most pressure right now,” said the former senior White House official. That’s true across South Korea’s political elites, including “the opposition party that may win the next election.” Should Seoul start hunting for the fuel to build such a device, Tokyo would likely launch a program of its own, they said, since Japan and South Korea are not treaty allies but do have hundreds of years of conflict history. “I find it hard to believe you'd see a Japan-and-South Korea joint nuclear weapons development project,” said the former senior defense official. All the officials we spoke to agreed that if one nation starts a nuclear-weapon program, others will likely do so as well. “Proliferation will beget more proliferation,” said the former senior White House official. Trump’s recent talk of abandoning treaty allies is not the only change that may push other nations toward nuclearization. He has also hinted that he might withdraw U.S. troops from certain countries, such as Japan or European nations. This would remove a “tripwire” that helps deter foreign attack, the former senior defense official said, and would cause a host government to consider new ways to deter attack on its own. [[Related Posts]] New arms-control talks? Yet Trump has also said he wants to reduce global spending on nuclear weapons. Last month, he called for arms-control talks that would slow Chinese and Russian efforts to build nuclear weapons and therefore allow the United States to shrink its own $1.7 trillion nuclear modernization plan. "There's no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons; we already have so many,” he said. Russian officials responded warmly to the overture, but said that any talks should include European nuclear arsenals as well. That’s likely a non-starter for Europe, especially in the context of Russia’s rapid nuclear modernization, space weaponization, and the breaking of previous commitments on weapons development. The U.S. president’s record in nuclear diplomacy holds little success. He cancelled the 2018 nuclear deal with Iran, whereupon Tehran began rebuilding its program; today, the country stands closer than ever to a nuclear arsenal. After trying threats and flattery on Kim Jong Un, “Donald Trump could only add his name to the list of American presidents who had tried and failed to curb North Korea’s nuclear ambitions before him,” the Wilson Center’s Katie Stallard wrote in 2020. As well, “Trump in his first term tried and failed to bring China into nuclear arms reduction talks when the U.S. and Russia were negotiating an extension of a pact known as New START,” AP wrote last week. “China has rebuffed past American efforts to draw it into nuclear arms talks, saying the U.S. and Russia first need to reduce their much larger arsenals. A government official reiterated that position on Friday.” And the New START treaty extension? Trump couldn’t bring it over the finish line, but President Biden concluded it in early 2021—and Moscow suspended its participation two years later. Breakout time How long would a technologically-advanced country need to develop a nuclear weapon, unconstrained by the sort of sanctions that slowed the North Korean and Iranian efforts? The officials we spoke to said it was at least one year but likely more. How many years depends on the country. Some, like Germany and Japan, already have access to the nuclear fuel cycle due to their energy sector. The technological know-how is no longer as elusive as it once was. was. But there are other factors. “A lot more work goes into designing a weapon than just making the necessary fissile material or mastering missile technology. Warhead design, reentry vehicle technology, potential explosive testing to ensure a design works, etc. will all take time,” said the former senior White House official. Also, any country launching a nuclear weapon program would likely be in violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty or NPT, which would carry its own consequences. “These things trigger certain cutoffs of U.S. aid and assistance when certain nuclear thresholds are reached,” said Brewer, the former NSC member who is now vice-president of the nonprofit Nuclear Threat Initiative. “And [the NPT] doesn't differentiate whether that country is an ally or an adversary. And so that would be a challenge that these countries would have to navigate. It's hard to create a domestic consensus within these countries for proliferation because of these challenges.” But NPT is only as strong as the will to enforce it. Once one country decides to abandon it, others would likely follow suit, said another former defense official. “Were South Korea or a Poland or Saudi Arabia to cross the threshold…It seems hard to believe that the NPT could survive.” The former White House official said many of these proliferation discussions might “come to a head” at next month’s NPT planning committee meeting in New York. Increased risk of war One of the biggest concerns among the officials was that China or Russia would likely regard a nuclear program by a U.S. treaty ally as a threat—and act against it. “It’s hard to believe Russia is going to stand by idly,” said Brewer. “If that were to happen, what exactly they would do, whether it be kinetic or nonkinetic, it is going to produce its own crisis.” That would make it more vital than ever for the United States to be clear that it will continue to abide by its protection commitments, said the former senior defense official. “Let's see whether American officials reiterate the importance of extended deterrence”—that is, the nuclear umbrella over allies and partners. “Frankly, that would be important,” the official said. A predictable outcome None of the officials we interviewed could say whether the White House or State Department were adequately staffed to engage in the highly complex diplomatic efforts needed to prevent runaway proliferation, especially at a time when large sections of the federal workforce are being slashed by the Trump administration. “If cuts impact expertise [in the National Nuclear Security Administration] and [Defense Threat Reduction Agency] offices that help with nuclear detection and nonproliferation at the same time U.S. extended-deterrence policies shift to increase the risk of proliferation,” then the task of monitoring new proliferation efforts and guiding them will be compromised, said the former senior White House official. But even existing agreements are proving to be far flimsier than their original drafters imagined. Perhaps the most infamous is the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, an agreement between the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, and Ukraine in which the latter gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees from the others. Russia, of course, abandoned that commitment in March 2014 when it first invaded Ukrainian territory. That action, more than a decade ago, threatened to collapse nearly half a century of nuclear non-proliferation efforts. Within days, U.S. lawmakers were debating an emergency aid package for Ukraine. Among the staunchest supporters was a handsome, 43-year-old Florida statesman who took to the Senate floor with an urgent plea: the United States must rise to Ukraine’s assistance, lest U.S. weakness usher in a new era of all-for-themselves nuclear proliferation. “That's why the Ukrainian situation is so much more important than simply what is happening in Europe. This situation has implications around the world. Countries around the world are considering increasing their defense capabilities, including a nuclear capacity, because they feel threatened by neighbors that have a nuclear capacity themselves,” said Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. “It raises the real risk that over the next two decades you could see an explosion in the number of countries around the world that possess a nuclear weapons capability.” Rubio, of course, is currently Secretary of State. ]]> Senator Mark Kelly Urges Continued U.S. Support After Visiting Ukraine. Musk Calls Him a ‘Traitor.’ Karoun Demirjian — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 17:49:33 -0400 Senator Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat and former astronaut, visited Ukraine over the weekend and said the United States could not give up on the people there as they fight Russia. Musk responded on X. Trial Set for Men Accused of Targeting Iranian Dissident in New York Colin Moynihan — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:05:17 -0400 Prosecutors say the men helped direct a murder-for-hire scheme aimed at Masih Alinejad. The trial is expected to show Iran’s efforts to punish those who criticize it, no matter where they are. Marines hire Anduril for counter-drone services worth up to $642M Ross Wilkers — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:30:00 -0400 Anduril has won a potential 10-year, $642.2 million contract to install and deliver systems at Marine Corps bases seeking to counter unmanned aircraft. The service branch received 10 proposals for the Installation-Counter small Unmanned Aircraft Systems contract that also includes sustainment services, according to the Pentagon’s Friday awards digest. Marine Corps officials set up the contract to acquire more capabilities for detecting, tracking, countering and defending their facilities, personnel and assets from small drones and other emerging threats. Solicitation documents released in February 2024 outline the Marines’ desire to cover the entire kill chain and rely on non-kinetic means such as electromagnetic, acoustic, or other signature disruptions to a small UAS’ flight path. Currently I-CSUAS capabilities are provided on a leased, as-a-service basis and operate under an “urgent statement of need,” according to fiscal year 2025 budget documents. The Marines aim to eventually turn I-CSUAS into a program of record. Delivery order No. 1 for the contract will involve program management, system procurement, site survey, new equipment training, physical configuration audit, and engineering services. [[Related Posts]] ]]> The D Brief: Ukraine’s intel quandary; Pentagon’s civilian firings; Speedier-software policy; Russia’s military horses; And a bit more. Eric Katz, Ben Watson, and Bradley Peniston — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:41:11 -0400 As Russia carts out horses to continue its 21st-century Ukraine invasion, Sweden’s Expressen newspaper is reporting that U.S. President Donald Trump has ordered the American military to cease military exercises with allies in Europe beginning in 2026. Asked about the report, a NATO spokesman responded that the alliance continues to “plan and execute exercises” with all 32 member states. *Bigger picture:* Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said in February that U.S. officials are reviewing the costs of shifting troops and equipment away from the continent and to the Pacific region in accordance with what some wonks have called a China-focused, “New Asia First” foreign policy during Trump’s second term. *Trump is also reportedly considering “withdrawing some 35,000 active personnel out of Germany” and redeploying them to Hungary,* UK’s Telegraph reported Friday. Reminder: “During his first term, Mr Trump ordered the withdrawal of almost 12,000 troops from Germany, where the US had several major military facilities including Ramstein Air Base, the headquarters for US European Command,” the Telegraph writes. That withdrawal, however, was stopped by dissent in Congress and the election of Joe Biden in 2020. To read more at a nonpaywalled link, Yahoo has this. *For reference,* here’s where U.S. troops are stationed in Europe, from the Council on Foreign Relations. *About Russia’s horses:* “The hoofed mammals carry supplies and soldiers to avoid the attention of drones, which can easily spot and strike armored and other vehicles moving near the front lines,” the Journal reports. And it’s not just horses; donkeys are now a part of the Russian invasion. *“It’s better if a donkey gets killed than two men in a car* carrying the things necessary for battle and sustenance,” a Russian general told a pro-Kremlin media outlet just last month. *Academic reax: “I’m not sure the resuscitation of old technology, nets, shotguns, horses, is out of choice,”* said Phillips O’Brien, a professor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. “They are desperate attempts to cope with unmanned aerial vehicles.” Read on, here. *Russian resourcefulness doesn’t end there:* Some of Moscow’s special forces reportedly walked nine miles inside a recently-abandoned gas pipeline before attacking Ukrainian forces near the town of Sudzha in occupied Kursk, Russia, the Associated Press reports. The town “houses major gas transfer and measuring stations along the pipeline, which was once a major outlet for Russian natural gas exports through Ukrainian territory.” *Russia is conducting a “major encirclement operation”* of Ukrainian forces in Kursk, Reuters reports. The advance is posing a dilemma for Kyiv, and “just as the spring thaw turns roads to mud tracks: should it withdraw from Kursk, and if so, can it do so without a disorderly rush to the border under intense Russian fire?” *North Korean troops reportedly helped Russia in these recent advances, too,* analysts at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War wrote Sunday evening. “Ukrainian sources told the Ukrainian outlet Suspilne on March 9 that up to two battalions of North Korean forces operating near Sudzha appear to be better trained and ‘acting more coherently’” than prior North Korean efforts alongside Russian forces. *Worth noting: These Russian advances are happening after Trump ordered a halt to intelligence sharing with Ukraine,* ISW points out. However, they caution, “A direct link between the suspension of US intelligence sharing and the start of the collapse of Ukraine's salient in Kursk Oblast is unclear, although Kremlin officials have recently announced their intention to take advantage of the suspension of US military aid and intelligence sharing to ‘inflict maximum damage’ to Ukrainian forces’on the ground’ during the limited time frame before the possible future resumption of US intelligence sharing and military aid to Ukraine.” More details, here. *New: On Trump’s orders, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency “temporarily suspended access” to commercial satellite imagery for Ukraine,* citing “the administration’s directive,” the Washington Post reported Friday. “U.S. partners and allies use the system to access the imagery through its orbital imaging services known as Global Enhanced GEOINT Delivery,” WaPo’s Alex Horton and Siobhán O'Grady write. “U.S. officials said the suspension affected multiple companies that deliver imagery through the program,” including Maxar. *Why it matters: “Artillery and drone units study the images to assess quality targets and review the damage to refine the attacks.* A constant refresh of satellite imagery helps commanders and soldiers keep tabs on where enemy positions and depots are, making it easier to find vulnerabilities and troop movements. And they help logistics soldiers plan vehicle routes, with alternative corridors laid out if pathways are mined or destroyed.” *Notable: “The suspension was immediately felt by soldiers in the Ukrainian military,* some of whom described the decision as treachery, not politics,” Horton and O’Grady write. Read on, here. *Developing: European nations are scrambling to find backups for broadband satellite internet if Elon Musk pulls the plug on Starlink,* the Financial Times reports. At least four satellite operators are reportedly in talks with European officials over the matter. *By the way: “Shares in Franco-British satellite operator Eutelsat (ETL.PA) soared as much as 650% last week* due to speculation the company could replace Starlink in providing internet access to Ukraine,” Reuters reported Monday. *Rubio vs. Sikorski:* The development prompted an ugly back-and-forth on social media this weekend between Trump’s top diplomat Marco Rubio and his Polish counterpart, Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski. *Poland is footing Ukraine’s bill for using Starlink among its frontline troops.* Elon Musk on Sunday wrote online that he believes Ukraine’s “entire front line would collapse if I turned it [Starlink] off.” That’s what riled up Sikorski, who responded, “Starlinks for Ukraine are paid for by the Polish Digitization Ministry at the cost of about $50 million per year. The ethics of threatening the victim of aggression apart, if SpaceX proves to be an unreliable provider we will be forced to look for other suppliers.” Rubio responded angrily, writing, “no one has made any threats about cutting Ukraine off from Starlink.” *Rubio also demanded Sikorski “say thank you* because without Starlink Ukraine would have lost this war long ago and Russians would be on the border with Poland right now.” *Musk even chimed in to reply to Sikorski, writing, “Be quiet, small man.* You pay a tiny fraction of the cost. And there is no substitute for Starlink.” *Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called for decorum* in remarks Monday, writing, “True leadership means respect for partners and allies. Even for the smaller and weaker ones. Never arrogance. Dear friends, think about it.” *Speaking of Musk: “Chinese investors are using opaque structures known as special-purpose vehicles to invest in Elon Musk's companies,”* the Financial Times reported over the weekend. The technique is useful because Chinese investors can “conceal their identities to avoid the ire of US authorities and companies wary of Chinese capital.” More behind the paywall, here. *Additional reading:* “Zelensky Is Set to Meet With Saudi Crown Prince Before U.S.-Ukraine Talks,” the New York Times reports; Reuters has similar coverage. Welcome to this Monday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson with Bradley Peniston and Eric Katz. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. It’s Harriet Tubman Day, so if you’re not already familiar with the U.S. Army mission she led that freed at least 730 enslaved people from South Carolina rice plantations back in 1863, check out historian Edda Fields-Black’s detailed 2024 retelling entitled, “Combee.” Around the Pentagon Mass firings began at the Defense Department last week, as multiple organizations received direction to put targeted probationary employees on administrative leave. Defense officials have announced plans to fire some 5,400 of the department’s 55,000 total probationary employees. An undisclosed number of them began receiving notification of their new status on Monday. They are expected to be officially terminated 14 to 21 days later, according to the information provided. Defense One’s Meghann Myers has more, here. *This wave of firings will be followed* by a hiring freeze and, eventually, a 5- to 8-percent cut of all civilian workers, Hegseth has said. “5 bullet points” email is now a weekly task for Pentagon civilians, the SecDef decreed on Friday, adding to guidance he issued last week. Each of the department’s roughly 760,000 civilian employees must send a list of their previous week’s achievements by Tuesday to the personnel and readiness directorate and copy their immediate supervisors. *“Submissions must exclude classified or sensitive information* and will be incorporated into weekly situation reports by supervisors,” the secretary wrote. “Non-compliance may lead to further review.” Defense One’s Myers has more. *Even so, it’s a terrible risky policy,* multiple intelligence officials told the Washington Post anonymously. “Adversaries are salivating over the thought of access to whatever ecosystem that DOGE is using in sifting through these bullets,” said one U.S. official in touch with Cyber Command personnel. Read on, here. *The Air Force is so worried that it sent its own follow-up guidance:* “Remove your contact info/signature block from the email. Individuals can be tracked via email if necessary. “BCC your supervisor to meet the requirement to Courtesy Copy your supervisor “If you cannot provide accomplishments in an unclassified manner, send your 5 bullet points to your supervisor using the appropriate network. “In your reply on NIPR, state that your bullet points are classified and Bcc your supervisor, along with the date and time of your submission.” DOD software buyers must default to rapid-acquisition processes, SecDef ordered in a May 6 memo. The move is a “big deal,” one expert told Defense One, because it will push the Defense Department to stop spending considerable money and time trying to build its own software and instead go to the marketplace for products that might already exist. Patrick Tucker has more, here. *Related reading:* “This AI startup wants to give federal workers a taste of the intel community”: Defense One’s Lauren C. Williams reports about a wider rollout for a geodata search engine created by AI-startup Danti. Commentary: “There’s a tanker-sized gap in this vision of the Air Force’s future,” writes Mike Minihan, until recently the four-star head of the Air Force’s Air Mobility Command, in a critique of a recent paper put out by the AFA-affiliated Mitchell Institute. Trump 2.0 CODEL to Gitmo. House Armed Services Committee members visited the immigrant detention center at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Friday. *“This is immoral theater on the taxpayers’ dime...Already, the project has cost $16 million—but only has capacity to hold 225 immigrants—and dozens of tents costing millions of dollars aren’t being used because they don’t meet [the Department of Homeland Security’s] standards,” said Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-California. “Thousands of military personnel are guarding a current immigrant population of 41, with only a little over half being categorized as a high threat,” she said. “It’s clear to me there is no operational reason for using Guantanamo Bay for this purpose,* but rather, it was done because President Trump liked the optics and its history as a site of horrific human rights abuses,” Jacobs said. For example, “The facility was initially run like a military prison, with some immigrants being held in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day, despite that being against DHS protocol,” said Jacobs. While conditions have improved, and these immigrants now have access to four hours of communal time,” she called for more effort “to respect the immigrants’ rights and to delineate the division of labor between [military] and DHS personnel.” *Unlike Jacobs, trip organizer HASC Chairman Mike Rogers of Alabama was not terribly interested in costs or capacity.* “Yesterday, I led a Congressional Delegation to Guantanamo Bay to see firsthand the incredible work being done by our servicemembers to keep our nation safe,” he said in his own statement Saturday. “During our visit, we met with servicemembers and law enforcement officials who have played a crucial role in facilitating the removal of some of the worst criminals,” he claimed. “Border security is national security and I’m proud of the role the Department of Defense has played in protecting our nation and ending the invasion at our southern border,” said Rogers. *Additional reading:* “Air Force intercepts aircraft flying in a restricted zone near Mar-a-Lago,” the Associated Press reported Sunday; “Trump loves the Gilded Age and its tariffs. It was a great time for the rich but not for the many,” AP reported Monday; “Inside America’s Fluoride Rebellion,” via the Wall Street Journal, reporting Monday from American conspiracists’ latest fixation; “US Coast Guard Academy Censors ‘Climate Change’ From Its Curriculum,” Inside Climate News reported Friday from the Trump administration’s ongoing culture war on language; “These Words Are Disappearing in the New Trump Administration,” the New York Times reported Friday. Etc. Space plane returns after 434 days in orbit. This seventh (acknowledged) flight for a Boeing X-37B was said to demonstrate “the ability to change orbits by using atmospheric drag to slow down, saving fuel,” AP reported Friday. ]]> Veterans Can’t Sit This One Out Chris Purdy — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 10:00:08 -0400 America’s democracy is built on strong institutions, including an apolitical military and an independent civil service that are supposed to serve the people, not the interests of a single leader. These institutions aren’t just symbols of democracy; they are its foundation. Right now, President Donald Trump’s administration is deliberately dismantling that foundation. Veterans know how to act in trying times. We have long been among the most trusted voices in American society—not just because of our service, but because we’ve shown time and again that we put country before politics. After the Civil War, veterans helped stitch a broken nation back together. After World War II, veterans led the fight for civil rights. After Vietnam, veterans forced America to confront its failures. And today, we face another test: whether our military and government will serve everyone equally under the rule of law. Recent events should be a wake-up call for anyone who cares about the future of democracy. Last month, General C.Q. Brown Jr., the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was fired, along with other senior military leaders. These were not routine changes but instead political purges, designed to install loyalists in positions that should remain nonpartisan. The same pattern is playing out across the U.S. government. More than 1,000 employees at the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) were fired last month. And the VA has announced plans to cut more than 80,000 additional positions—gutting the very infrastructure veterans rely on for care and benefits. Key election security officials have been removed, weakening safeguards for free and fair elections. The military is being deployed to the southwest border for political purposes. The administration has detained civilians with no criminal record at the same military facility in Guantanamo Bay that was used to house enemy combatants during the Global War on Terrorism. This is not about efficiency or reform. It is about control. And the administration’s attempts to exert control are having an impact on the veteran and military communities. Veterans should recognize this playbook. We’ve seen it in other countries, where democratic backsliding starts with the erosion of independent institutions, the politicization of the military, and the replacement of independent, experienced leaders with those who will not challenge executive authority. The United States has long prided itself on a professional, apolitical military and a government built on institutional integrity. That foundation is now being deliberately eroded. This is a moment that demands a response, particularly from the veteran community. For years, veteran service organizations (VSOs) have led the fight for better healthcare, stronger benefits, and greater protections for veterans. Their advocacy has secured life-saving care, expanded access to education, and ensured veterans are not left behind. But now, as the very systems that support veterans and safeguard democracy come under attack, their leadership is more critical than ever. The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) has spoken out, urging the administration and Congress to stop the indiscriminate firing of VA employees, many of whom are veterans themselves. Other VSOs must follow their lead. This is not a time for caution. VSOs should be leading the charge to defend our constitutional system. They have the platform, credibility, and reach to sound the alarm in ways few others can. They should be calling on Congress to investigate the administration’s firings, pushing back against the politicization of the military, and ensuring that veterans are part of the national conversation about what’s at stake. VSOs and veterans have an opportunity to act as defenders of the democratic institutions that make their advocacy possible in the first place. While these organizations exist to uphold the interests of veterans, we know veterans are not served by a government that removes oversight, weakens institutions, and strips away checks and balances. But we can’t wait for VSOs alone to act. Every veteran has a role to play. Congress needs to hear from us directly. Lawmakers are already facing backlash at town halls, where constituents are demanding answers for the administration’s attacks on democratic institutions. Veterans have a unique credibility in these spaces—not just as constituents, but as people who have served and sacrificed for this country. When veterans show up and speak out, we are difficult to ignore. Our voices carry weight, and our presence signals that what’s happening is bigger than politics—it’s about protecting the values we swore an oath to defend. Veterans should demand that Congress use its authority to hold this administration accountable. Oversight bodies have the power to investigate the ongoing, mass firings, as well as the broader effort to erode institutional independence. The House and Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committees must demand answers on why thousands of VA employees, many of them veterans, have been fired. The House Oversight Committee and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee—both of which have broad investigative authority over executive branch actions—must examine the administration’s dismantling of government. And the Senate and House Armed Services Committees need to investigate last month’s political purges of senior officers, including the removal of General C.Q. Brown Jr. and other military officials. The message must be clear: Our government and our military serve the people, bound by the rule of law and the Constitution. That principle must be defended. This is not about partisanship. This is about protecting the pillars of our democracy itself. History has shown us what happens when career civil servants and military leaders are replaced with political loyalists. We know how this ends. Veterans understand what is at stake. The question now is whether the organizations that represent them will rise to meet this moment. Our country has faced threats before, and veterans have always stepped forward to meet the challenge forward. Now, we must do so once again. IMAGE: U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Paul Weme, NATO Headquarters, salutes the American flag during a Veterans Day ceremony. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Victor J. Caputo) The post Veterans Can’t Sit This One Out appeared first on Just Security. I’m a Transgender Colonel. Trump Wants Me Out. Sarah Wildman and Derek Arthur — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 09:36:36 -0400 “Until I am dragged away, I’m going to do my job to the utmost of my ability.” The Illegality and Human Rights Violations in El Salvador’s Bizarre Offer to House US Prisoners Lauren-Brooke Eisen — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:59:43 -0400 When U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited El Salvador in early February to meet with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, Rubio announced that Bukele had offered to house “dangerous American criminals, including U.S. citizens and legal residents, in his jails.” Rubio then confirmed this offer on X. For those who think that this was just social media posturing, the U.S. Department of State issued a “readout” of Rubio’s meeting with Bukele confirming Bukele’s “extraordinary gesture.” Bukele also wrote on X, “We are willing to take in only convicted criminals (including convicted U.S. citizens) into our mega-prison (CECOT) in exchange for a fee.” Billionaire and head of the DOGE (Department of Governmental Efficiency) Service Elon Musk retweeted that and noted that he thought this was a “great idea.” A few days later, U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) penned a letter to Rubio and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi urging the Trump administration to “immediately and unequivocally reject” Bukele’s proposition to incarcerate U.S. citizens in El Salvador. Ossoff wrote in his letter that, “[e]ven entertaining this offer suggests a potential abandonment of core legal and ethical principles that protect the human and civil rights of Americans and others subject to U.S. jurisdiction.” Is it Legal to Send U.S. Citizens Convicted of Crimes to Prisons in El Salvador? Even President Donald Trump told reporters, in speaking of the offer, “If we had the legal right to do it, I would do it in a heartbeat.” And Rubio himself – an attorney – also acknowledged “There’s obviously legalities involved. We have a Constitution.” It is illegal to expatriate U.S. citizens for a crime. In fact, U.S. citizens can only be stripped of citizenship if they knowingly perform acts resulting in a voluntary relinquishment of citizenship such as a “formal renunciation of nationality in the United States during a time of war” or “leaving or remaining outside the United States during a time of war or national emergency to avoid military service.” However, even if imprisonment in El Salvador does not strip incarcerated citizens of their status, it is still illegal under Trump’s own touted First Step Act. There is no modern precedent for sending U.S. citizens who are convicted of crimes to other countries for punishment, or “banishment” as it has been formerly called and practiced. As far back as ancient Rome, people practiced self-banishment to escape severe punishment and exiled themselves from Rome. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the United Kingdom “banished” people convicted of crimes to its colonies in North America and Australia, as both a method of colonization and in some cases a commercial transaction since some could fill labor shortages as indentured servants. In fact, banishment emerged in the United Kingdom as an alternative to capital punishment. More than 50,000 people were transported to the American colonies by 1775; while more than 162,000 people considered “convicts” were sent to Australia between 1788 and 1868. Note that all people sentenced to penal transportation in Great Britain were sent to places that, while far away, were jurisdictions of the British Crown. The practice of penal transportation to the United States abruptly stopped around the time of the Revolutionary War. The other legal impediment stems from a little-known provision in the First Step Act, which impacts where incarcerated people are housed. Signed by Trump in 2018 during his first term, the law included changes in federal sentencing in addition to reforms intended to improve the conditions of those in federal prisons. The law mandates that the federal government place people in “a facility as close as practicable to the prisoner’s primary residence, and to the extent practicable, in a facility within 500 driving miles of that residence.” The policy behind this law is to facilitate family visitation; ensure incarcerated people are not deprived of the ability to see family, clergy, and other members of the community; and better support their reintegration into their communities upon release. The First Step Act even mandated that, but for the few exceptions and the incarcerated person’s preference for staying in their current prison, the Federal Bureau of Prisons must transfer already-incarcerated people to facilities closer to their primary residence when the law became effective – even if they were currently in a prison within 500 driving miles of their primary residence. No matter how you do the math, prisons in El Salvador are not within 500 driving miles (nor even 500 flying miles) of any part of the United States. What about the Eighth Amendment? Deporting American citizens to serve their sentence in an El Salvador prison would violate the 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which ensures that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The “cruel and unusual punishments” clause protects those convicted of crimes from excessively long sentences in prison in addition to ensuring that prison conditions meet certain health and safety standards. But despite this provision, it has been up to the U.S. Supreme Court to provide the contours of what is acceptable punishment that doesn’t violate the 8th Amendment. There have been several significant cases that have helped shape the constitutional guardrails against “cruel and unusual punishment.” In the 1958 case of Trop v. Dulles, Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that the “basic concept underlying the Eighth Amendment is nothing less than the dignity of man. While the State has the power to punish, the Amendment stands to assure that this power be exercised within the limits of civilized standards.” Almost 20 years later in Estelle v. Gamble, the U.S. Supreme Court established what is known as the “deliberate indifference” standard. In that case, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote that “deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of prisoners constitutes the ‘unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain’” which is prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Other Supreme Court cases have focused on providing guardrails against “unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain,” and excessive use of force. More recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 2011 case Brown v. Plata that the conditions of confinement in California’s prisons were so inhumane that they violated the Eighth Amendment. In that case, evidence indicated that California’s prisons had operated at around 200 percent of design capacity for at least a decade. Some prisons were even operating at almost 300 percent capacity. There were not enough treatment beds because of the overcrowding, so suicidal individuals in prison were held for long time periods in “telephone-booth sized cages without toilets.” So what are the conditions like inside the prison in El Salvador where people are likely to be sent? The Center for the Confinement of Terrorism (CECOT), a 40,000-capacity megaprison 45 miles from the capital San Salvador that opened in 2023, is a place where prisoners receive no visitors, do not participate in any rehabilitative or educational programming, and do not spend any time outside. The prison was constructed as part of Bukele’s campaign to eliminate crime and gangs. The result: more than 84,000 arrests in the country since March of 2022, almost entirely without due process. Bukele suspended basic rights such as access to attorneys and the right to a speedy trial through his “State of Exception,” making it simpler to arrest, prosecute, and imprison suspected gang members. As of January 2024, El Salvador had the highest incarceration rate on the planet, with more than 1,000 people in prison per 100,000 residents. Notably, Senator Ossoff, in his letter to Rubio and Bondi, pointed out that the U.S. State Department warns U.S. citizens who travel to the country about Bukele’s declaration of a “State of Exception” and notes that those released from some of the country’s prisons “reported a lack of food and potable water and being limited to two tortillas, one spoonful of beans, and one glass of water per day.” Human rights advocates have found more than 6,000 violations in the country’s justice system, including “arbitrary detentions, torture, due process violations, enforced disappearances, and 366 deaths within state custody.” If the Trump administration sends U.S. citizens convicted of a crime to El Salvador, it is almost certain that this maneuver violates the 8th Amendment, making the transportation unconstitutional. What Happens From Here? In the best-case scenario, this offer goes down in history as a public performance of world leaders who are known for their populist and authoritarian tendencies, in addition to their belief that reducing or eliminating civil liberties will reduce crime. It is unclear whether the Trump administration is still researching the “legality” of this proposal or thinking through this scenario with any seriousness. But if genuine steps are taken to remove U.S. citizens convicted of crimes to prisons in El Salvador, this removal would violate not only U.S. law but the U.S. Constitution. IMAGE: A prison officer stands guard inside at the Counter-Terrorism Confinement Centre (CECOT) mega-prison in El Salvador. The CECOT is the largest prison in Latin America and an emblem of the government of President Nayib Bukele. (Photo by Marvin (Photo by MARVIN RECINOS/AFP via Getty Images) The post The Illegality and Human Rights Violations in El Salvador’s Bizarre Offer to House US Prisoners appeared first on Just Security. The United States Must Avoid AI’s Chernobyl Moment Janet Egan — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:50:18 -0400 (Editor’s Note: This article is part of our series, “Tech Policy under Trump 2.0.”) In January, U.S President Donald Trump tasked his advisors to develop by July 2025 an AI Action Plan, a roadmap intended to “sustain and enhance America’s AI dominance.” This call to action mirrors the early days of nuclear energy — a transformative technology with world-changing potential but also grave risks. Much like the nuclear industry was derailed by public backlash following disasters such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, AI could face a similar crisis of confidence unless policymakers take proactive steps to prevent a large-scale incident. A single large-scale AI disaster—be it in cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, or biotechnology—could undermine public trust, stall innovation, and leave the United States trailing global competitors. Recent reports indicate plans to cut the government’s AI capacity by dismantling the AI Safety Institute. But this would be a self-inflicted wound—not only for safety, but for progress. If Washington fails to anticipate and mitigate major AI risks, the United States risks falling behind in the fallout from what could become AI’s Chernobyl moment. When Innovation Meets Catastrophe: Lessons from Nuclear Energy For many Americans, AI’s transformative promise today echoes the optimism around nuclear power in the early 1970s, when more than half of the public supported its expansion. Yet the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island—a partial reactor meltdown—shattered that optimism, with support for nuclear energy dropping precipitously by the mid-1980s. By 1984, nearly two-thirds of Americans opposed the expansion of nuclear energy. Statistical analysis suggests that the Three Mile Island incident was associated with a 72 percent decline in nuclear reactor construction globally. Following the deadlier 1986 Chernobyl incident, countries were more than 90 percent less likely to build nuclear power plants than prior to this accident. Just as many nations envisioned a renaissance for nuclear energy, the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan triggered renewed public skepticism and policy reversals. Fukushima — the only nuclear disaster besides Chernobyl to ever reach the highest classification on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale — caused public support for nuclear energy to plummet around the world. The Japanese government halted all plans for new nuclear reactors. Germany shut down all 17 of its nuclear power generation facilities, ultimately leading to increased dependence on Russian fossil fuels, compromising both its energy security and climate goals. The world is still paying the opportunity cost today: Limited access to clean, reliable nuclear power remains a critical bottleneck for AI development and other energy-intensive innovations. While AI systems have not yet caused significant and widespread harm, risks may not be far away. Experts warn of looming threats that could likewise trigger consequential backlash. AI-generated code, for example, may have hidden vulnerabilities that hackers can exploit, amplifying society’s exposure to cyberattacks as software development is increasingly automated. Future AI systems may exceed human experts in chemical and biological sciences, and equip a much broader pool of actors with the know-how to create devastating bioweapons. Leading AI companies—including OpenAI, xAI, and Anthropic—explicitly cite bioweapon creation as a potential risk, with OpenAI recently stating that its “models are on the cusp of being able to meaningfully help novices create known biological threats.” With today’s blistering pace of advancement, driven by Stargate-sized investment and algorithmic breakthroughs advancing AI’s ability to reason, private sector action alone will likely be insufficient in managing such risks. If such dangers do materialize, public opinion could turn sharply against AI, prompting a wave of restrictive regulations that stifle innovation. A serious AI incident would increase already-growing public opposition to the technology. Despite optimism from the tech sector, the majority of Americans are more concerned than excited about AI. A large-scale incident could amplify these concerns. As with nuclear energy, this could shatter the social license for AI innovation and instead galvanize public support for overly burdensome regulation, curtailing the technology’s considerable potential benefits. The Stakes of Maintaining America’s AI Edge Losing momentum in AI innovation would have profound implications. A stalling AI ecosystem would delay life-saving applications like drug discovery, diminish economic growth from AI tools, and threaten national security. Slowdown from an incident could also allow China to leapfrog the United States in AI’s economic and military applications. Moreover, it would globally discredit the United States’ balanced approach to AI development, opening the door to competing approaches. Withdrawing from AI security leadership would cede the future of AI governance to others — either the European Union’s overly burdensome regulations or China’s use of AI to enhance social control and restrict freedom of expression. Preventing AI’s Chernobyl moment is about more than simply maintaining America’s technological and economic leadership. It is also about safeguarding democratic values on the global stage. China has already deployed AI technology for mass surveillance — and exported that surveillance technology to over 83 countries. The U.S. AI Action Plan is correct in focusing on U.S. innovation and leadership. Doing so is a necessity for defending U.S. security at home and promoting democratic values abroad. Securing AI’s Future through Expertise and Agility—Not Red Tape The path forward demands precision. Navigating the fine line between vigilance and overregulation takes agility and expertise. The United States cannot let speculative fears trigger heavy-handed regulations that would cripple U.S. AI innovation. Yet it also cannot dismiss the possibility of serious — even catastrophic — risks simply because they are uncertain. The solution lies in staying nimble — encouraging innovation while detecting emerging threats early. Smart, lightweight oversight can help policymakers spot emerging dangers while readying government and industry to act when needed. This approach won’t burden AI companies with excessive red tape. But it requires something crucial: a government with the expertise and resources to truly understand AI’s rapidly advancing capabilities. The reportedly planned firing of 500 employees of the National Institute of Standards and Technology would gut that expertise. Since its creation last year, NIST’s U.S. AI Safety Institute has become the center of AI knowledge in the U.S. government — drawing in leading technical talent from AI companies and universities — and will remain crucial for assessing emerging risk in collaboration with the private sector. Evaluations of the most advanced models, like those in development by the U.S. AI Safety Institute in partnership with Scale AI, are a critical first step. Similarly, close partnerships between U.S. national security agencies and leading AI companies will be essential for testing how AI capabilities might affect the cyber, biological, nuclear and radiological capabilities of foreign adversaries. Still, evaluations alone are insufficient. As AI systems move from labs into high-stakes deployment contexts, the federal government must establish a central reporting system for AI-related incidents—akin to how cybersecurity breaches are tracked. A central reporting system to track AI-related incidents would allow the government to maintain visibility and update its approach to evaluations, where appropriate. It would also give policymakers the data to craft targeted safeguards — replacing blanket regulations that could strangle innovation with mitigations tailored to specific risks. No single company can handle major AI incidents alone — whether it is a large-scale system failure or a sophisticated attack. Just as the U.S. government coordinates with industry to respond to national cyber incidents, it must forge similar partnerships to address AI risks that could impact national security. The Department of Homeland Security’s Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security Board offers a starting point, but the United States needs a comprehensive framework for public-private coordination that clearly defines responsibilities and enables rapid response. If an AI crisis hits, government and industry must be ready to act together, based on established responsibilities and response plans, instead of improvising amidst a potential crisis. These precautions would give policymakers an early warning system for AI risks while creating clear protocols for action — all without hampering innovation or imposing heavy-handed regulation on AI companies. The stakes are high: Without smart and targeted oversight now, the United States risks a Chernobyl moment — a public backlash that could cripple AI development in the same way successive, preventable accidents stalled nuclear energy for generations. By acting thoughtfully today, policymakers can protect both public safety and technological progress, avoiding the false choice between innovation and security. It would be easy to speed through AI development in accordance with the Silicon Valley mantra “move fast and break things.” But for a technology as powerful as AI, breaking things is the surest way to put the brakes on progress. IMAGE: President Donald J. Trump speaks about infrastructure and artificial intelligence to reporters with Larry Ellison, chairman of Oracle Corporation and chief technology officer, Masayoshi Son, SoftBank Group CEO, and Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO in the Roosevelt Room at the White House on Tuesday, Jan 21, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images) The post The United States Must Avoid AI’s Chernobyl Moment appeared first on Just Security. Early Edition: March 10, 2025 Weronika Galka — Mon, 10 Mar 2025 07:54:05 -0400 Signup to receive the Early Edition in your inbox here. A curated weekday guide to major news and developments over the weekend. Here’s today’s news: *SYRIA* More than 1,000 people have been killed in clashes between government security forces and Assad regime loyalists on Syria’s Mediterranean coast over the last four days, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said yesterday. Eyewitnesses say that armed men loyal to the new Syrian government committed atrocities during the unrest, including by carrying out field executions. Christina Goldbaum and Reham Mourshed report for the New York Times; Mostafa Salem reports for CNN. Syria’s interim president Ahmad al-Sharaa yesterday called for national unity, vowing to hold accountable “anyone involved in the bloodshed of civilians” who “overstepped the powers of the state.” He did not directly comment on the accusations that his supporters committed atrocities. Lucy Clarke-Billings and Gabriela Pomeroy report for BBC News. Israel will let Syrian Druze workers enter the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights from Syrian territory, Israel’s defense ministry said yesterday. Reuters reports. *RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR* Russian strikes killed at least 25 people in Ukraine and injured dozens through the weekend, Ukrainian officials said. Commenting on the strikes, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said that “[t]his is what happens when someone appeases barbarians.” Henri Astier reports for BBC News. Russia is advancing in Kursk, with Ukraine struggling to retain its sole territorial bargaining chip in the conflict as Russian and North Korean troops seized territory in recent days, according to soldiers in the area. Separately, Ukrainian soldiers and military analysts say Kyiv has stalled Moscow’s offensive in the Donetsk region in recent months and started to win back small patches of land. Evgeniia Sivorka, James Marson, and Jane Lytvynenko report for the Wall Street Journal; Marc Santora reports for the New York Times. *RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR — U.S. RESPONSE* The United States has “temporarily suspended” the sharing of satellite imagery with Ukraine in accordance with President Trump’s orders, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency said on Friday. Analysts say the move, coupled with the U.S. halt of military aid and intelligence-sharing with Ukraine, could potentially give Russia a decisive advantage on the battlefield. Eve Sampson reports for the New York Times. “Anybody else would” take advantage of the halt in U.S. aid for Kyiv to step up attacks, Trump said on Friday, commenting on Russia’s strikes on Ukraine. Trump added that he is finding it “more difficult” to deal with Ukraine than Russia in negotiations. Hours earlier, the President stated he was “strongly” considering imposing large-scale sanctions on Russia to force it into a peace deal. Michael Birnbaum, Sabrina Rodriguez, and Kostiantyn Khudov report for the Washington Post; Ian Aikman and Tom Bateman report for BBC News; Erica L. Green reports for the New York Times. The Trump administration is examining how to ease sanctions on Russia’s oil and gas industry to deliver swift economic relief if Moscow agrees to end its war in Ukraine, according to two sources. Jarrett Renshaw and Jonathan Saul report for Reuters. Trump has privately told his aides a minerals deal between Washington and Kyiv won’t be enough to restart aid and intelligence sharing and that he wants Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to change his attitude to making concessions to Russia and planning elections in Ukraine, according to an administration official and another U.S. official. Courtney Kube, Kristen Welker, and Carol E. Lee report for NBC News. *ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR* Israel has cut off the electricity supply to Gaza, disconnecting power to a desalination plant producing drinking water for part of the territory, officials said yesterday. A Hamas spokesperson called the decision part of Israel’s “starvation policy.” Melanie Lidman and Samy Magdy report for AP News. Israel’s defense ministry will open an office to manage the mass displacement of Palestinians from Gaza to other countries, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said yesterday. The formation of the new office was not immediately confirmed by the defense ministry. Gerry Shih reports for the Washington Post. Israel and Hamas on Saturday signaled they were preparing for the next phase of Gaza ceasefire negotiations, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office announcing that Israeli negotiators will travel to Doha today and Hamas saying there were “positive” indicators in the talks. Nidal Al-Mughrabi reports for Reuters. *ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR — U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE* Israel objected to the Trump administration’s covert direct negotiations with Hamas in a “difficult” call between Netanyahu’s close aide Ron Dermer and U.S. hostage envoy Adam Boehler last Tuesday, according to an Israeli official. Boehler yesterday said that while he understands Israel’s concerns, the United States is “not an agent of Israel” in the efforts to broker a ceasefire. Barak Ravid reports for Axios; Avery Lotz reports for Axios. The foreign ministers of France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom on Saturday announced they support Egypt’s “realistic” plan for the reconstruction of Gaza that would avoid displacing Palestinians from the territory. Lucy Clarke-Billings reports for BBC News. Trump’s Special Envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, is expected to travel to Doha tomorrow to join the ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas, two U.S. officials said. Barak Ravid reports for Axios. *TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ACTIONS* The Justice Department has transferred at least three top officials in the National Security Division, a move that sources say amounts to a complete overhaul of the Division’s leadership. On Friday, the DOJ also removed a top ethics official, a pardon attorney, and a head public records officer, the sources added. Perry Stein and Salvador Rizzo report for the Washington Post. Two New York federal prosecutors who worked on the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams have been escorted out of their workplace by federal law enforcement officials after being placed on leave by the Justice Department on Friday, according to law enforcement sources. At least one other DOJ attorney was also placed on leave, apparently over social media comments about the interim U.S. attorney for D.C., Ed Martin, the sources added. Ryan J. Reilly and Tom Winter report for NBC News. Trump has instructed officials to exclude non-profit organizations that engage in activities that have a “substantial illegal purpose” from a student loan forgiveness program in an executive order published Friday. The move appears to target groups supporting undocumented immigrants, diversity initiatives, or gender-affirming care for children. Stacy Cowley reports for the New York Times. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem yesterday announced that Todd Lyons, ICE’s former assistant director of field operations, will serve as the agency’s new acting Director. Noem also pledged to step up polygraph testing of employees to identify personnel leaking information to the media. Christine Fernando reports for AP News. The Trump administration has told the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to prepare to lose another 1,000 workers, raising concerns among scientists that NOAA’s lifesaving forecasts might be hindered as the hurricane season approaches. Raymond Zhong, Austyn Gaffney, and Christopher Flavelle report for the New York Times. The Homeland Security Department on Friday said it would end its collective bargaining agreement with Transportation Security Administration workers, claiming the union contract was imperilling the safety of travellers. Tim Balk reports for the New York Times. *U.S. FOREIGN AFFAIRS* Calls for negotiations by “bully states” are aimed at dominating others and not resolving issues, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Saturday, in an apparent response to Trump’s comments that he has written to Khameini to kick start negotiations on a new nuclear deal. Mohammed Tawfeeq and Donald Judd report for CNN. The Trump administration has asked researchers and organizations working overseas to disclose ties to entities regarded as hostile, including “entities associated with communist, socialist or totalitarian parties,” according to a questionnaire seen by the New York Times. Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Apoorva Mandavilli report. Panama on Saturday released dozens of migrants held in a remote camp following their deportation from the United States, telling them they have 30 days to leave Panama. Some migrants said the move leaves them in legal limbo and with no money. Megan Janetsky, Alma Solis, and Matias Delacroix report for AP News. More than 80 Afghan women who fled the Taliban to pursue higher education in Oman say they now face imminent return back to Afghanistan due to the Trump administration’s foreign aid cuts. Yogita Limaye reports for BBC News. The State Department yesterday ordered non-emergency government personnel to leave South Sudan’s capital amid escalating tensions in the country. AP News reports. *OTHER U.S. DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS* The Secret Service yesterday shot a man near the White House after an “armed confrontation” with federal officials, the agency said in a statement, adding that the man’s condition is unknown. Luke Broadwater and Adam Goldman report for the New York Times. The Justice Department should dismiss a corruption case against Mayor Eric Adams “with prejudice,” an outside legal expert appointed by the judge overseeing the case opined on Friday, saying that the move would “eliminate the appearance problems” inherent in Adams being subject to an “ever-looming prospect of reindictment.” Shayna Jacobs reports for the Washington Post. Immigration agents on Saturday arrested a Palestinian graduate student who has played a prominent role in pro-Palestinian protests at New York’s Columbia University, the Student Workers of Columbia labor union said in a statement. Jonathan Allen reports for Reuters. President Trump’s family business on Friday sued Capital One for allegedly “unjustifiably terminating” its accounts over the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot. Ben Protess reports for the New York Times. A federal judge in Missouri on Friday found the Chinese government responsible for covering up the start of the Covid-19 pandemic and hoarding protective equipment, awarding damages of more than $24 billion that Missouri officials vowed to enforce by seizing Chinese assets. Mitch Smith reports for the New York Times. *OTHER GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS* Former central banker Mark Carney will be the next Prime Minister of Canada following a landslide victory in a contest to lead Canada’s ruling Liberal Party yesterday. Carney is expected to call an election in the coming weeks, according to sources. Anna Mehler Paperny reports for Reuters. Armed men who attacked a U.N. helicopter on an evacuation mission killed one crew member and injured two others in a volatile part of South Sudan on Friday, the U.N. said. Declan Walsh reports for the New York Times. Romania’s central election authority yesterday barred the far-right pro-Russian candidate Calin Georgescu from running in May’s presidential election re-run, saying Georgescu violated electoral rules during his first run. Carmen Paun reports for POLITICO. Poland must “drastically” increase the size of its military and even “reach for opportunities” related to “nuclear and unconventional weapons,” Poland’s Tusk said on Friday. Andrew Higgins reports for the New York Times. *TRUMP ADMINISTRATION LITIGATION* A group of labor unions on Friday asked a federal court for an emergency order restraining DOGE from accessing the sensitive Social Security data of millions of Americans. Fatima Hussein and Lindsay Whitehurst report for Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions by Just Security Timeline: Politicization and Weaponization of Justice Department in Second Trump Administration by Ryan Goodman and Audrey Balliette Trump Executive Actions / Series: What Just Happened What Just Happened: Security and Foreign Policy Implications of Pausing Intelligence Sharing with Ukraine by Brett Holmgren Russia Trump’s Russia Reset Is Real — Here’s How Europe Should Respond by James Batchik and Doug Klain Countering Russian Lawfare and Gray Zone Operations by Omer Duru and Jill Goldenziel ICC / Israel-Hamas War Mapping State Reactions to the ICC Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant (Updated) by Rebecca Ingber International Women’s Day Foreign Aid Cuts Compound Harmful Impact of US Reimposition of ‘Mexico City Policy’ by Cristal Downing International Order Pax Americana: How Not to Hide an Empire by Matiangai Sirleaf U.S. Citizenship Jurisdiction, Territorial Sovereignty, and the Fourteenth Amendment by Austen Parrish Symposium: Tech & Atrocity Prevention From Open-Source to All-Source: Leveraging Local Knowledge for Atrocity Prevention by Jacqueline Geis Federal Workers / Surveillance What U.S. Federal Employees Should Know About Workplace Surveillance by Chris Gilliard and Joan Donovan Intelligence Community / Reform How DHS Laid the Groundwork for More Intelligence Abuse by Spencer Reynolds Podcast The Just Security Podcast: What Just Happened Series, CIA Officers’ Lawsuit at Intersection of DEI and National Security David Aaron interview with Kevin Carroll The Just Security Podcast: Politicization and Weaponization of the Justice Department in the Second Trump Administration Tom Joscelyn interview with Ryan Goodman and Mary B. McCord The Just Security Podcast: Understanding the Congressional Investigations Landscape Paras Shah interview with Ronak D. Desai The post Digest of Recent Articles on Just Security (Mar. 3-7, 2025) appeared first on Just Security. A Europe in Emotional Shock Grapples With a New Era Roger Cohen — Sat, 08 Mar 2025 03:41:50 -0500 It remains to be seen how far President Trump’s embrace of Russia and abandonment of traditional allies will go. But “the West” may be gone. Trump’s Embrace of Russia Leaves Europe in Emotional Shock Roger Cohen — Sat, 08 Mar 2025 03:41:50 -0500 It remains to be seen how far President Trump’s embrace of Russia and abandonment of traditional allies will go. But “the West” may be gone. Pentagon aims to accelerate acquisition of new tech through software-contracting change Patrick Tucker — Fri, 07 Mar 2025 23:59:28 -0500 The Pentagon must default to rapid acquisition processes when buying software, from business systems to weapons components, the defense secretary said in a Thursday memo. The move is a “big deal,” one expert told Defense One, because it will push the Defense Department to stop spending considerable money and time trying to build its own software and instead go to the marketplace for products that might already exist. “While the commercial industry has rapidly adjusted to a software-defined product reality, DoD has struggled to reframe our acquisition process from a hardware-centric to a software-centric approach,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote in the March 6 memo. “Software is at the core of every weapon and supporting system we field to remain the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world.” The Pentagon must prioritize the Software Acquisition Pathway when buying software, the memo said—a set of guidelines the Defense Department rolled out to streamline the purchase of software, guided in part by the experience of the special operations community. But its implementation was slow across the Department, at least as of July 2023, according to a GAO report from that time. Contract officers weren’t sure how to apply it to current programs and worried about doing so incorrectly, undermining regulations and requirements. Under that “pathway,” DOD buyers must default to using acquisition approaches called Commercial Solutions Openings, which allow the department to purchase commercially available tech, and Other Transaction Authority, which allow contracts outside of the formal federal acquisition regulations. Both tools enable faster procurement and easier work with non-traditional defense contractors. The Defense Innovation Unit, or DIU, relies almost exclusively on OTAs and CSOs to bring commercial tech into the Defense Department. Since 2016, the unit has awarded more than 500 OTAs using the CSO process, a defense official told reporters Friday. Some 88 percent of those contracts went to vendors that were not traditional defense contractors, and 68 percent have gone to small businesses. [[Related Posts]] Hegseth’s new policy should bring “an uptick in sort of the demand for DIU projects,” the official said. The memo will also spur DIU efforts to educate the military services’ program executive officers about using these authorities to speed up software acquisition. So how will all this affect big-ticket programs of record, like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter? Another defense official said the change applies to any program that has reached the planning phase or is reaching a “natural transition point to adopt a new acquisition pathway”—essentially, a point where it makes sense to change up the program’s software or other tech providers. There are limits to how the department can use OTAs. For instance, they aren’t suitable for the acquisition of massive platforms like ballistic missile submarines. Any contract over $100 million requires approval by the defense acquisition undersecretary. But the nature of defense technology is rapidly evolving away from such big-ticket items anyway and moving toward efforts like Replicator, which seeks to field large numbers of low-cost, highly autonomous drones. As part of that program, DIU used CSO processes to hire Anduril to provide collaborative autonomy software that enables drones from a wide variety of vendors to work together. DIU got them under contract in 110 days, much faster than the time it takes to put out a traditional solicitation and make a contract award. More reliance on OTAs does reduce congressional oversight on how the Pentagon spends money, since traditional solicitations give both the Defense Department and lawmakers more time to review potential programs. But OTA was created by Congress, whose members have since pushed the Defense Department to make more use of it. Tara Murphy Dougherty, CEO of data and decision science company Govini, said the change is “a big deal.” “DOD has been somewhat schizophrenic on how it buys software, and this is a big commitment to really get behind commercial software,” she said. This is a contrast to the Pentagon trying to build its own software, as it did with its data analytics tool Advana. Dougherty said Advana will become one of the first tests for the approach. But, she said, there are still projects where the Defense Department is trying to build its own software, or contract for others to do so, rather than buy commercial software that could serve the same need. “There are a lot of existing… IT development projects that the department never should have launched. Frankly, it's against the commercial item preference statute that they started those projects to begin with. So the question is still open as to whether those will be stopped.” ]]> Trump Promised Retribution. Turns Out He Had a Very Big Target in Mind. Jamelle Bouie — Fri, 07 Mar 2025 21:43:56 -0500 It is hard to describe the president’s first month and a half in office as something other than a retribution campaign against the American people. Fort Liberty Renamed Fort Bragg, Fulfilling a Trump Campaign Promise Chris Cameron — Fri, 07 Mar 2025 21:39:20 -0500 Congress had pushed past President Trump’s veto to rename Fort Bragg, named for a Confederate general, in the final days of his first term. ATTRITION: Defending the Dhruv Disaster Fri, 07 Mar 2025 19:17:37 -0500 MORALE: Drone Operators and Losses Fri, 07 Mar 2025 19:16:28 -0500 This AI startup wants to give federal workers a taste of the intel community Lauren C. Williams — Fri, 07 Mar 2025 18:06:43 -0500 Tech-curious federal workers can now test drive the geodata search engine created by AI-startup Danti already used by some defense and intelligence agencies. The cloud-based platform, which can be retooled for various classification levels, is already used by the Space Force’s data analytics effort, called the Tactical Surveillance Reconnaissance and Tracking, or TacSRT, program, as well as the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Federal Emergence Management Agency. But now anyone with a government email can get set up to use it, the company announced Thursday. The military has been using data analysis on the battlefield to help commanders make decisions. But moving that information between a headquarters and troops in the field can be a challenging process. “If you're an aviator planning a mission and you're looking at one of the latest [surface-to-air missile] sites or alternate landing locations along my route, that might be something that you've got to wait a bit of time to get an analyst to run,” said Jesse Kallman, Danti’s founder and CEO. “We want to take this to, where someone deployed overseas on a [Tactical Assault Kit] device is asking questions and getting high quality analysis in seconds, and being able to automate a lot of the simple stuff that takes a lot of time from the highly skilled analysts” who could be doing more complicated work. For example, when looking for more information on Thursday’s fatal missile strike on a Ukrainian hotel in Kryvyi Rih, a Google search brings up the latest news stories and social media posts. But on Danti’s platform, the keywords “Ukraine hotel strike by Russia” pulls up “satellite photos that intersect where the hotel is,” a clickable map that “shows me where it took place. It shows me geolocated news. It shows me every image that was captured over that hotel, and a breakdown of what happened from news and social,” Kallman said as he walked Defense One through the platform. [[Related Posts]] The search pulled up several feeds, a map, a text summary and bullet list of what happened, common questions, and clickable tiles for news stories and media posts. Users can also save and share the searches for offline use. “Maybe I want to see social media from the ground. I want to see the latest information. I can see Telegram posts, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook posts, all of this information,” from translated Russian, Ukrainian, and U.S. sources, he said. Kallman said the AI tool gives government workers, who may not be highly technical, the ability to pull data from various sources with analysis and recommendations based on a simple query. “Some people think that AI is going to solve everything for everybody, and take everyone's job. And I think that's grossly misunderstood. I think it's going to help the people that just don't have 15 to 20 years of expertise with a lot of the easy stuff,” he said. Going forward, Danti is focused on scaling its product use to larger organizations with thousands of users and into the “hands of people that are not sitting in a [secure facility] in Washington, D.C., but someone that's in the field [who] needs information right now,” Kallman said. Right now, “a lot of analysts are generating analysis in the system. We're also indexing that and making it available for the next analyst that asks the question. So there's a major compounding benefit effect here.” ]]> There’s a tanker-sized gap in this vision of the Air Force’s future Mike Minihan — Fri, 07 Mar 2025 15:56:03 -0500 The debate at this week’s Air & Space Force Association’s Warfare Symposium focused on a plea to President Trump to "Make the Air Force Great Again." In the spirit of a post-mission aircrew debrief, I offer this experienced intervention with the utmost respect for the entire Air Force enterprise. This is a team sport, and the team must improve. Immediate and ruthless self-assessment is essential. Senior leadership, industry partners, and all Airmen must recognize that this moment is consequential. Without drastic shifts in our approach, we will squander a once-in-a-century opportunity to transform the force—and fail to close the capability gap between mobility’s aerial refueling and cargo fleet and the fighter and bomber fleet they support. Transformation is not tied solely to changes in presidential administrations. During my tenure as commander of Air Mobility Command, we sensed and seized opportunities to aggressively pursue our obligation to better support the Air Force and the Joint Force in conflict and crisis. We rapidly developed new concepts to advance each of our core missions: airlift, aerial refueling, aeromedical evacuation, and enabling ground support. We had ample operational data points to inform and guide our improvement efforts: Kabul, Ukraine, Mobility Guardian, Bamboo Eagle, Israel, Gaza, Homeland Defense, border security. All these missions and exercises were executed with a wounded and vulnerable fleet. (See, for example, reports on the KC-46 and C-130H.) We crafted strategy and guidance to inspire alignment, imagination, and action. Most importantly, we expanded beyond comfortable dogma, seeking innovative concepts and technical solutions from America’s brightest industrial minds. Yet I struggled. Bureaucratic inertia and political hesitancy proved formidable. Securing deep integration within the Air Force and Joint Force was harder than it had to be. Overcoming erratic programming priorities required crafty advocacy outside of DoD. And, as was revealed last week with the release of the Mitchell Institute’s “Vector for Trump” study, I failed to influence the practitioners of Air Power advocacy effectively. Produced by the Air Force Association’s think tank affiliate, the new study properly aligns with Air Force chief Gen. Allvin’s “Make or Break” op-ed from January, arguing that America needs more Air Force. It proposes an additional $45 billion in funding to buy essential platforms such as Next Generation Air Dominance, B-21s, F-35s, and F-15EXs. Of this, a mere $300 million is allocated for development of Next Generation Air Refueling, a less-than-1-percent afterthought. The Mitchell report is righteous on intent but flawed in execution. It honors mobility in words but not action. Its programming advice disregards the most relied-upon force in history of warfare: Rapid Global Mobility. Most critically, it struggles to account for the political and strategic realities—mobility recapitalization and an airpower concept that knits together the need for the whole fleet—that enable true Air Force rejuvenation. Even if the $45 billion materialized and the Mitchell report authors’ wildest dreams came true, the result would likely be a cutting-edge 5th- and 6th-generation kinetic force fatally shackled to 2nd-generation airlift and aerial refueling platforms for decades to come. It would be a world-class striking force rendered ineffective due to outdated mobility assets that cannot connect, support, or maneuver joint air, sea, and ground forces in future conflicts. This is already a significant concern. This ask makes it worse. Furthermore, the most significant share of the $45 billion infusion will reward the parts of the American defense industry notorious for delays, cost overruns, and subpar performance. The warfighter pays the price for these inefficiencies—in capability, readiness, and, ultimately, in conflict. Collaborative combat aircraft are a decent start, but where is the holistic bold thinking that once defined the Air Force? Where is the integrated approach that binds all core functions and into an unrivaled, lethal force? Where is the partnership with America’s most daring, provocative, and aspirational companies? True transformation must include advanced mobility and aerial refueling capabilities that enable mass, volume, tempo, and survivability in contested environments. It must incorporate cutting-edge connectivity, uncrewed automation, human performance technology, VTOL & EVTOL, and flexible logistics solutions that augment, then replace, ancient KC-135s, aging C-17s, suffering C-130s, and failing C-5s. America needs more Air Force, and the Air Force needs more resources. But America does not need a larger more unbalanced Air Force. The President, Secretary of Defense, incoming Chairman, and Secretary of the Air Force have no appetite for the continuation of recycled and expensive disappointments. Do we, members of the Air Force enterprise, have the courage to finally design and administer winning violence for current and future air domains? Fiercely advocating for every contributor to air power is foundational to ensuring Air Force battle-sky supremacy and enabling the Joint Force. Mike Minihan, a retired U.S. Air Force general, is a former commander of the service's Air Mobility Command. ]]>

U.S. National Security and Military News Review

Musk Email Reaches Italian Workers. It Did Not Go Well.

Unruly Passenger Swallows Rosary Beads on American Airlines Flight

¿Cuál es el estatus de la operación para migrantes en Guantánamo?

Europe Weighs Peacekeeping Role in Ukraine Amid Trump’s Embrace of Russia

Man Who Shot at Pipeline and Power Station Gets 25 Years in Prison

Canada, allies play a key role in some military AI experiments

Canada, other allies play a key role in some military AI experiments

US resumes sending aid, intel to Ukraine; seeks ‘yes’ from Russia on ceasefire

Jury Hears Details of Failed Plot to Kill Iranian Dissident in New York

U.S. Investigation Into Global Antidoping Agency Continues Under Trump

The ‘Chain Saw’ at the Veterans Agency

Trump administration reverses its cancellation of national-security office leases

The D Brief: Allies mull nukes; Syrian breakthrough?; Base-refineries proposal; Judge demands DOGE records; And a bit more.

Around the world

Around the Defense Department

Trump 2.0

Musk Calls Senator Mark Kelly a ‘Traitor’ on X After He Urges for U.S. Support of Ukraine

Congress Must Stop the Weaponization of Personal Security Clearances

IMAGE: Low angle view of a dome, Capitol Building, Washington DC (Getty Images)

Israel’s Pager Operation: Not an Indiscriminate Attack But a Strategic Success

Mapping the Widespread Criticisms under the Law of Armed Conflict

But on What Basis? Assessing the Criticisms

Facing Up to the Strategic Purpose

Jessie Mahaffey, Survivor of Pearl Harbor Attack, Dies at 102

Early Edition: March 11, 2025

Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions

What We Know About the Month-Old Migrant Mission at Guantánamo Bay

Justice Dept. Official Says She Was Fired After Opposing Restoring Mel Gibson’s Gun Rights

WINNING: Ukraine Invades Russia and Chaos Ensues

MURPHY'S LAW: Iran Benefits From The Losses of Others

Defendant in U.S.S. Cole Bombing Case Signs Plea Offer

Experts fear cascade of nuclear proliferation as Trump shakes alliances

Senator Mark Kelly Urges Continued U.S. Support After Visiting Ukraine. Musk Calls Him a ‘Traitor.’

Trial Set for Men Accused of Targeting Iranian Dissident in New York

Marines hire Anduril for counter-drone services worth up to $642M

The D Brief: Ukraine’s intel quandary; Pentagon’s civilian firings; Speedier-software policy; Russia’s military horses; And a bit more.

Around the Pentagon

Trump 2.0

Etc.

Veterans Can’t Sit This One Out

IMAGE: U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Paul Weme, NATO Headquarters, salutes the American flag during a Veterans Day ceremony. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Victor J. Caputo)

I’m a Transgender Colonel. Trump Wants Me Out.

The Illegality and Human Rights Violations in El Salvador’s Bizarre Offer to House US Prisoners

Is it Legal to Send U.S. Citizens Convicted of Crimes to Prisons in El Salvador?

What about the Eighth Amendment?

What Happens From Here?

IMAGE: A prison officer stands guard inside at the Counter-Terrorism Confinement Centre (CECOT) mega-prison in El Salvador. The CECOT is the largest prison in Latin America and an emblem of the government of President Nayib Bukele. (Photo by Marvin (Photo by MARVIN RECINOS/AFP via Getty Images)

The United States Must Avoid AI’s Chernobyl Moment

When Innovation Meets Catastrophe: Lessons from Nuclear Energy

The Stakes of Maintaining America’s AI Edge

Securing AI’s Future through Expertise and Agility—Not Red Tape

Early Edition: March 10, 2025

Trump Executive Actions / Series: What Just Happened

Russia

ICC / Israel-Hamas War

International Women’s Day

International Order

U.S. Citizenship

Symposium: Tech & Atrocity Prevention

Federal Workers / Surveillance

Intelligence Community / Reform

Podcast

A Europe in Emotional Shock Grapples With a New Era

Trump’s Embrace of Russia Leaves Europe in Emotional Shock

Pentagon aims to accelerate acquisition of new tech through software-contracting change

Trump Promised Retribution. Turns Out He Had a Very Big Target in Mind.

Fort Liberty Renamed Fort Bragg, Fulfilling a Trump Campaign Promise

ATTRITION: Defending the Dhruv Disaster

MORALE: Drone Operators and Losses

This AI startup wants to give federal workers a taste of the intel community

There’s a tanker-sized gap in this vision of the Air Force’s future