Podcasts about defense policy

EASY LISTENING DEP'T.: Last term, people told him he couldn't have that military parade and that he couldn't send the troops to shoot protesters. But this time around, he's gotten rid of those people and with them the limits on his ability to play around with deadly force to make himself feel powerful. If you can't grasp that simple fact, you need not to be presenting yourself as an expert on defense policy or for that matter, as the editor of a major general interest magazine. Please visit, read, and support INDIGNITY! https://www.indignity.net/

For more information and published work - please see below link:https://www.aei.org/profile/todd-harrison/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Germany is deploying 5,000 troops to Lithuania, marking the first such permanent deployment to another country since the end of World War II. Also, immigration lawyers are sounding alarms over what they say is an escalating immigration crackdown along the northern US border in Maine. And, Iran and Russia ratify a new agreement to strengthen economic ties, with more cooperation in banking and arms trade. Plus, an 11-year-old boy in the UK teaches himself to master the piano in only six months.Listen to today's Music Heard on Air. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

A new book, U.S. Defense Policy toward Israel: A Cold War History, takes on the revisionists over what happened in the Cold War. Recorded on April 16, 205.

Listen to this episode commercial free at https://angryplanetpod.comSpecial for our international listeners, did you know you can now buy a pathway to U.S. citizenship for the low, low price of $5 million sent directly to the U.S. treasury? For decades America's immigration policies were a boon to its national defense. No one has better intelligence on a rival country than a fleeing dissident with firsthand knowledge.Times have changed.Gil Guerra of the Niskanen Center is here to talk all about those changes. It's an episode packed with bizarre anecdotes and interesting tidbits about how America runs now. You'll learn why evangelical Christians are turning their back on refugees, why China won't accept deportation flights, and how to navigate the Darien Gap using short form video posts.Immigration is a foreign policy toolDissident refugees as a strategic winWhat we know about how the “Gold Card” will work“You simply can't create greencards out of nowhere.”How Mexico uses immigration to get concessions from the U.S.“At a certain point the people who send you into the blades look like the bastards.”Dealing with a dictator20,000 Chinese nationals at the southern borderThe internet has made it easier to immigrateNavigating the Darien Gap, one TikTok video at a timeOp-ed: Trump's gold card visa, explainedDomestic debate, global strategy: Revisiting immigration in U.S. foreign policyChina owns 380,000 acres of land in the U.S. Here's whereWeapons of Mass MigrationSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/warcollege. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With national security set to be a key issue in the next election, the Coalition is expected to unveil new defence policies to strengthen Australia’s military capabilities.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Following the Trump administration's controversial comments and actions on Ukraine, tariffs and much else, CER director Charles Grant sits down with the director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute, Kori Schake, to discuss what America's hostility to the rules-based international order means for transatlantic relations. Produced by Octavia Hughes

President Trump has convened a meeting with Russia in Riyadh to discuss Peace in Ukraine. President Macron also convened a meeting of European leaders while President Zelensky of Ukraine is meeting with Turkish President Erdogan in Ankara. First steps to end the three year conflict.

What foreign policy challenges does the Trump Administration face as of February 2025? Where are the potential flashpoints of global conflict and strife? What ‘bad actors’ are out there, and are they working together? Defense Policy expert Rebeccah Heinrichs discusses these serious issues with Jeff, and offers some ideas for how America can defend itself […]

What foreign policy challenges does the Trump Administration face as of February 2025? Where are the potential flashpoints of global conflict and strife? What 'bad actors' are out there, and are they working together? Defense Policy expert Rebeccah Heinrichs discusses these serious issues with Jeff, and offers some ideas for how America can defend itself and work to promote and protect our national interest and citizens. Read Rebeccah's bio here: https://www.hudson.org/experts/1054-rebeccah-l-heinrichs Host: Jeff Sikkenga Executive Producer: Jeremy Gypton Subscribe: https://linktr.ee/theamericanidea #foreignpolicy #ccp #ukrainewar #freetrade #irondome #nationaldefense

A talk by Thanissaro Bhikkhu entitled "The Buddha's Defense Policy"

A talk by Thanissaro Bhikkhu entitled "The Buddha's Defense Policy"

The politics of a review of a national security strategy are huge. What is the appetite for change? What is the appetite to deliver? What is the political reference and timeframe for decisions? How to balance domestic pressures and foreign threats? Former UK Minister of the Armed Forces, military veteran, and ex-MP, The Rt Hon James Heappey talks about the tensions and challenges of putting national security on the political agenda, getting it funded, delivering change, and why it doesn't always work as planned. A fascinating insight into how politics at this level works, with all the implications on industry, society, voter, and banking. No mincing of words here.

Segment 1: SECDEF Pete Hegseth Wants to End Military-Funded Abortions Pete Hegseth, former Secretary of Defense, takes a strong stand against taxpayer-funded abortions in the military. This segment explores the moral and financial implications of his efforts and the pushback from pro-abortion activists. Segment 2: Former Planned Parenthood Abortionist Dies at Age 67 A former Planned Parenthood abortionist, responsible for thousands of terminated lives, has died at 67. We examine their career, the lives lost under their practice, and the polarizing legacy they leave behind in the ongoing battle over the sanctity of life. Segment 3: Ohio State and Notre Dame Football Players Praise Jesus A powerful display of faith on the field! Players from Ohio State and Notre Dame openly praise Jesus after their game, inspiring Christians nationwide while sparking backlash from some secular critics. Their bold testimonies remind us of the importance of standing firm in faith. Get free alerts at http://PrayInJesusName.org © 2025, Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt, PhD. Airs on NRB TV, Direct TV Ch.378, Roku, AppleTV, Amazon FireTV, AndroidTV, GoogleTV, Smart TV, iTunes and www.PrayInJesusName.org

As it always does, the National Defense Authorization Act known as the NDAA includes a whole section devoted to federal procurement. We get highlights not from attorney Zach Prince of Haynes Boone. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

As it always does, the National Defense Authorization Act known as the NDAA includes a whole section devoted to federal procurement. We get highlights not from attorney Zach Prince of Haynes Boone. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

National security analyst and former Trump administration official Elbridge Colby joined FP Live earlier this year to share his take on what a second Trump term could mean for foreign policy. He was recently tapped to be the under secretary of defense for policy in the incoming administration. As such, he will be an integral part of Trump's decision-making—making this episode newly relevant.  Suggested reading (FP links are paywall-free): Transcript: Decoding Trump's Foreign Policy Elbridge Colby, Mackenzie Eaglen, and Roger Zakheim: How to Trim the Defense Budget Without Harming U.S. Security (2020) Elbridge Colby and David Ochmanek: How the United States Could Lose a Great-Power War (2019) Elbridge Colby: How to Win America's Next War (2019) FP Staff: The Trump Transition Begins Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As we approach the three-year mark of the war in Ukraine, and conflict continues to rage in the Middle East, technology has played a key role in these arenas—from cyber attacks and drones to propaganda efforts over social media. In Ukraine, SpaceX's Starlink has blurred the lines between commercial and military communications, with the satellite broadband service supporting the Ukrainian army while becoming a target for signal jamming by Russia. What can we learn from these conflicts in Europe and the Middle East? What role will cyber and disinformation operations play in future wars? What has Ukraine taught us about the U.S. defense industrial base and defense technology? As China increases its aggression toward Taiwan and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific, how will technology play a role in either deterring a conflict or deciding its outcome? Evan is joined by Kevin B. Kennedy,  a recently retired United States Air Force lieutenant general who last served as commander of the Sixteenth Air Force. He previously served as Director for Operations at U.S. Cyber Command.

Junior enlisted troops will receive a historic pay raise next year after President Joe Biden signed the annual defense bill into law on Monday. Other service members will get a 4.5% raise beginning January. Junior enlisted service members ranks E-1 through E-4 will see the extra ten percent added to their paycheck beginning April. The bill also increases the income eligibility threshold for the basic needs allowance to 200% of federal poverty guidelines. Congress must still authorize a full fiscal 2025 spending bill once it's back in session. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Junior enlisted troops will receive a historic pay raise next year after President Joe Biden signed the annual defense bill into law on Monday. Other service members will get a 4.5% raise beginning January. Junior enlisted service members ranks E-1 through E-4 will see the extra ten percent added to their paycheck beginning April. The bill also increases the income eligibility threshold for the basic needs allowance to 200% of federal poverty guidelines. Congress must still authorize a full fiscal 2025 spending bill once it's back in session. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It seems a favorite pastime of leaders in Washington is telling us — Americans — what we believe and what we want. Such assertions by politicians are sometimes true, but they inevitably reflect the policy the politician is attempting to promulgate.   So what do Americans actually believe when it comes to key defense and foreign policy issues? We don't have to guess, thanks to the Reagan National Defense Survey. The Washington Director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, Roger Zakheim, joins guest host Bradley Bowman to share the latest survey's findings.

It seems a favorite pastime of leaders in Washington is telling us — Americans — what we believe and what we want. Such assertions by politicians are sometimes true, but they inevitably reflect the policy the politician is attempting to promulgate.   So what do Americans actually believe when it comes to key defense and foreign policy issues? We don't have to guess, thanks to the Reagan National Defense Survey. The Washington Director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, Roger Zakheim, joins guest host Bradley Bowman to share the latest survey's findings.

In this episode, H.E. Vivian Motzfeldt, Minister for Statehood and Foreign Affairs, introduces Greenland's new Foreign, Security, and Defense Policy. Titled “Greenland in the World — Nothing About Us Without Us,” the strategy outlines Greenland's priorities, positions, needs, and concerns as an Arctic nation.The address is followed by a Q&A with the audience, moderated by Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, Chairman of Arctic Circle and former President of Iceland.This speech and discussion originally took place at the 2024 Arctic Circle Assembly.Arctic Circle is the largest network of international dialogue and cooperation on the future of the Arctic. It is an open democratic platform with participation from governments, organizations, corporations, universities, think tanks, environmental associations, Indigenous communities, concerned citizens, and others interested in the development of the Arctic and its consequences for the future of the globe. It is a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization. Learn more about Arctic Circle at www.ArcticCircle.org or contact us at secretariat@arcticcircle.orgTWITTER:@_Arctic_CircleFACEBOOK:The Arctic CircleINSTAGRAM:arctic_circle_org

On today's episode of Uncommon Sense with Ginny Robinson, we're joined with the incredible Justin (J Hans) from X. Justin is a 20 year military veteran, retired US Army First Sergeant, Bronze Star recipient, with five combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan as a Black Hawk helicopter crew chief. Now a prominent voice on social media, Justin delivers important political commentary and an invaluable perspective. Today, we're discussing the upcoming election, exploring the pressing issues shaping this presidential race—and we're also tackling the crisis of America's plummeting health and how we can (and will) head in a different direction to help the future of our people. — https://policecoffee.com/?srsltid=AfmBOorN9Z4DTToEjcK_mPWUkfmV6lL3XLBpMOA0TQNcOf5o632mk9rs— Follow Justin on X: https://x.com/blackhawkce457

Uploaded every Friday, Nikkei Asia News Roundup delivers a collection of articles from Nikkei's English language media, Nikkei Asia. ・A selection of news headlines ・A glimpse into a notable story for deeper understanding ・A discussion on a recent hot topic ・Today's discussion topic is: "Challenges in Japan's defense policy push" ・You can read more at: https://asia.nikkei.com/

In this episode of the ChinaPower podcast Meia Nouwens joins us to discuss the major themes and takeaways from the 2024 Shangri-La Dialogue. She discusses this year's record number of high-level participants and the significance of the dialogue for regional security. Nouwens unpacks both Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun's and U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin's speeches and analyzes what they can tell us about the current state of U.S.-China relations. Finally, Nouwens speaks to how China's participation and actions this year differed from previous years and what messages China may have been conveying regarding its approach to global security going forward. Meia Nouwens is a senior fellow for Chinese Security and Defense Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).  Her expertise lies in Chinese cross-service defense analysis, China's defense industry and innovation, as well as China's regional strategic affairs and international relations. She leads IISS research on China's Digital Silk Road and was a co-lead of the China Security Project with the Mercator Institute for China Studies. Prior to commencing at IISS, she worked for the European External Action Service as a policy officer in Taipei, and as a trade analyst in the EU's delegation to New Zealand. Meia holds a BA Hons in international relations and political science from Macquarie University, a master's in international relations and diplomacy from Leiden University in conjunction with the Clingendael Institute, and an MPhil in modern Chinese studies from the University of Oxford and Peking University.

OPINION: Setting our wrongheaded defense policy right | April 14, 2024Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein #TheManilaTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

AgendaIntroductory RemarksMike Gonzalez, Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum Senior Fellow, International Engagement, The Heritage FoundationFireside ChatThe Honorable Burgess Owens (R-UT), Member, U.S. House of RepresentativesEric Teetsel, Vice President, Government Relations, The Heritage Foundation (Moderator)Panel I: The Capture of Higher Education InstitutionsJay P. Greene, PhD, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Education Policy, The Heritage FoundationNicki Neily, President and Founder, Parents Defending EducationSarah Parshall Perry, Senior Legal Fellow, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage FoundationKristina Rasmussen, Executive Director, Do No HarmLindsey Burke, PhD, Director, Center for Education Policy, The Heritage Foundation (Moderator)Panel II: The Capture of Military InstitutionsEarl Matthews, Former Acting General Counsel, U.S. Army (Trump Administration), and Current Judge Advocate, U.S. Army ReserveAmber Smith, Former Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Outreach in Public Affairs and former Kiowa Warrior Pilot, U.S. ArmyWill Thibeau, Director of the American Military Project, The Claremont Institute, and former Infantry Officer, U.S. ArmyJV Venable, Senior Research Fellow, Defense Policy, Allison Center for National Security, The Heritage Foundation, and former Fighter Pilot and Commander of the Thunderbirds, U.S. Air Force (Moderator)Panel III: Donors, the Media, and Corporate AmericaAndy Olivastro, Chief Advancement Officer, The Heritage FoundationAaron Sibarium, Reporter, Washington Free BeaconArmen Tooloee, Chief of Staff of Christopher RufoJonathan Butcher, Senior Research Fellow in Education Policy, Center for Education Policy, The Heritage Foundation (Moderator)The successful campaign to oust the presidents of Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania has made clear that a window of opportunity has opened in the struggle against DEI and CRT. This window opened when Americans, especially those in the center, watched in horror as students – indoctrinated into a narrative of oppressor vs. oppressed – threw their support behind the Hamas terrorists who committed atrocities in Israel on October 7. We must keep this window open.Join us to hear from experts in national defense, medicine, and education, along with journalists uncovering DEI and CRT's capture of a wide range of institutions. From medical schools to the military and law schools to corporations, see how this pernicious ideology has made its way into every facet of American institutions and what can be done to reverse course.This half-day event will begin with a fireside chat between Congressman Burgess Owens and Heritage Vice President Eric Teetsel. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What does India's Agni-5 test really mean for its competition with China? What exactly are MIRVs and how do they affect the nuclear balance? Saurabh Todi and Aditya Ramanathan delve into the politics of atomic catastrophe. Do check out Takshashila's public policy courses: https://school.takshashila.org.in/courses We are @‌IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram. https://twitter.com/IVMPodcasts https://www.instagram.com/ivmpodcasts/?hl=en https://www.facebook.com/ivmpodcasts/ You can check out our website at https://shows.ivmpodcasts.com/featured Follow the show across platforms: Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, JioSaavn, Gaana, Amazon Music .Do share the word with your folksSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

One of the benefits of being located so close to Washington, D.C., is that the U.S. Army War College has access to some of the nation's most senior leaders. Most recently, the Honorable Melissa Dalton addressed the Homeland Defense Symposium in Carlisle and took time out of her busy schedule to join podcast editor Ron Granieri for an intriguing conversation. Sworn in as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs on March 4, 2022, Secretary Dalton currently performs the duties of Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. She shares how she found her way to the civil service and the challenges her office faces in pursuit of national defense priorities. Her portfolio includes Indo-Pacific Affairs, International Security Affairs, Space Policy, Special Operations Low-Intensity Conflict and Homeland Defense Hemispheric Affairs.

"Echoes of Valor: Episode 6 is here!  This is Part 1 of a two-part series, and listening to this, you'll find yourself at a crossroads where history and heroism intersect. Our host, Colonel Tom Rendall convenes a rare gathering of extraordinary minds and guides a fascinating discussion. In collaboration with The National Museum of the Mighty Eighth Air Force and The World War II Foundation, this episode introduces Dr. Mark Clodfelter, Professor Emeritus at The National War College, with his own firsthand Air Force experience. Dr. Clodfelter's academic contributions have illuminated our understanding of airpower history, strategy and tactics for decades.  We meet Lieutenant General Tim Fay (USAF, Ret.) whose remarkable career has bridged the operational and strategic dimensions of the Air Force, and his influence continues today. Throughout his career, commanding bombers in the skies and shaping policy in the Pentagon, General Fay offers an insider's view of the legacy of the 8th Air Force, and the evolution of air strategy and policy. Joining us, too, is Lieutenant General John Fairfield (USAF, Ret.),whose storied career in our Air Force spans combat missions in Vietnam to the development our nation's B2 Stealth Bomber. His anecdotes and reflections paint a vivid picture of airpower's transformation through the years. This dialogue offers more than just an account of the past; it's an incisive look into the legacy of the 100th Bomb Group, the advances in air combat technology, and a tribute to the courage and sacrifice of those who truly “mastered the skies” during World War II. Prepare for a fascinating deep dive into the history and heroism that “Masters of the Air” so vividly brings to the screen. Stay tuned for Part 2!  Coming up!   All of the above photos were contributed by World War II Foundation Chairman, Paul Clifford, from a “Masters of the Air” tour in which he participated in 2016.   #EchoesOfValor, #Military #Podcast, #Aviation #Strategy, #AirForce #Legacy, #Military #History, #AirPower, #Combat #Tactics, #Veteran #Insights, #Defense #Policy, #Strategy #Impact, #B2Bomber, #WWIIHistory, #Legends, #AirCombat #Evolution.  

Article 23 of India's constitution allows the union government to mandate conscription to secure the nation's interest and public well-being. There are various social as well as political arguments on why we should or should not enforce such conscription, but what would either option mean for India's contemporary security approach? Should the military focus on officers' quantity or quality, or on technological advancements instead? Tune in with Ananya Desai as she speaks to Aditya Ramanathan about the possibility of mandatory conscription in India's present context. Do check out Takshashila's public policy courses: https://school.takshashila.org.in/courses We are @‌IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram. https://twitter.com/IVMPodcasts https://www.instagram.com/ivmpodcasts/?hl=en https://www.facebook.com/ivmpodcasts/ You can check out our website at https://shows.ivmpodcasts.com/featured Follow the show across platforms: Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, JioSaavn, Gaana, Amazon Music Do share the word with your folks    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Flanigan's Eco-Logic, Ted speaks with Ahmad Faruqui, an energy economist whose distinguished career working with electric utilities encompasses expert rate design, demand response program structures, the integration of distributed energy resources into the grid, demand forecasting, decarbonization, electrification and energy efficiency, and load flexibility.In his career, Dr. Faruqui has advised some 150 clients in 12 countries on 5 continents and appeared before regulatory bodies, governments, and legislative councils. He has authored or coauthored more than 150 papers in peer-reviewed and trade journals and co-edited 5 books on industrial structural change, customer choice, and electricity pricing. He has taught economics at San Jose State University, the University of California, Davis, and the University of Karachi and delivered guest lectures at Carnegie Mellon, Harvard, Idaho, MIT, New York University, Northwestern, Rutgers, Stanford, UC Berkeley, and UC Davis.He and Ted discuss his background, born and raised in Pakistan post partition, studied Economics and went into Civil Service before moving to the US and attending UC Davis for his PHD, which led to work in forecasting for the California Energy Commission. While working in energy, Dr. Faruqui still remained very engaged with defense policy in his home country, becoming the leading voice in mainstream conversations about Pakistan in the US post 9/11. He has carried out in-depth analyses of Pakistan's defense policies, evaluating the multiple dimensions of national security, the combat effectiveness of armies, and the consequences of spending more on the military dimension and less on the social, cultural and economic dimensions of national security.He shares his journey in the energy world, highlighting the Demand and Conservation Program at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), as well as his consulting works at The Brattle Group. He also shares the more contentious parts of the journey, seeing the utility industry go from basic rate structures to more sophisticated rates, leading to the question of what rates do in the ideal that help society, and diving into the net energy metering / net billing issue. He concludes by sharing the energy efficiency improvements he's made in his home over the years, including changing HVAC equipment, installing rooftop solar, adding battery for backup during outages, and buying an EV, all leading to bill savings and happiness as a result.

The US Space Force, the newest branch of the American military, takes national defense to a new frontier. Here on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I sit down with AEI senior fellow Todd Harrison to discuss the state of the Space Force and its evolving mission.Harrison has served as senior vice president and head of research at Metrea, a defense consulting firm, been a senior fellow for defense budget strategies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, directed the Defense Budget Analysis and Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and served as a captain in the US Air Force Reserve.In This Episode* Creating the Space Force (0:53)* A New Kind of Warfare (9:15)* Defining the Mission (11:40)* Conflict and Competition in Space (15:34)* The Danger of Space Debris (20:11)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationCreating the Space Force (0:53)Pethokoukis: I was recently looking at an image that showed the increase in the number of satellites around the earth, and it's been a massive increase; I imagine a lot of it has to do with SpaceX putting up satellites, and it's really almost like—I think to an extent that most people don't understand; between  government, military, and a lot of commercial satellites—it's really like the earth is surrounded by this information shell. And when looking at that, I couldn't help but think, “Yeah, it kind of seems like we would need a Space Force or something to keep an eye on that and protect that.” And I know there was a lot of controversy, if I'm not mistaken, like, “Why do we need this extra branch of government?” Is that controversy about why we need a Space Force, is that still an active issue and what are your thoughts?Harrison: To start with where you started, yes. The number of satellites in space has been growing literally exponentially in the past few years. I'll just throw a few numbers out there:  In 2023 alone, about 2,800 new satellites were launched, and in that one year it increased the total number of satellites on the orbit by 22 percent, just in one year. And all the projections are that the number of satellites, number of launches, are going to keep growing at a pace like that for the foreseeable future, for the next several years. A lot is going into space, and we know from all other domains that where commerce goes conflict will follow. And we are seeing that in space as well.Like the Navy protecting the shipping lanes. Yeah, exactly. So we know that to a certain extent that's inevitable. There will be points of contention, points of conflict, but we've already seen that in space just with the military dimension of our space. Back in 2007, I think a lot of the world woke up to the fact that space is a contested environment when the Chinese tested an anti-satellite weapon, which, by the way, produced thousands of pieces of space debris that are still in orbit today. More than 2,600 pieces of debris are still in orbit from that one Chinese ASAT test. And, of course, that was just one demonstration of counter-space capabilities. Space has been a contested war fighting domain, really, since the beginning of the Space Age. The first anti-satellite test was in 1959, and so it has become increasingly important for economic reasons, but also for military reasons. Now, when the Space Force debate kicked into high gear, I think it took a lot of people who weren't involved in military space, I think it took a lot of people by surprise that we were having this debate.Yeah, it really seemed like it came out of nowhere, I think probably for 99 percent of people who aren't professionals tracking the issue.In reality, that debate, it started in the 1990s, and there was a senator from up in New Hampshire who had written a journal article basically talking about, “Hey, we need to separate space into its own military service.” You had the Air Force chief of staff at the time in the mid-1990s, General Ron Fogleman. He said that the Air Force should eventually become an Air and Space Force, and then one day a Space and Air Force. So you had the seeds of it happening in the '90s. Then you had Congress wanting to look at, “Okay, how do we do this? How do we reorganize military space?” They created a commission that was led by Donald Rumsfeld before he became Secretary of Defense for the second time. That commission issued its report in 2001, and it recommended a bunch of reforms, but it said in the midterm, in five to 10 years we should create a separate military service for space, something like a Space Corps.Nothing happened, even though Rumsfeld then became Secretary of Defense. We kind of took our focus off of it for a while, there were a few other studies that went on, and then in 2016, two members of Congress, a Republican and a Democrat, Mike Rogers and Jim Cooper, who were on the House Armed Services Committee, they took this issue up. They got so fed up with the oversight of looking at how the Air Force was shortchanging space in many ways in terms of personnel and training and funding and modernization, that they then put a provision into the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act that would've created a Space Corps, they called it: a separate military service for space. And that bill actually passed the full House of Representatives.The Senate did not have a similar provision in their bill, so it died. It didn't make it into law—but then, all of a sudden, a couple of years later, President Trump, pretty much out of the blue floats this idea of creating a Space Force, and he did it at a rally that was at a Marine Corps base out in California, and, for some reason, it caught on with Trump. And then you already had the votes, a bipartisan group in the House of Representatives who had already pushed this, and so it started to gain momentum.It was very controversial at the time. The secretary of the Air Force at that time was adamantly opposed to it. Eventually, Trump forced it on the civilian establishment at DoD, and Congress ultimately enacted it, and the Space Force became a military service in December… I think December 20th, 2019. Now, there was some question, will the Biden administration keep it?Is this here to stay?It is written into law, so a president cannot unilaterally take it away, and, at this point, it's got its own roots in the ground and the Space Force is not going anywhere.A little bit off topic, but was there a similar debate when they separated the Air Force out of the Army?There was, yeah, and it lasted for a long time. So you had folks like Billy Mitchell who were in the Army Air Corps way back before World War II—I think in the late '20s, early '30s—they were advocating for a separate military service for Air. And I believe Billy Mitchell actually got court marshaled because he disobeyed orders from a superior about advocating for this with Congress.And so the idea of a separate service for Air pretty much died out until World War II hit. And, of course, that was a war that we were brought into it by an attack that came from the air, and that really brought air power into full effect in terms of a major component of military power. So then, at the end of World War II, the Air Power advocates got together, they created the Air Force Association to advocate for a separate military service and they got it in the National Security Reform Act in 1947, I think the Air Force actually stood up in 1948.It took longer, I would argue, a lot more advocacy and it took a World War, a crisis, to show us how important Air was to the military in order for us to actually create an Air Force. Now, I think, thankfully, we did that in advance of a crisis in terms of creating the Space Force.Right now, what the Space Force does, is it tracking satellites, tracking and space debris, is it a monitoring and tracking service? It's not a fighting service yet?Well, yes and no. A lot of what the Space Force does on a day-to-day basis is they provide space-enabling capabilities to the other military services. So if you want to get intelligence, reconnaissance, surveillance from space, you can go to the Space Force. Separately, we have intel space that's run through the National Reconnaissance Office—that has not changed its organization. If you want to get GPS, the Space Force runs our GPS constellation of satellites, and they're responsible for defending it against all forms of attack, which it is attacked daily. If you want satellite communications, the Space Force delivers that. If you want missile warning… So the Space Force delivers lots of enabling capabilities for other parts of the military. At the same time, it is tasked with defending those capabilities, and it's not just against kinetic forms of attack where an adversary is literally trying to shoot a satellite out of the sky.A New Kind of Warfare (9:15)I guess that's the first thing that popped in my mind. Too much science fiction maybe, but…Well, that is real, that's a real threat. The truth is there's not a lot you can do to actively protect against that—at least, we don't have a lot of capabilities right now—but the forms of attack we see on a daily basis are cyber, electromagnetic, and other forms of non-kinetic attack like lazing the sensors on a satellite. You could temporarily, or even permanently, blind the sensors on a satellite with a laser from an aircraft or from a ground station.I'll give you an example: When Russia invaded Ukraine, at the very beginning of the invasion, one of the first attacks they launched was a space attack. It was cyber, and it was against a commercial space capability. What they did is they exploited a vulnerability, previously unknown, in ViaSat modems. ViaSat's, a commercial satellite communications company, they had some sort of a vulnerability in their modems. The Russians, through a cyber attack, basically bricked all those modems. They locked them out. The Ukrainian military relied on ViaSat for satellite communications, so it locked up all of their terminals right at the beginning. They could not communicate using Satcom. Incidentally, it locked up lots of ViaSat terminals across Europe in that same attack. So we see this happening all the time. Russian forces are constantly jamming GPS signals. That makes weapons and drones much less effective. They can't use GPS for targeting once they go into a GPS-denied environment.But the Space Force has ways to overcome that. We have protected military GPS signals, we have ways of increasing the strength of those signals to overcome jamming. There's lots of things you can do with counter-space and then counter to the counter-space.The problem is that we kind of sat on our laurels and admired our advantage in space for a couple of decades and did not make a concerted effort to improve the protection of our space systems and develop our own capability to deny others the advantage of space because others didn't have that same advantage for a long time.Well, that has changed, and the creation of the Space Force, I think, has really set us in a positive new direction to get serious about space defense and to get serious about denying others the advantage of space if we need to.Defining the Mission (11:40)The Chief of Space Operation at the Space Force recently published a short white paper, which I guess begins to lay out kind of a doctrine, like, “What is the mission? How do we accomplish this mission?” Probably the first sort of Big Think piece maybe since Space Force became a branch. What did that white paper say? What do you make of it?Yeah, so I think one of the criticisms of military space for a while has been that we didn't really have space strategy, space doctrine, we didn't have a theory of space power that was well developed. I would argue we had some of those, but it's fair to say that they have not been that well developed. Well, one of the reasons you need a military service is to actually get the expertise that is dedicated to this domain to think through those things and really develop them and flesh them out, and so that's what this white paper did, and I think it did a pretty good job of it, developing a theory of space power. He calls it a “theory of success for competitive endurance in the space domain.”And one of the things I thought was really great that they highlight in the paper, that a lot of US government officials in the past have been reluctant to talk about, is the fact that we are under attack on a daily basis—gray zone-type aggression in the space domain—and we've got to start pushing back against that. And we've got to actually be willing and able to exercise our own defensive and counter-space capabilities, even in the competition phase before we actually get to overt conflict, because our adversaries are doing it already. They're doing it to us. We need to be able to brush them back. We're not talking about escalating and starting a conflict or anything like that, but when someone jams our satellite communication systems or GPS, they need to feel some consequences. Maybe something similar happens to their own space capabilities, or maybe we employ capabilities that show them we can overcome what you're doing. So I thought that was a good part of the theory of success is you can't just sit by and let an adversary degrade your space capabilities in the competition phase.How much of the focus of Space Force currently, and maybe as that paper discussed what the department's mission is, focused on the military capabilities, protecting military capabilities, the military capabilities of other nations, versus what you mentioned earlier was this really expanding commercial element which is only going to grow in importance?Today, the vast majority of the Space Force's focus is on the military side of providing that enabling military capability that makes all of our forces more effective, protecting that capability, and then, to a lesser extent, being able to interfere with our adversaries' ability to use space for their own advantage.They are just now starting to really grapple with, “Okay, is there a role for the Space Force in protecting space commerce, protecting commercial space capabilities that may be economically important, that may be strategically important to us and our allies, but are not directly part of a military capability?” They're starting to think through that now, and it really is the Space Force taking on a role in the future that is more like the Navy. The Navy does fight and win wars, of course, but the Navy also has a role in patrolling the seas and ensuring the free flow of commerce like we see the US Navy doing right now over in the Red Sea: They're helping protect ships that need to transit through that area when Houthi Rebels are targeting them. Do we need that kind of capability and space? Yeah, I think we do. It is not a huge priority now, but it is going to be a growing priority in the future.Conflict and Competition in Space (15:34)I don't know if such things even currently exist, but if you have satellites that can kill other satellites, do those exist and does the Space Force run them?Satellites that can kill other satellites, absolutely. That is a thing that exists. A lot of stuff is kept classified. What we know that's unclassified is, back in the 1960s and early '70s, the Soviets conducted many tests—a couple of dozen tests—of what they call a co-orbital anti-satellite system, that is a satellite that can kill another satellite, and there's still debris in space from some of those tests back in the '60s and '70s.We also know, unclassified, that China and Russia have on-orbit systems that appear to be able to rendezvous with other satellites, get very close. We've seen the Russians deploy a satellite that appeared to fire a projectile at another Russian satellite—looks like a test of some sort of a co-orbital weapon. So yes, those capabilities are out there. They do exist. We've never seen a capability like that used in conflict, though, not yet, but we know they existLooking forward a decade… One can imagine a lot more satellites, multiple space platforms, maybe some run by the private sector, maybe others not. One could imagine permanent or semi-permanent installations on the moon from different countries. Are plans being made to protect those things, and would the Space Force be the one protecting them? If you have a conflict between the Chinese military installation on the moon and the American, would that be in the Space Force domain? Again, it seems like science fiction, but I don't think it's going to seem like science fiction before too long.Well, that's right. We're not at that point today, but are we going to be at that point in 10, 20, 30 years? Perhaps. There are folks in the Space Force, like in the chief scientist's office that have thought about these things; they publish some papers on it. There's no real effort going into that right now other than thinking about it from an academic perspective. Should that be in the mandate of the Space Force? Well, I think it already is, it's just there's not a need for it yet, and so it's something to keep an eye on.Now, there are some rules, if you will, international agreements that would suggest, “Okay, some of these things should not happen.” Doesn't mean they won't; but, for example, the main treaty that governs how nations operate in space is the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. The Outer Space Treaty specifically says that you can't claim territory in space or on any celestial body like the moon or Mars, and it specifically says you cannot put a military installation on any celestial body.So, should China put a military base on the moon, they would be clearly violating the Outer Space Treaty. If China puts a scientific installation that happens to have some military capabilities on it, but they don't call it that, well, you know, what are we going to do? Are we going to call them before the United Nations and complain? Or if China says, “Hey, we've put a military installation in this key part of the lunar South Pole where we all believe that there is ice water, and if anyone tries to land anywhere near us, you're going to interfere with our operations, you might kick up dust on us, so we are establishing a keep-out zone of some very large area around this installation.”I think that there are some concerns that we could be headed in that direction, and that's one of the reasons NASA is pushing forward with the Artemis program to return humans to the moon and a set of international agreements called the Artemis Accords, where we've gotten, I think, more than 20 nations now to agree to a way of operating in the lunar environment and, to a certain extent, in Earth orbit as well, which will help make sure that the norms that develop in space, especially in deep space operating on the moon, are norms that are conducive to free and open societies and free markets. And so I give credit to former NASA administrator, Jim Breidenstein and the Trump administration; he came up with the Artemis Accords. I think it was wonderful. I would love to see us go even further, but NASA is still pursuing that and still signing up more countries to the Artemis Accords, and when they sign up to that, they can be part of our effort to go back to moon and the Artemis program, and right now we are on track to get there and put humans back on the moon before China. I just hope we keep it that way.The Danger of Space Debris (20:11)Let me finish up with a question based on something you've mentioned several times during our conversation, which is space debris and space junk. I see more and more articles about the concerns. How concerned are you about this? How should I think about that issue?Yeah, it is a concern, and, I mean, the physics of the space domain are just fundamentally different than what we see in other domains. So, in space, depending on what orbit you're in, if something breaks up into pieces, those pieces keep orbiting Earth indefinitely. If you are below about 600 kilometers, those pieces of debris, there's a tiny amount of atmospheric drag, and, depending on your mass and your surface area and solar weather and stuff, eventually things 600 kilometers and below are going to reenter the Earth atmosphere and burn up in weeks, months, years.Once you get above about 600 kilometers, things start staying up there much longer. And when you get out to geostationary orbit, which is 36,000 kilometers above the surface of the earth, those things aren't coming down, ever, not on their own. They're staying up there. So the problem is, imagine every time there was a shipwreck, or a car wreck, or a plane crash, that all of the debris kept moving around the earth forever. Eventually it adds up. And space, it's a very large volume, yes, but this stuff is whizzing by, if you're in low-earth orbit, you're going around 17,000 miles per hour constantly. And so you've got close approach after close approach, day after day, and then you run the risk of debris hitting debris, or debris hitting other satellites, and then creating more debris, and then increasing the odds that this happens again and again, the movie Gravity gave a dramatic effect to this.I was thinking about that scene as you're explaining this.Yeah. The timeline was very compressed in that movie, but something like that, the Kessler Syndrome, is theoretically possible in the space domain, so we do have to watch out for it. Debris is collecting, particularly in low Earth orbit above 600 kilometers, and ASAT tests are not helpful at all to that. So one of the things the Biden administration did is they instituted a unilateral moratorium on antisatellite testing by the United States. Well, it's easy for us to do. We didn't need to do any anti-satellite tests anymore because we already know we can do that. We have effective capabilities and we wouldn't want to use kinetic anti-satellite attacks anyway, 'cause it would hurt our own systems.We have been going around trying to get other countries to sign up to that as well, to a moratorium on ASAT testing. It's a good first step, but really you need Russia and China. They need to sign up to not do that anymore. And India, India conducted a kinetic ASAT test back in, I think, 2019. So those are the countries we really need to get on board with that.But there's a lot of accidental debris production that happens as well. When countries leave a spent rocket body up in orbit and then something happens. You know, a lot of times they leave their fuel tanks pressurized or they leave batteries on there, after five, 10 years in orbit, sometimes these things explode randomly, and then that creates a debris field. So there's more that we can do to kind of reach international agreements about just being smart stewards of the space domain. There are companies out there that are trying to work on technologies to clean up space debris. It's very hard. That is not something that's on the immediate horizon, but those are all efforts that should be ongoing. It is something to be concerned about.And actually, to circle back to the chief of space operations and his theory of success in his white paper, that's one of the tensions that he highlights in there, is that we want to use space for military advantage, including being able to deny other countries the ability to use space. But at the same time, we want to be good stewards of the space domain and so there's an inherent tension in between those two objectives, and that's the needle that the Space Force is trying to thread.I have one final question, and you may have no answer for it: If we were to track a large space object headed toward Earth, whose job would it be to stop it?So it would be NASA's job to spot it, to find objects like near-Earth orbit asteroids. Whose job is it to stop it? I think we would be figuring that out on the fly. First of all, we would have to figure out, can we stop it? Is there a way to stop it? And it would probably require some sort of an international effort, because we all have a common stake in that, but yeah, it is not in anyone's job jar.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

China has accused the United States of interfering in its internal affairs.

This week Congress passed the annual defense spending bill, known as the NDAA. Utah's federal delegation was divided on the bill, because it extended Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. The program allows the government to spy on Americans through wiretaps. Congresswoman Celeste Maloy voted for the bill and joins to discuss why it's important to keep those two issues separate.

This week, Congress will begin debating and voting on the annual National Defense Authorization Act. As part of this bill... some lawmakers are hoping to reform FISA, which gives the government surveillance powers. James Czerniawski from Americans for Prosperity breaks down what's at stake and why efforts to expand FISA would result in more FBI abuses. 

Early next month, the European Union and China are set to hold the 24th bilateral summit. The last EU-China summit was held via video conference in April 2022. It took place against the background of China's countermeasures to EU sanctions on human rights, Chinese economic coercion and trade measures against the single market, and most importantly, Russia's military aggression against Ukraine and Beijing's unwillingness to condemn the invasion. Earlier this year, the European Council reaffirmed the EU's multifaceted policy approach towards China, which is based on the judgment that China is simultaneously a partner, a competitor, and a systemic rival. However, that balancing act is getting more and more difficult.Host Bonnie Glaser is joined by Mr. Gunnar Wiegand, who has recently retired from the post of Managing Director for Asia and the Pacific at the European External Action Service, which he held for 7 ½ years. He is now a visiting professor at the College of Europe and the Paris School of International Affairs, and as of November 1, 2023, he has joined GMF's Indo-Pacific program as a visiting distinguished fellow.  Timestamps[01:39] EU-China Relations on the Eve of the 24th Bilateral Summit[05:13] Impact of the War in Ukraine on EU-China Relations[07:29] How could China alleviate concerns in Europe? [09:33] De-risking in the European Union[15:27] Proportionate and Precise Economic Security[18:27] How similar are EU and US perceptions of China?[22:13] The EU's Stance on Taiwan[26:19] How can EU contribute to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait?[27:21] Outcomes of the Biden-Xi Summit

Robert J. Peters is a Senior Fellow for Nuclear Deterrence and Missile Defense, The Heritage Foundation. He was previously the Chief within the Strategic Integration Directorate of the Strategic Trends and Effects Department (STED) at the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. STED's mission is to generate timely, credible, and actionable insights into threats within the counter-WMD and counter-emerging threat mission space and to assess the effectiveness of Agency efforts to support the Joint Warfighter. STED also sponsors a strategic dialogues program with allies and partners, table top exercises, and a number of research efforts. Prior to joining DTRA, Mr. Peters served as a Senior Research Fellow at National Defense University's Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction.From March-November 2009, Mr. Peters was detailed to the Office of the Secretary of Defense-Policy as SpecialAssistant to the DASD for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction. Prior to joining National Defense University, Mr. Peters worked as a Technical Analyst for the Northrop Grumman Corp., and as a Research Associate for the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.Mr. Peters received an MA from Georgetown University in National Security Studies and a BA in Political Science and History from Miami University. His publications include: "Deterrence in the 21st Century: Integrating Nuclear and Conventional Force;" in Strategic Studies Quarterly; “A New Approach to Eliminating North Korean Weapons of Mass Destruction is Needed;” at 38north.com; and “The WMD Challenges Posed by a Collapse of North Korea,” in the Nonproliferation Review.EPISODE NOTES:Follow NucleCast on Twitter at @NucleCastEmail comments and story suggestions to NucleCast@anwadeter.orgSubscribe to NucleCast podcastRate the show

In this episode of our podcast, Host Jeff Crank explores the unique blend of leadership and service embodied by Senator Dan Sullivan. A distinguished military officer and a prominent policymaker, Senator Sullivan offers a rare perspective on national defense and security, shaped by his ongoing service as a Colonel in the Marine Corps Reserves. This conversation delves into his insights on legislative initiatives, security challenges, and the strategic importance of the Arctic region. Senator Sullivan's dual role as a military officer and senator provides a nuanced understanding of the interplay between military and civilian spheres in shaping America's strategic interests.    Join us for an engaging discussion that highlights the intersection of military service and governance in the career of one of the nation's most dynamic policymakers.   Check out American Potential here: https://americanpotential.com   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AmericanPotentialPodcast   Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/americanpotentialpodcast/   X: https://twitter.com/AMPotentialPod

Hour 3: Matt O'Leary, board member of Citizens for a Greater Downtown St. Louis joins Mark Reardon to discuss the city's homeless bills and how they could perpetuate failed policies. Then, John Venable, a 25-year veteran of the US Air Force, now a Senior Research Fellow for Defense Policy at the Heritage Foundation, shared his take on Israel. Later, Mark brings you the Audio Cut of the Day.

In this special episode, recorded on the sidelines of ASPI's annual conference ‘Disruption and Deterrence', David Wroe speaks with Kori Schake. As well as being Director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute, Kori is a contributing writer for The Atlantic and a regular on the popular Deep State Radio podcast. David and Kori talk about the future of the international order, the state of American politics — from the perspective of a lapsed Republican — and Kori's irrepressible optimism about the future of democracy and open economies. Guests: David Wroe: https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/david-wroe Kori Schake: https://www.aei.org/profile/kori-schake/ Music: "Think Different" by Scott Holmes, licensed with permission from the Independent Music Licensing Collective - imlcollective.uk

New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart join Geoff Bennett to discuss the week in politics, including President Biden's trip abroad for the NATO summit, the GOP's defense policy and the 2024 campaign. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart join Geoff Bennett to discuss the week in politics, including President Biden's trip abroad for the NATO summit, the GOP's defense policy and the 2024 campaign. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Kori Schake is the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute. She has also worked in policy positions at the State Department, the Defense Department and the White House, taught at West Point, and more recently, served on the commission tasked with renaming military bases named for confederate figures. She sat down with Lawfare's editor in chief Ben Wittes, to talk about her unusually diverse career in national security, her work at AEI in a period when principled conservatism isn't popular, and about the recent NATO summit.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kori Schake is the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy at the American Enterprise Institute. She has also worked in policy positions at the State Department, the Defense Department and the White House, taught at West Point, and more recently, served on the commission tasked with renaming military bases named for confederate figures. She sat down with Lawfare's editor in chief Ben Wittes, to talk about her unusually diverse career in national security, her work at AEI in a period when principled conservatism isn't popular, and about the recent NATO summit. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.