The National Interest

Rachel Bucchino

Donald Trump 2024, Americas

Donald Trump was suspended from Facebook and banned from Twitter after the riot at the U.S. Capitol building in January, which is when the former president is believed to have incited violence among his followers.

If former President Donald Trump decides to pursue the White House for a third time in 2024, then he’ll likely have to launch a presidential campaign without access to his digital sidekicks—Facebook and Twitter. 

Facebook’s oversight board ruled last week that Trump would remain suspended from the platform for the foreseeable future and executives are reportedly mulling over whether to make the measure on the former president permanent.  

But Twitter took it one step further. The company’s chief financial officer, Ned Segal, confirmed to CNBC in February that Trump is officially banned from Twitter. 

“The way our policies work, when you’re removed from the platform, you’re removed from the platform whether you are a commentator, a CFO, or you are a former or public official,” Segal said. 

The rulings by the major social media platforms puts the Republican Party’s kingpin in a tough spot to reach voters in 2024—a reality that already has GOP lawmakers and operatives feeling “panicked.” And Trump, who still holds an iron-like grip over the party for his commitment to shifting both congressional chambers red in the 2022 midterm elections, would have to ignite a potential White House run without access to Facebook’s massive fundraising abilities.

“This is a huge decision, makes it infinitely harder for him to raise money,” a source close to Trump told Politico. “Facebook was the main way he raised money. He’s now going to have to spend far more in the future to find other ways to raise money. . . . It was the main way he found donors.” 

But the former president’s immediate response to the news didn’t indicate that he was concerned over the financial implications of being banned or temporarily suspended, though he did appear fearful over how he could rally support from voters without the ability to digitally communicate with them.  

While Trump and other GOP lawmakers have expressed concern over the former president being blacklisted from Twitter and potentially Facebook, some Republicans said that Trump still has vast financial and political resources even without access to the two biggest social media platforms. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich argued that the Facebook ruling would allow Trump to be seen as a tech “martyr.” 

And some GOP groups, like the National Republican Senatorial Committee, have already taken advantage of the news, as the group launched a Facebook ad with the headline, “Big Tech Is Out Of Control.” The ad upholds Trump’s significance over the party, while also attempting to reach voters and draw in donors on a platform that the former president has no access to. 

But with a rumored presidential primary playing field that has nearly a dozen GOP candidates, the social media ban and suspension could be damaging to Trump’s potential 2024 White House bid. 

“It makes it more difficult for him and it gives everyone from Tim Scott to Nikki Haley to Mike Pompeo to Ted Cruz the ability to go out and begin to win over the Trump donors and voters that exist in a vacuum that Trump is not filling,” a top GOP operative told Politico. 

Trump’s suspension from Facebook and Twitter ban came after the Capitol riots in January, which is when the former president was pressed for his involvement in inciting the violence among his MAGA following.

Trump has been looking into launching his own social media platform or using alternative outlets to connect virtually with voters, but the Trump operation has not committed to one publicly. A source close to Trump said the team was depending on getting back onto Facebook to reach his following. 

Prior to the decisions by the social media giants, Trump held the third-largest political following on Facebook with over 32 million followers and nearly 88.7 million followers on Twitter. 

Rachel Bucchino is a reporter at the National Interest. Her work has appeared in The Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report and The Hill. 

Image: Reuters.

Peter Suciu

Taxes, Americas

For those who know they owe money, a better solution is to file and set up a payment plan, make an “offer in compromise” or even request a temporary collection delay.

Sometimes you just can't meet deadlines, including the one for the federal income tax. While the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has already extended the normal deadline from April 15 to May 17, some people will still need a bit more time. This year you can file for an extension request using IRS Form 4868, which gives you additional time to file your personal tax return.

There are several pros and cons to consider.

In most cases, the extension request will be honored automatically and you don't even have to explain a reason with the IRS for why you need an extension. Instead, just fill out the form—but be sure to double-check important details such as Social Security number and other data. It is erroneous information that results in the rare extension rejection.

By filing for an extension you'll have until Oct. 15 to file your return. This will give those who have been unable to prepare their tax return a little extra breathing room. When it comes to taxes it is always better to be correct and accurate than early.

So if you've suffered an illness, been in an accident or had to deal with lost records from a computer crash it can be best to file an extension to reduce the need to rush. You can also avoid any late filing fees by filing an extension. Victims of some winter storms in the south have already had their filings extended—and that includes residents in Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas.

However, the extra time doesn't always work for some people and just causes more time to stress, and if you're waiting for a return, it won't come until after you file. If you need the money, then you need to file as soon as you can.

Likewise, if you know that you owe, filing an extension is certainly not going to make the problem go away and even delaying it won't help the situation. The extension is only for filing your tax return, not for paying the taxes you owe. If you fail to pay by the original deadline, the IRS will charge you interest on the unpaid balance and can even add-on penalties for paying late.

For those who know they owe money, a better solution is to file and set up a payment plan, make an “offer in compromise” or even request a temporary collection delay.

“An extension of time to file your return does not grant you any extension of time to pay your taxes, according to the IRS. “You should estimate and pay any owed taxes by your regular deadline to help avoid possible penalties. You must file your extension request no later than the regular due date of your return.”

However, the IRS has provided a “Free File” to electronically request an automatic tax-filing extension, which gives you until Oct. 15 to file a return. To receive the extension, you will need to estimate your tax liability on the form and also pay any amount due.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Image: Reuters

Stephen Silver

Gas Price Spike,

Earlier this week, following the cyberattack on the Colonial Pipeline, exports worked that spikes in gas prices could be on the way. Now, it appears that’s exactly what has happened.

Earlier this week, following the cyberattack on the Colonial Pipeline, experts warned that spikes in gas prices could be on the way. Now, it appears that’s exactly what has happened.

Per WSB, the prices have already begun to rise in the Atlanta area, frustrating local motorists. Florida, per WJCT, also saw gas prices rise 10 cents in just a week. And the Lexington Herald Leader reported that the Lexington, Kentucky, area, had posted the second-largest gas price increase in the United States. North Carolina has declared a state of emergency related to the gas issue.

Once the ransomware attack shut down the Colonial Pipeline, which experts described as the nation’s most important, experts declared that disruption of supply, and ultimately higher gas prices, was likely in the near future unless the pipeline was back online quickly. Also, it was expected that the Southeast would see prices rise first.

“At this time, our primary focus is the safe and efficient restoration of our service and our efforts to return to normal operation,” Colonial Pipeline said in a statement immediately following the recognition of the attack.

“This process is already underway, and we are working diligently to address this matter and to minimize disruption to our customers and those who rely on Colonial Pipeline.”

The Russian ransomware group known as Darkside has claimed responsibility for the hack, while claiming their only motivation is money and that they are not political actors. The FBI also considers them responsible for the attack.

“Our goal is to make money, and not creating problems for society. From today we introduce moderation and check each company that our partners want to encrypt to avoid social consequences in the future,” the group said on its website, according to NBC News.

Until now, gasoline had stayed below an average price of $3 a gallon for most of the year so far.

The White House, Tuesday night, released a fact sheet touting what it called “an All-of-Government Effort to Address Colonial Pipeline Incident.”

“The Administration is focused on avoiding potential energy supply disruptions to impacted communities, the U.S. military, and other facilities reliant on gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other refined petroleum products. The Administration is continually assessing the pipeline shutdown’s impact on the U.S. fuel supply, as well as what additional actions are available to mitigate the impact of the pipeline’s shutdown,” the White House said.

That has included the establishment of an interagency response group, while also establishing “a targeted, one-week waiver allowing multiple states to temporarily use noncompliant fuel in an effort to boost available supply.” The White House also vowed to secure “critical infrastructure,” in the wake of the ransomware attack.

Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philly Voice, Philadelphia Weekly, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Living Life Fearless, Backstage magazine, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver.

Ethen Kim Lieser

Stimulus Theft,

Amid the ongoing pandemic, it appears that greed and desperation are pushing people to steal—even from highly vulnerable senior citizens.

Amid the ongoing pandemic, it appears that greed and desperation are pushing people to steal—even from highly vulnerable senior citizens.

Two people in Ohio are facing charges after police say they stole a home and other funds, including a coronavirus stimulus check, from an elderly woman. They are accused of deceiving the victim into signing over a quitclaim deed to her residence and then placing her into a nursing home.

According to the mortgage lending company Quicken Loans, a “quitclaim deed can be one of the simplest methods of transferring a property to a new owner. In other words, the property owner (also known as the grantor) can offer this type of deed and transfer the entire interest in the property to the recipient, or the grantee. Generally, no money is involved in this transaction, there’s no need for title insurance and no title search is conducted to verify the property owner.”

Throughout the disbursement of three rounds of stimulus funds, these types of criminal activities have occurred regularly. In a more extreme example, an Indianapolis man in March fatally shot four people after he and his girlfriend argued because he wanted a share of her stimulus payment, according to a court document.

Although there might be that temptation to try to deposit a stimulus check that is under a different name, the law office of Stechschulte Nell says that one should always be aware of the consequences.

“If you have tried to deposit a dead or fraudulent COVID-19 stimulus check you may be charged with a federal crime such as bank fraud, mail fraud, or wire fraud. All of these are serious crimes, with long sentences of imprisonment or large fines,” writes the law office.

“In some cases people have been defrauded of their stimulus check, and when they try to deposit what they think is their real money, they may find that they have been a victim of a scam. Even though they are the victim, they may nonetheless be charged with a crime. Regardless of why you have been charged with fraud, you need to contact an attorney as soon as possible,” it added.

Stechschulte Nell added that sizeable fines and even possible imprisonment that could span decades await those who commit check fraud.

“There are serious consequences for committing check fraud. This can include a fine of up to $1 million, or you can be imprisoned for up to thirty years (or both),” it said.

“If you have been charged with depositing a dead or fraudulent COVID-19 stimulus check, this may be one of the charges you are faced with.”

Ethen Kim Lieser is a Minneapolis-based Science and Tech Editor who has held posts at Google, The Korea Herald, Lincoln Journal Star, AsianWeek, and Arirang TV. Follow or contact him on LinkedIn.

Eli Fuhrman

Tax Refund, Stimulus Payments,

The IRS is facing a major backlog of unprocessed tax returns as it struggles to manage a number of demanding tasks.

Here's What You Need to Remember: Contributing to IRS delays is the agency’s role in distributing the third-round of direct federal stimulus payments. To date, the IRS has sent out 164 million payments worth $386 billion.

The IRS is facing a major backlog of unprocessed tax returns as it struggles to manage a number of demanding tasks. In addition to processing recently filed 2020 tax returns, the IRS also finds itself faced with unprocessed 2019 tax returns and the added mission of distributing the third-round of direct federal stimulus payments. The result has been a delay for many people in receiving their 2020 tax refunds.

This year’s tax season is proving to be particularly daunting for the IRS. The IRS is now reportedly in possession of nearly 31 million returns for manual processing ahead of the May 17 tax deadline, an increase of 2 million from just a few weeks ago in mid-April. The problem will likely get worse, with 121 million returns filled out so far out of the expected total of 160 million.

Part of the problem that the IRS is facing is that it is still working through some returns from last year. The IRS is still working through some 2.4 million unprocessed 2019 tax returns. These returns remain unprocessed because of the IRS’ three-month shut down of its tax processing centers last spring as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The IRS has been playing catch up ever since, and was further hindered by the fact that even after they reopened, many tax processing centers were not operating at full capacity because of social distancing requirements. The IRS is also processing returns at a slower rate this year, with the number of returns processed down 16%.

But it is not just last year’s returns that are tripping up the IRS. This year’s returns are particularly significant, with a number of valuable COVID-relief measures tied to 2020 tax returns. Working through these added credits and rebates and determining eligibility for them is likely contributing to delays, with two measures in particular causing a slowdown. Both the recovery rebate credit and the earned income tax credit require extra verification of information, which means it will take the IRS longer to process returns in which people are claiming on or both credits. The recovery rebate credit allows people who did not receive all the money they were eligible for during the first two rounds of stimulus payments to claim the money on their 2020 tax return, while the earned income tax credit is designed to benefit people with lower incomes.

Also contributing to IRS delays is the agency’s role in distributing the third-round of direct federal stimulus payments. To date, the IRS has sent out 164 million payments worth $386 billion. Many of the payments that still need to be made are to those people eligible for what the IRS calls “plus-up” payments, or supplemental payments sent to people whose 2020 tax returns indicate that they are eligible for larger stimulus payments.

Eli Fuhrman is a contributing writer for The National Interest. This article first appeared earlier this year.

Image: Reuters.

Trevor Filseth

Stimulus Payments,

Not all Democrats are in favor of the proposals

Here's What You Need to Remember: All of these things remain progressive priorities, and Biden will likely try to address them later in his term. However, it is crucial to remember that, even in its restricted form, the American Families Plan’s goals are simply ambitions. And the plan is not likely to pass Congress, at least not without significant alterations.

Within two months of the signing of the “American Rescue Plan” – the new administration’s initial $2 trillion COVID-19 relief bill – President Joe Biden has already set his sights on bigger things. Last Wednesday, on the eve of his hundredth day in office, he announced two new spending plans – the “American Jobs Plan,” which would focus on creating new jobs, and the “American Families Plan,” which would focus on alleviating poverty and placing money directly into American families’ hands.

Of the two plans, the second is far broader in its ambitions – it contains a long checklist of welfare programs, including free community college, universal pre-K education, an expansion of the Child Tax Credit, and subsidized childcare.

Here’s what it left out.

Student Loan Forgiveness. Student loan debt in the United States hovers at around $1.7 trillion, with the average loan size at approximately $30,000 – making student loan debt a larger problem than auto loans and credit card debt. One of Biden’s campaign proposals involved cancelling $10,000 in debt for all students. Other progressive sources have proposed higher numbers.

However, it is unclear if the President actually has the authority to unilaterally cancel the debt with the stroke of a pen. There is also the matter of how to compensate the creditors, who would either stand to lose billions of dollars overnight or else be compensated through taxpayer money.

A $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage. In recent years, the issue of a $15 per hour minimum wage has pushed to the forefront of – in part due to the influence of Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign. The measure has been enacted locally in a number of local areas, and Biden passed an executive order mandating a $15 per hour minimum wage for federal contractors. However, not all Democrats are in favor of the proposal; some, including Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), favor a lower, $11 per hour proposal.

A Fourth Stimulus Check. Speculation has surrounded the idea of a fourth stimulus check, with many Democrats in favor of recurring payments for the duration of the pandemic. However, Biden did not address this idea in his speech on Wednesday night.

All of these things remain progressive priorities, and Biden will likely try to address them later in his term. However, it is crucial to remember that, even in its restricted form, the American Families Plan’s goals are simply ambitions. And the plan is not likely to pass Congress, at least not without significant alterations. It is unclear if all fifty Senate Democrats support the measure. Even if they did, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was quoted as saying that Senate Republicans were “100 percent committed” to fighting Biden’s agenda, suggesting that the plan would not be able to pass without filibuster reform.

In reality, though, if Congressional horse-trading works the way it has always worked, McConnell’s “100 percent” opposition will probably translate to a smaller plan with fewer benefits – but also one that is less likely to break the bank.

Trevor Filseth is a news reporter and writer for the National Interest. This article first appeared earlier this year.

Image: Reuters.

Caleb Larson

Drones, Middle East

Back in the day, drones were more likely to fly without an escort than they are now, and this incident is why.

Here's What You Need to Remember: Yes, the F-35 Lightning II program has been plagued by cost overruns, production setbacks, and tech hick-ups. The F-22 Raptor is far from perfect. Still, these two incidents demonstrate that stealth platforms, despite the teething issues they’ve had, provide a valuable capability that is worth the investment.

Way back in 2012, an American General Atomics MQ-1, typically called “Predator” was flying in international airspace, approximately 16 miles from Iran’s coast and conducting surveillance (Iran also flies a Predator knock-off).

Back in those days, drones were more likely to fly without an escort than they are now, and this incident is why.

Two Iranian jets were scrambled and attempted to intercept and shoot down the drone. Using onboard guns, both jets opened fire on the Predator. Although the Iranian pilots conducted several passes, both were unable to hit the drone. The drone was able to return to base untouched.

American officials were subsequently able to identify the aircraft that attempted the intercept. Both were Su-25 Frogfoot bombers, essentially flying tanks. Oddly enough, the Su-25 Frogfoot (yet another example of how heavily Iran leans on foreign tech, particularly for their airframes) is not typically used as an interceptor, but rather for close air support or as a bomber.

In these roles, Su-25 pilots would be unlikely to be particularly efficient air-to-air gunners, having in all likelihood trained on stationary, ground-based targets.

Likely as a consequence of this incident, Predator drones would later fly with a fighter escort, either F-22 or F-18 Hornets. Although this would, in theory, make the drone more easily identifiable to ground-based radar, the extra firepower was deemed necessary.

Another Day, Another . . . Bomber?

Just a year later, another QM-1 Predator was flying on some sort of intelligence-gathering mission near Iran. This time, it came with an escort.

During the mission, two IRIAF (Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force) F-4 Phantoms were scrambled to interdict the drone, apparently unaware that this Predator was accompanied by a lone F-22 Raptor, likely one of the stealthiest aircraft in the world.

The F-22 was able to maneuver Top Gun-like underneath one of the F-4 Phantoms, according to reports,

“He [the Raptor pilot] flew under their aircraft [the F-4s] to check out their weapons load without them knowing that he was there, and then pulled up on their left wing and then called them and said ‘you really ought to go home.’” How embarrassing.

Stealth Is King

Yes, the F-35 Lightning II program has been plagued by cost overruns, production setbacks, and tech hick-ups. The F-22 Raptor is far from perfect. Still, these two incidents demonstrate that stealth platforms, despite the teething issues they’ve had, provide a valuable capability that is worth the investment.

Caleb Larson is a defense writer for the National Interest. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Image: Reuters

Rachel Bucchino

Student Loan Debt,

The president’s $1.8 trillion American Families Plan, however, calls for free community college and invests more than $300 billion in expenditures toward higher education.

Here's What You Need to Remember: In the meantime, the White House has provided federal student loan borrowers with a forbearance program, with the interest set at zero percent. That means the borrowed amount will not grow during this time, but the program expires Sept. 30, 2021.

President Joe Biden addressed a joint session of Congress last week for the first time, where he called on Democrats and Republicans to pass his ambitious proposals that inject federal funds into infrastructure and a number of family-related policies. Since then, the president, first lady Jill Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and other key players in the infrastructure and jobs fight have been traveling across the country in efforts to sell the administration’s big-spending plans.

But the efforts omit a massive promise that Biden echoed on his presidential campaign trail—whether the administration will forgive student loans for federal borrowers.

The president’s $1.8 trillion American Families Plan, however, calls for free community college and invests more than $300 billion in expenditures toward higher education. Biden has also previously asked Education Secretary Miguel Cardona to put together a memo on the president’s “legal authority” to cancel up to $50,000 in federal student loan debt through executive order, which wouldn’t require Congress’ approval, but the administration has reportedly not completed its review of the president’s legal authorities.

And while student loan borrowers and advocacy groups await the administration’s findings and Biden’s ultimate decision, lawmakers have ramped up efforts to implement a massive student loan forgiveness measure.

At a Senate subcommittee hearing last month on student debt, the subcommittee’s chair, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), opened the meeting with a striking statistic—36 million out of the 43 million federal student loan borrowers, or 84 percent, would have all of their debt cancelled if the president cut $50,000 in loans per borrower.

A number of congressional Democrats, including Warren, have continuously pressured the White House to unilaterally forgive $50,000 in federal student loans per borrower through the Higher Education Act, a measure that Biden rejected at a town hall event in January. Instead, he’s expressed support for a $10,000 cancellation.

The White House also found itself under seething pressure recently after 416 community and professional organizations signed a letter to Biden, pushing him to eradicate student debt. The letter was first sent in November and then again in January, which has been updated with 85 additional signatures.

“During the campaign, you endorsed $10,000 of relief while Congress negotiated the CARES Act, and subsequently promised to provide broad student debt cancellation ‘immediately’ as a coronavirus response. Administrative debt cancellation will deliver real progress on your racial equity, economic recovery, and COVID-19 relief campaign priorities,” the groups wrote. Signers include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), American Federation of Teachers, the National Domestic Violence Hotline and the Sunrise Movement.

“Cancelling student debt would disproportionately help borrowers of color, respond to the coronavirus crisis, and provide much needed economic relief and stimulus. We call on you to deliver on the promise of the Biden-Harris Racial Economic Equity plan by cancelling federal student debt by executive action immediately,” they added.

In the meantime, the White House has provided federal student loan borrowers with a forbearance program, with the interest set at zero percent. That means the borrowed amount will not grow during this time, but the program expires Sept. 30, 2021.

The Education Department also cut student debt for borrowers who were defrauded by their colleges, as well as those with total and permanent disabilities.

But even with these major measures in place, Biden has still failed to resurface his campaign promise to cancel some form of student debt for federal borrowers.

Rachel Bucchino is a reporter at the National Interest. Her work has appeared in The Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report and The Hill. This article first appeared earlier this year.

Image: Reuters.

Caleb Larson

U.S. Navy,

It's trying, but there are a couple of obstacles to overcome.

Here's What You Need to Remember: If a workable design is created, this solar energy gatherer could harvest enormous amounts of energy, at much greater efficiency than Earth-side solar arrays.

In a recent press release, the Department of Defense explained the United States Space Force will be using the X-37B reusable space plane in the future for conducting experiments in space. The report detailed a rather bland experiment involving the effects of radiation from space on seeds—not exactly an attention-grabber.

It then casually and quietly mentioned how the Naval Research Laboratory is planning to harvest the sun’s energy for use on Earth. “A third experiment, designed by the Naval Research Laboratory, transforms solar power into radiofrequency microwave energy, then studies transmitting that energy to Earth,” the press release said.

Essentially the X-37B will carry an array of solar panels that can be deployed once the space plane is in orbit around the Earth. Once stretched out, these panels could gather solar energy from the Sun and send it back down to Earth.

High in the Sky

If a workable design is created, this solar energy gatherer could harvest enormous amounts of energy, at much greater efficiency than Earth-side solar arrays. The anticipated jump in efficiency would be thanks to the conditions in space—cloud cover wouldn’t be a problem and dust would likely cover the panels only very lightly, if at all. 

Harvested solar energy would then be beamed back to Earth in the form of microwaves. Microwaves could be used to power a variety of equipment, possibly even onto any location on Earth. The energy harvesting system could be used to provide emergency power to crisis-stricken areas—and there is also a military application, of course.

Troops at remote outposts or inaccessible locations could in theory be provided with a powerful, unlimited supply of energy. With an effective delivery system, it may have the potential to virtually eliminate some types of energy supply lines, like fuel for trucks, tanks, or other vehicles.

Additionally, solar energy could also be used to power objects in orbit, like space stations, space aircraft, or even other satellites. 

Challenges

There are a couple of obstacles to overcome though. Dr. Paul Jaffe, an aerospace engineer with the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory explained that one of the non-material difficulties is simple physics—it is expensive to launch things into space. And the heavier an object is, the more propellant it needs to get airborne, and the bigger the price tag gets. In order to keep weight to a minimum, internal components would need to be made as small and light as possible, itself not an easy engineering feat.

The other issue is not specific to the solar harvesting concept, but to all satellites in general. Once aloft, satellites orbit the Earth at incredible speeds. Getting them into a different orbit for directing energy elsewhere on Earth is challenging. It remains to be seen if this project will be feasible, costs and technical difficulties aside.

Caleb Larson holds a Master of Public Policy degree from the Willy Brandt School of Public Policy. He lives in Berlin and writes on U.S. and Russian foreign and defense policy, German politics, and culture.

Image: Flickr

Caleb Larson

Fighter Jets, Middle East

Stealth is something that Iran just doesn’t do. In fact, capable and domestically-produced military planes are also something they don’t do.

Here's What You Need to Remember: Iran has a long history of claiming old (and foreign) platforms are totally new and 100 percent domestically manufactured.

Back in 2014, photos surfaced of a new subsonic combat trainer/light attack aircraft that, predictably, Iran claimed was domestically produced. A close look shows an airframe that is very much similar to Russia’s produced Yakovlev Yak-130, a light attack training jet developed in conjunction with an Italian firm.

According to The Aviationist, both the Yak-130 and the Shafaq have an “almost identical front section and large LERX (Leading Edge Root Extensions).” The missiles that were photographed on the mock-up jet’s hardpoints were “fake AGM-65 Maverick and AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles.”

Russian Trainer

Since there is limited information on the HESA Shafaq, its likely parent airframe—the Yak-130—can be used to estimate the Shafaq’s capabilities.

Though it is subsonic, the Yak-130 can perform in recon and light attack roles, Despite having had some success being exported abroad, several notable accidents have raised questions about the Yak-130’s reliability and airworthiness.

The Yak-130 has nine hardpoints with which ordinance or fuel tanks can be attached, two hardpoints are on the wingtips, one is the underbelly, and six are underwing hardpoints, for a total combat load of about three thousand kilos or around sixty-six hundred pounds.

Being a subsonic aircraft, the Yak-130’s capabilities are modest. Maximum airspeed is just below Mach 1, and the reported service ceiling is 12,500 meters or about 41,000 feet.

Although the Yak-130 is not in any way a stealth aircraft, the Shafaq is claimed to have stealth characteristics. Any degree of stealth would likely be achieved not by the airframe shape, but by radar-absorbent materials on the outside of the airframe.

Despite the obvious limitations inherent in the airframe, there has been speculation that the Yak-130 could give NATO a run for its money under certain circumstances.

Yet Another Imitation

Iran has a long history of claiming old (and foreign) platforms are totally new and 100 percent domestically manufactured. The Karrar Main Battle Tank may have some improvements but is essentially either a modified T-72 or T-90 tank with some modern components. The Azarakhsh, Saeqeh, and Kowsar jet fighters are only slightly modified American F-5 light attack jets from the mid- to late-1950s. It is even suspected that their premier fast-attack boat is a copy of an award-winning British speedboat.

Stealth is something that Iran just doesn’t do. In fact, capable and domestically-produced military planes are also something they don’t do.

Is the Shafaq a truly new creation? That’s extremely unlikely. Is it stealthy? Also unlikely. Chances are the Shafaq charade is a rebadged Russian Yak-130. Still, if it could ever enter serial production, it could be a decent trainer airframe.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer with The National Interest. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture. 

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Ethen Kim Lieser

Stimulus Payments,

The number of checks sent out now represents more than 85 percent of the $450 billion total earmarked for stimulus funds.

Here's What You Need to Remember: The fastest way to get a stimulus check, though, is still via direct deposit, which requires one to have an open bank account. Considering that, the IRS has been encouraging individuals to set up a free account at a local bank.

The Internal Revenue Service has confirmed in its latest press release that approximately one hundred sixty-four million $1,400 coronavirus stimulus checks, with a total value of $386 billion, have been disbursed to date under the American Rescue Plan.

The number of checks sent out now represents more than 85 percent of the $450 billion total earmarked for stimulus funds.

Despite this success to help millions of cash-strapped Americans amid the ongoing pandemic, the IRS is also keenly aware that there are certain eligible individuals who do not have a permanent address or an open bank account.

To date, most of the stimulus payments have been disbursed automatically—either via direct deposits, paper checks, or prepaid debit cards. So, without a home or a bank account, it makes the IRS’ job that much more difficult to get the stimulus money into the hands that need it the most.

Know that this is precisely the reason why the agency developed and launched a non-filers tool last year for the first round of stimulus checks—but, unfortunately, that particular tool is no longer active. Currently, the best option is to take the necessary time and file a tax return, even if there was no income earned in 2020. According to the IRS, this is considered the fastest way to garner the necessary information to disburse the funds as quickly as possible.

There is also a way to claim either or both of the missing first two stimulus checks. The IRS has reminded those affected that for this tax season—which has been extended to May 17—a handy Recovery Rebate Credit has been added to all returns, so that people in this situation can eventually get their hands on the overdue payments.

The IRS website says that “if you didn’t get any payments or got less than the full amounts, you may qualify for the Recovery Rebate Credit and must file a 2020 tax return to claim the credit even if you don’t normally file.”

It adds: “People do not need a permanent address or a bank account. They don’t need to have a job. For eligible individuals, the IRS will still issue the payment even if they haven’t filed a tax return in years.”

The agency noted that these individuals may put the address of a friend or a relative to receive the funds, adding that an address of a shelter or a drop-in day center is also acceptable.

The fastest way to get a stimulus check, though, is still via direct deposit, which requires one to have an open bank account. Considering that, the IRS has been encouraging individuals to set up a free account at a local bank. To offer even more assistance, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has launched a campaign that has already identified more than seventy banks and credit unions that are offering free or low-cost accounts.

Approximately seven million U.S. households do not have a bank account, according to the FDIC. 

Ethen Kim Lieser is a Minneapolis-based Science and Tech Editor who has held posts at Google, The Korea Herald, Lincoln Journal Star, AsianWeek, and Arirang TV. Follow or contact him on LinkedIn. This article first appeared earlier this year.

Image: Reuters.

Ethen Kim Lieser

$1400 Stimulus Payments,

Despite the fact that roughly 85 percent of all stimulus checks now have been disbursed, there are still plenty of reports suggesting that many U.S. taxpayers haven’t seen the funds that they are entitled to.

Here's What You Need to Remember: To request a trace, first call the IRS at 800-919-9835 or mail or fax a completed Form 3911, “Taxpayer Statement Regarding Refund.” If the trace request was done over the phone, then one no longer has to fill out Form 3911.

According to their most up-to-date press release, the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department have announced that 1.1 million more $1,400 coronavirus stimulus checks worth $2 billion have been issued as part of the eighth batch of payments under President Joe Biden’s American Rescue Plan.

The newest batch now boosts the total number sent out to date to approximately one hundred sixty-four million with a value of $386 billion. As for when Americans can expect to receive these funds, know that this particular batch began processing on April 30 with an official payment date of May 5.

Despite the fact that roughly 85 percent of all stimulus checks now have been disbursed, there are still plenty of reports suggesting that many U.S. taxpayers haven’t seen the funds that they are entitled to.

For those who are stuck in this precarious situation, know that there are several options to tap into.

First, many may not be aware, but taxpayers can speak to a live human regarding their missing, lost, or destroyed stimulus checks. The IRS Economic Impact Payment phone number is 800-919-9835—but be warned that “IRS live phone assistance is extremely limited at this time,” states the agency’s website. What this likely means is that inquiring individuals should be prepared to sit on hold for a considerable amount of time.

Perhaps the most popular option out there is the IRS “Get My Payment” tool, which can be accessed at www.irs.gov/coronavirus/get-my-payment. To use it, one will just need to type in the full Social Security or tax ID number, date of birth, street address, and ZIP code—then a stimulus payment status update should soon pop up.

Take note, though, that some individuals will receive a “Need More Information” message, which means that the stimulus check was returned to the IRS because the post office was unable to deliver it.

And others will receive a message that states, “Payment Status Not Available.” The agency says that “if you get this message, either we have not yet processed your payment, or you are not eligible for a payment. We will continue to send the 2021 Economic Impact Payment to eligible individuals throughout 2021.”

Finally, for those who have gotten Notice 1444 or Notice 1444-B from the IRS stating that their payment was issued even though they haven’t received it, the impacted individuals have the option to request an IRS payment trace.

Understand that a similar action can be taken if the IRS “Get My Payment” tool shows that the stimulus funds have been transferred but nothing has changed at all in the recipient’s bank account.

To request a trace, first call the IRS at 800-919-9835 or mail or fax a completed Form 3911, “Taxpayer Statement Regarding Refund.” If the trace request was done over the phone, then one no longer has to fill out Form 3911.

Ethen Kim Lieser is a Minneapolis-based Science and Tech Editor who has held posts at Google, The Korea Herald, Lincoln Journal Star, AsianWeek, and Arirang TV. Follow or contact him on LinkedIn. This article first appeared earlier this year.

Image: Reuters.

Caleb Larson

F-117 Nighthawk, Middle East

The F-117s are weird jets. But they're flying again. 

Here's What You Need To Remember: It became apparent to the United States’ war planners that if NATO bombers and fighters were to fly against the Warsaw Pact, a massive amount of airframes would be lost due to the Soviet Union’s extensive surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft arsenals, which would likely be networked together to more effectively fight-flight groups. Something had to be done.

In order to counter Soviet air defenses, Lockheed dreamed up the world’s first stealthy airplane, the F-117, which is still used today in a very limited capacity.

Origins

The Lockheed F-117 was a product of the Vietnam War. During Vietnam, The United States lost a number of both fighters and bombers due to North Vietnamese surface-to-air missiles supplied by the Soviet Union.

The Yom Kippur War in 1973 was also a learning curve for American planners — Israel had lost over a hundred airframes in a matter of weeks, again mostly due to Soviet-supplied surface-to-air missiles.

It became apparent to the United States’ war planners that if NATO bombers and fighters were to fly against the Warsaw Pact, a massive amount of airframes would be lost due to the Soviet Union’s extensive surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft arsenals, which would likely be networked together to more effectively fight-flight groups. Something had to be done.

Stealthy

Lockheed designed the first operational airplane with stealth characteristics through the use of faceting, a design process in which an “aircraft surface reflects 99.99 percent of the reflected radar energy from the radar source away from its receiver.”

In order to keep production costs low, Lockheed’s Skunk Works used a number of off-the-shelf components to deliver the F-117 in a very short amount of time. “The jet engines were out of a Northrup T-38A Talon,” a jet trainer. “The landing gear was from the Fairchild/Republic A-10A Thunderbolt II. And the environmental systems were taken from the Lockheed C-130 Hercules.”

Although the design Lockheed came up with was indeed stealthy, that is, it successfully reflected nearly all radar energy, it was very aerodynamically unstable. This was solved by using the “The fly-by-wire components…from the General Dynamics F-16,” which were essentially a quadruple-redundant computer system that made minute adjustments to the airframe’s control surfaces to allow for stable, even flight.

Engineering Challenge

One of the pioneering aspects of the F-117 was the engine intake inlet. The inlet has a radar-absorbing grid on the outside. When seen through radar, the inlet appears like a flat panel, which reflects or absorbs the majority of radar. Any radar that makes its way into the inlet is bounced around inside an S-shaped air intake and is absorbed by a radar-absorbent coating, greatly reducing the chance that any radar is then reflected outwards.

The engine exhaust is also unique. The exhaust nozzles (known as the Platypus), are flattened, to spread out the exhaust, cooling it and reducing the infrared signature to a low enough degree that infrared detectors can’t track via the exhaust.

Due to installing readily available components, Lockheed built two technology demonstrators under budget and early for just 35 million dollars — a feat even more remarkable when considering the massive costs of the F-35 Lightning II program.

New Start?

Although the F-117 fleet is retired, a number of airframes have been Congressionally mandated to stay in a state of readiness — essentially in flyable condition. Retired F-117s are used to test radar and radar-absorbent material as test platforms, or possibly as aggressor aircraft for pilot training.

As recently as March of 2020, at least one F-117 was seen flying by an amateur photographer and plane spotter. The F-117s are flying again.

Caleb Larson is a defense writer for the National Interest. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture. This article first appeared last year.

Image: Flickr

Peter Suciu

B-52 Bomber,

The capabilities of the United States Air Force's B-52 Stratofortress have expanded greatly since the aircraft first took flight in the 1950s.

Here's What You Need to Remember: It isn't entirely clear how the warship was targeted or how and even if it fought back, but according to reports it was score one for the B-52s. That mock sinking of a destroyer highlighted the B-52's capabilities in ASuW today.

The capabilities of the United States Air Force's B-52 Stratofortress have expanded greatly since the aircraft first took flight in the 1950s. The Cold War-era heavy bombers have received regular updates, which could keep the venerable B-52 flying high for decades to come.

In recent months, the B-52s have been deployed around the world from Guam to Europe, and earlier this week two subsonic B-52s – call-signs "Bush 11" and "Bush 12" – flew from the Royal Air Force (RAF) base at Fairford and conducted joint exercises with Moroccan Air Force F-16s in a drill to find and "sink" a U.S. Navy destroyer, Forbes.com reported on Tuesday.

The exercise was conducted to demonstrate the bomber's latent anti-ship capabilities. This isn't exactly a new role or function for the B-52 however. Since the 1970s, the Stratofortress has been utilized in ocean surveillance missions in the Atlantic and Pacific and its aircrews have routinely trained with the U.S. Navy in these missions.

Moreover, in the 1980s the B-52 bombers stationed in Maine and Guam were armed with AGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles to counter Soviet naval forces. The bombers could descend to low altitude, approach from different directions and launch salvos of Harpoons to saturate defenses from upwards of 100 miles away, reported AirForceMag.com.

The use of the B-52 in such situations was notable in that the bombers could carry a large complement of missiles, but could also be replenished in a few hours versus the days or weeks that most warships required. Most importantly, the bomber had the range to strike at the enemy's warships well before those vessels came within range of targeting U.S. Navy ships.

Given that Russia and China are "upping" the game with more advanced anti-ship weapons it is easy to see why the U.S. military would want to utilize the B-52 in anti-service warfare (ASuW) capacity.

Destroyer Destroyed

In Monday's exercise, two B-52s took off from Fairford and flew south to "hunt" the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Roosevelt (DDG-80), which was one of four of the class of warships that operate from Spain in missile-defense patrols.

It isn't entirely clear how the warship was targeted or how and even if it fought back, but according to reports it was score one for the B-52s. That mock sinking of a destroyer highlighted the B-52's capabilities in ASuW today.

"Conducting these missions alongside our African partners shows the strategic reach of our joint force and our collective commitment to preventing malign influence in Africa," said Maj. Gen. Joel Tyler, U.S. Africa Command director of operations, as reported by Forbes.com.

SURFREM 15

The U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy further showed inter-service cooperation last month when Airmen and Sailors worked together during the Aug. 12 SURFREM 15 naval exercises at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. The two services came together for a day-long test called "Clutch Shot," in which the objective was to shoot a missile from a Navy P-8 Poseidon and from the USS Fitzgerald at a free-floating target at the same time.

A B-52 aircrew helped with nontraditional intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance.

"The harpoon shot support by the B-52 in SURFREM 15 just shows how no matter the service we are all one team capable and aware of how other services can integrate in a joint environment to accomplish a mission," said Capt. Matt Spinelli, 20th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron team chief. "Building on the relationship between the services, educating the crew forces, and building better ways to effectively and efficiently work together is always a goal that we strive for." 

High and Long Flying

Last month in a single-day mission dubbed Allied Sky, six B-52 bombers flew across 30 NATO countries to highlight solidarity with U.S. partners and allies. Four of the Cold War-era U.S. Air Force bombers were deployed from Royal Air Force (RAF) Fairford in the UK and flew over Europe, while two bombers from the 5th Bomb Wing at Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota flew over the U.S. and Canada.

Allied Sky was meant to be the latest iteration of Bomber Task Force (BTF) missions that have been conducted in the European theater of operations since 2018.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com. This article is being republished due to reader interest.

Image: Wikipedia.

Peter Suciu

T-14 Armata, Eurasia

The T-15 was designed primarily as a transport and could carry a dozen soldiers including three crewmembers.

Here's What You Need to Remember: As a troop transport, the T-15 is unusually heavy, and at forty-eight tons it is actually heavier than any serving Russian tank other than the T-14. It even weighs slightly more than the T-90 tank, which remains the frontline armored vehicle of the Russian Army.

While both are based on the same Armata chassis, the T-14 main battle tank has routinely been in the spotlight whether for its latest improvements that could allow it to be remotely operated or if one was even destroyed in Syria. However, far less has been noted about the T-15 armored fighting vehicle, which could be a significant component to the Russian Army.

It could even have as much effect on the Russian military as its heavier sister platform.

The T-15 was designed primarily as a transport and could carry a dozen soldiers including three crewmembers. However, it was not quite an armored personnel carrier (APC)—such as the U.S. military’s Cold War-era M113 (APC) or newer Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV)—but not exactly an update to its BMP-3M infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), which is the latest update to a platform dating back to the early 1960s.

This vehicle exists somewhere between an APC and IFV. There is no NATO vehicle that is comparable to the T-15 and the closest equivalent could arguably be the Israeli-built Merkava, which is essentially a heavy tank that can also carry troops. In the case of the T-15 however, it is far more of a heavily armed and armored troop carrier.

The keyword could be heavy—in both cases. 

As a troop transport, the T-15 is unusually heavy, and at forty-eight tons it is actually heavier than any serving Russian tank other than the T-14. It even weighs slightly more than the T-90 tank, which remains the frontline armored vehicle of the Russian Army. This is because the T-15 shares the same Armata chassis as the T-14, which is about as beefy as they come today.

Unlike the true tank version of the Armata platform, the T-15 features a remote-controlled Bumerang-EM/Empoch turret that is placed at the back of the tank, while the engine is situated at the front of the vehicle. This has the added benefit of allowing the engine to shield the passengers from hits to the front.

The platform’s primary armament is a Shipunov 2A42 30-millimeter autocannon, while secondary armament consists of a dual bank of Kornet anti-tank missiles and a 7.62 PKMT machine gun. The “fire and forget” missiles are capable of defeating reactive armor and active protection systems. These use technical vision with an automatic target tracker, which makes it five times more likely to accurately hit a target at ranges from 150 to 10,000 meters.

This mix of weapons, along with the fire and forget ability, actually allows the T-15 to fire at multiple targets simultaneously. The T-15 can carry a total of 500 rounds of ammunition including 160 armor-piercing and 340 high-explosive fragmentation rounds.  

Latest Updates 

Russian deputy defense minister Alexei Krivoruchko announced in August 2018 that a contract on 132 T-14 tanks and T-15 infantry fighting vehicles based on the Armata combat platform had been signed—but how many of each was unclear, but deliveries of both have been repeatedly delayed and according to state media troops wouldn’t even get the first tanks until 2021. It isn’t known when deliveries of the T-15 would begin.

However, both platforms were demonstrated to potential foreign buyers at Army-2020 international arms show last month.

This past winter, Georgy Zakamennykh, CEO of the Burevestnik Central Research Institute, which is part of Uralvagonzavod manufacturer within the state hi-tech corporation Rostec, also told Tass that the T-15 Armata heavy infantry fighting vehicle with the latest AU-220M combat module. 

According to information from the Uralvagonzavod press office, the AU-220M is an unmanned cannon and machine-gun module. It was designed to serve as the armament for various combat vehicles infantry fighting vehicles already in operation as well as new platforms such as the T-15.

The AU-220M has a firing range of up to 14.5 kilometers with a maximum rate of fire of eighty rounds per minute. Ammunition load typically includes eighty unitary fifty-seven-millimeter munitions including multifunctional remote-controlled, armor-piercing and guided projectiles, which allows effectively striking small-size unmanned aerial vehicles, low-flying aircraft and helicopters, and also land-based light-armored hardware and field fortifications.

However, it remains unclear when the first T-15s to feature the AU-220M combat module will be deployed or for that matter if the hybrid APC/IFV will be rolling out even next year.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com. This article is being republished due to reader interest.

Image: Wikipedia.

Peter Suciu

U.S. Navy, Americas

Modern weapons are threatening to send the aircraft carrier into the dustbin of history.

Key point: The aircraft carrier needs longer range aircraft and drones in order to strike safely from a distance. Here is how America is aiming to do that.

Since their creation a century ago the goal of the aircraft carrier was to extend the range of naval forces beyond the horizon, and now U.S. Navy carriers could extend that range significantly further. Speaking at last Friday’s Virtual Hook convention webinar of the Tailhook Association, Rear Adm. Gregory Harris, director of Air Warfare in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, offer his thoughts on the future air wing that will launch from flight decks by the end of this decade.

This first appeared earlier this year and is being reposted due to reader interest.

The future air wing will still consist of the forty-four strike fighters but it will include a mix of Block 4 F-35C fighter jets along with Block III F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter jets changing from ten and thirty-four respectively, to sixteen and twenty-eight. The strike fighters will further equip one sixteen-aircraft F-35C squadron and three ten-aircraft F/A-18E/F Super Hornet squadrons.

The balance of the aircraft in the wing will be filled by configurations including five to seven EA-18G Growler electronic combat aircraft, five E-2D Advanced Hawkeye command-and-control aircraft, six to ten MH-60 Seahawk helicopters, three CMV-22B Osprey carrier-onboard delivery aircraft, and five to nine MQ-9 Stingray aerial tanker unmanned aircraft.

The addition of the MQ-25 Stingray, which was developed by Boeing, could be a crucial component of the air wing of the future.

“The MQ-25 adds range, which adds lethality to the carrier strike group,” said Harris as reported by Defense News. “When you add that additional range to 4th and 5th Gen[eration] fighters; when you add that range to the range we’re looking at for F/A-XX or next-generation air dominance family of systems; if you add that to the long-range weapons that we are currently procuring and look to procure in the future: we have an ability to strike at range and with volume and tempo.”

As Defense News also noted, Harris made his comments just weeks after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy staged high profile tests of its DF-26B and DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles, which were fired into the South China Sea. The so-called “carrier killer” missiles were fired as an apparent warning to the United States Navy, which has operated carriers including the USS Nimitz and USS Ronald Reagan among other warships in the waters of the disputed region. 

Harris downplayed the threat the anti-ship ballistic missiles present to the U.S. Navy’s carriers. 

“We just finished a future naval force structure study that looked very specifically at the carrier air wing, and throughout that study the folks who were working with us challenged us to operate farther and farther away from the threat, with the assumption that threat systems were going to prevent us from being able to operate from inside certain ranges,” Harris added.

“I’ll never stop saying it: the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier is one of the 11 most survivable airfields in the world,” Harris reaffirmed. “You put on top of that a flexible carrier air wing and supported by a carrier strike group and all the capabilities that are resident with our flight III DDGs and the rest of our systems, you have an amazing capability that is able to strike at range, at depth and with volume.”

Next year, the Navy’s carrier USS Carl Vinson will be deployed with a ten-aircraft F-35C squadron (Strike Fighter Squadron 147) on the aircraft’s first carrier deployment. In addition, the warship will carry two ten-aircraft F/A-18E squadrons and one fourteen-aircraft F/A-18F squadron. The second carrier deployment of the F-35C jets is scheduled in 2022 by Marine Fighter Attack 314.

In addition, members of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211 (VMFA-211), Marine Aircraft Group 13, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing and ten of the U.S. Marine Corps fifth-generation multirole fighter jets arrived at RAF Station Mahram, home to the British F-35 jets to begin training for a deployment on the new Royal Navy carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com. This first appeared earlier this year and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Image: Reuters

Emanuele Ottolenghi

Security, Americas

Asunción’s financial system is compromised: terror finance, cigarette contraband, the trade of counterfeited goods, smuggling, and tax evasion fuel fraud and draw organized crime like a magnet.

On April 8, after a three-year judicial ordeal, Paraguay sentenced Hezbollah financier Assad Ahmad Barakat to two years and six months for passport forgery and immigration fraud. Barakat already served his time while awaiting trial, and Paraguayan authorities swiftly expelled him to Brazil. For a country that for decades hosted Hezbollah’s terror finance networks with impunity, sentencing Barakat, whom the United States Department of Treasury sanctioned in 2004, looks like a welcome change. It is not. Barakat’s expulsion changes nothing. The Hezbollah networks in the area are unaffected and his supporters are already hailing his return home as a victory.

The Biden administration—which just last week sanctioned Ulises Quintana, a member of Paraguay’s National Assembly, for corruption and aiding transnational organized crime—should recognize that Paraguay remains a haven for organized crime and terror finance thanks to its corrupt political elites. Unless Washington keeps its attention and pressure on Paraguayan leaders, Asunción will only put up a show, much like the expulsion of Barakat, but do little else to address the systemic corruption abetting crime within its own borders.

For decades since the 1989 overthrow of Paraguay’s fascist dictator, Alfredo Stroessner, the country’s old elites have embraced democracy while benefiting from Stroessner’s legacy—a largely corrupt power structure, heavily compromised by a black economy of contraband and illicit trafficking. The twin engines of that economy remain vast, porous frontiers and thriving money-laundering centers along the country’s borderlands, especially in the notorious Tri-Border Area of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay (TBA). Since the 1980s, Hezbollah has built a sophisticated trade-based money laundering center in the heart of a retail commerce-free zone in Ciudad Del Este, on the Paraguayan side of the TBA.

The TBA’s illicit economy poses a serious threat to the integrity of the U.S. financial system. A large quantity of merchandise shipped to the TBA to fuel illicit schemes transits through the United States. So do payments, which, as a growing number of cases currently being tried in America show, are exposing the U.S. financial system to money laundering and terror finance.

Paraguay’s financial system is compromised: terror finance, cigarette contraband, the trade of counterfeited goods, smuggling, and tax evasion fuel fraud and draw organized crime like a magnet. Numerous criminal syndicates have established their presence there in recent years, where they grease the public sector to ensure complicity in their criminal activities. Growing international concern has put pressure on Asunción to change course, but to little effect so far. Even as Paraguay’s legislature passed new laws to improve its anti-money laundering and terror finance regulations, the gap between stated intents and actual results remains.

To be sure, Paraguayan prosecutors, at least those who are not in the pay of politicians and criminal networks, continue to doggedly investigate crime. The prosecutions of Barakat and Quintana are proof that even a country ranking 137 in Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index for 2020 can still find integrity among its public servants. Under increased pressure and scrutiny, Paraguay also cooperated with the United States in the arrest and extradition of three suspected Hezbollah traffickers and financiers: Ali Issa Chamas in 2017, Mahmoud Ali Barakat in 2018, and Nader Mohamad Farhat in 2019. And in 2019, Paraguay designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

Yet with some exceptions, investigations rarely yield convictions, which is something that is regularly lamented in the annual State Department International Narcotics Control Strategy Report to Congress. Corruption sabotages the course of justice more often than not, with politicians taking money from criminal networks to fund their electoral campaigns in exchange for political cover and immunity from prosecution.

Barakat has operated with impunity for more than two decades in this corrupt environment, despite the occasional run-ins with local justice and the U.S. Treasury designation in 2004. In 2018, the Argentinian government, under then-President Mauricio Macri, took the unprecedented step investigating a TBA money laundering network linked to the Barakat family, which was moving cash into Argentina and using a local casino to launder it.

Going after the most prominent member of the Barakat clan seemed a good way to respond to mounting U.S. pressure and international attention and show that Paraguay too was ready to rein in local terror finance networks. In August 2018, Paraguayan authorities accused Barakat of passport fraud and issued an international arrest warrant for his capture. Brazilian authorities arrested him soon after in Foz do Iguaçu, the Brazilian city in the TBA that sits across the river from Ciudad Del Este, the main site of Hezbollah’s terror finance activities in the area.

Brazil eventually extradited Barakat to Paraguay. A swift trial followed, leading to expulsion. Yet expelling Barakat to Brazil, where he is a permanent resident, is meaningless. Brazil has no open case against him. He served his time. And while technically Barakat cannot return to Paraguay ever again, the border crossing in the TBA is not exactly an insurmountable barrier.

Besides, most business owners operating in Ciudad Del Este live on the Brazilian side. Hezbollah-controlled communal institutions for the thirty thousand strong Shiite community in the area are on the Brazilian side. Even in “exile,” Barakat can continue to engage in his corrupt activities.

Nothing illustrates this better than the case of Ulises Quintana, who is currently under investigation and has spent time in jail, for facilitating, through his position as an elected official, a drug trafficking scheme. Quintana tried every trick in the book to derail the investigation, and after his release from jail in 2020, has resumed official duties as a parliamentarian inside the National Assembly.

Quintana is now running for mayor of Ciudad Del Este, Paraguay’s second-largest city and the main hub of its illicit economy. He remains the candidate for the ruling party—an alliance of two movements, headed by the current president, Marito Abdo, and his predecessor, Horacio Cartes, who is wanted in Brazil for money laundering.

The Biden administration has made the global fight against corruption a keystone of its foreign policy. Last week’s U.S. announcement that Quintana and his wife are henceforth barred from entering America on grounds of corruption and aiding transnational organized crime is a clear signal that Paraguay needs to do more. Yet that applies to Washington as well. Paraguay’s sporadic actions so far have failed to disrupt the intricate web of organized crime and terror finance exploiting its porous borders and corrupt governance. Yet, these actions also show that its governing elites respond to pressure from Washington. That is why U.S. sanctions against Quintana should not be the endgame, but the beginning of a sustained campaign where no corrupt politician or criminal figure should be beyond reach.

In the great Italian novel, The Leopard, by Giuseppe Tomasi Prince of Lampedusa, the young Sicilian aristocrat Tancredi famously quipped, “Everything must change, for everything to remain the same.” Tancredi and Sicilian aristocracy faced radical changes, as Italy’s unification swept away their feudal old world. To preserve the old power structure, they had to embrace the new and, like a leopard, they changed their spots. Paraguay is doing the same thing. Its ruling cupola manages to pretend it is changing course so that everything can stay the same. It is up to Washington to make sure change will be real.

Emanuele Ottolenghi is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a non-partisan think tank focused on national security and foreign policy. Follow him on Twitter @eottolenghi

Image: Reuters

James Jay Carafano

Military History, Americas

From “traditional” war to “gray zone” tactics, the levels of war continue to demonstrate relevance.

Decades ago, the U.S. military adopted the concept of the “three levels of war” as part of their doctrine. Developed from a historical appreciation of conflict, this framework for understanding war remains relevant, a reminder that even as technology and geopolitics march on, sometimes the past marches with them. 

“Seeing the elephant,” was a popular nineteenth-century catchphrase. It meant investing a lot of effort to see or do something and then concluding it hadn’t been worth it. The term was usually applied to the experience of war.

The phrase was often paired with the ancient Hindu parable of the blind men who encounter an elephant for the first time. Each described the animal differently, according to which part of the elephant they touched. This aptly explained the challenge of analyzing and describing war, so much was shaped by perspective and experience. 

In practice, nineteenth-century military histories reflected the elephant parable. In the West, Napoleon Bonaparte was the historian’s elephant in the room, the dominant topic. What complicated understanding the Napoleonic way of war was that Bonaparte did pretty much everything there was to do in fighting a war. He commanded troops in battle. He directed protracted operations over vast distances. He was his empire’s strategist making all the big decisions about how the ways, means and ends of France’s way of war would be employed.  

Distinguishing Bonaparte’s role and influence as a military leader across decades of campaigning across multiple continents could be bewildering. Consider the two most renowned and influential interpreters of Bonaparte, Antoine-Henri, baron de Jomini and Carl von Clausewitz. In analyzing the Little Corporal’s influence, they bounce all over the place. Clausewitz’s seminal On War, for example, though often thought of as the classic text for understanding military strategy, actually dedicates many of its pages to describing tactics and military campaigning. 

Military writings often drifted towards the “sexy” part of the elephant, focusing on the conduct and outcome of battles. One of the most popular and influential books was The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World: from Marathon to Waterloo by Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy, published in 1851. This battle-centric approach to military history dovetailed well with Clausewitz’s notion, from the study of Napoleonic warfare, that the proper focus of effort was on the decisive military engagement. This really popularized the notion that winning wars was about annihilating the enemy in a climactic battle. 

Of course, wars don’t follow a script, least of all one that was written by Clausewitz or Edward Shepherd Creasy.  Even in their own times, not all wars looked like a classic Napoleonic campaign. Clausewitz, for instance, never showed much interest in the protracted French campaigns in Iberia (1808–1814), which featured guerilla warfare and interminable skirmishing rather than big Armageddon-like engagements a la Waterloo.  Similarly, the Crimean War (1856) looked nothing like a page out of Cressey’s book.  

Understanding military history and operations required a more sophisticated framework than just focusing on one part of war and ignoring others. The U.S. military realized this when it struggled to come to terms with America’s failure to dominate in the Vietnam War.  

For his part, Army Col. Harry Summers, tried to shift the focus of analysis on Vietnam from body counts and helicopter raids to the strategic component of the war. In 1982, he produced a study for the Army War College which became a best-selling book, On Strategy: the Vietnam War in Context. That started people thinking.  

The 1980s saw a dramatic revival of interest in the U.S. military history, spearheaded by a newly established military command called TRADOC. One of the command’s efforts was to revitalize warfighting doctrine, drawing from the broad sweep of history rather than just refighting the last war.

One doctrinal initiative was to break out conflict into its component parts—the levels of war. The tactical level of war comprised activities on the battlefield including battles and engagements, like Waterloo. The larger activities that compromised the campaign, sequences of moving and positioning forces are the battlefield—was called the operational level of war (such Wellington’s peninsular campaigns during the Iberian War). The strategy was the capstone level, including how leaders brought together all the instruments of power—political, diplomatic and economic, as well as a military force—to achieve their ends. It was, for example, Bonaparte’s Continental Strategy to isolate Great Britain that eventually led to his final downfall at Waterloo. 

Like organizing parts of an orchestra so they all make sense as a whole, understanding how the parts of the war come together helps leaders, “design and synchronize operations, allocate resources, and assign tasks to the appropriate command.” They also remain the best tool for dissecting wars and understanding what went right and what went wrong.  

Take, for example, the Korean War, Vietnam and current operations in Afghanistan. The inability to decisively bring the enemy to heal—different tactics and campaigns, victories and defeats aside—was the strategic challenge that couldn’t be easily solved. In each case, the enemy had a sanctuary to which it could withdraw and where, for geopolitical reasons, the United States could not pursue the enemy and defeat them in detail.  

From “traditional” war to “gray zone” tactics, the levels of war continue to demonstrate relevance. Of course, like any construct, they should not be approached dogmatically. As Australian military analyst Martin Dunn observes:  

The concept of levels of war is useful teaching and learning tool. They help us explain the past, and develop our ideas for the future. But we need to remember that they provide us with just a tool. Clausewitz observed, “Only the rankest pedant would expect theoretical distinctions to show direct results on the battlefield. The primary purpose of any theory is to clarify concepts and ideas that have become, as it were, confused and entangled.”  

Well said.   

A Heritage vice president, James Jay Carafano directs the think tank’s research on matters of national security and foreign relations.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Peter Suciu

AK-47 and M16,

But aside from the fact that they were gun designers who served their respective nations, the two men shared little in common.

Here's What You Need to Remember: While Kalashnikov lived in near poverty, Stoner was reportedly paid $1 for every single M16 produced.

The Soviet-designed AK-47 and the American-built AR-15/M16 are arguably the most iconic firearms in the modern world. Even people who don't actually "know guns" have at least heard of these. Both were developed and introduced in the Cold War, and millions were produced and used by the respective allies of the Soviet Union and the United States. Arguments on which rifle is better rage on to this day, in this publication and elsewhere.

AK-47 and M16: Legendary Rifles

Each was part of a new class of weapons – the "assault rifle" – and fired an intermediate cartridge that was smaller than the traditional rounds used in a main battle rifle, but larger than the pistol rounds employed in submachine guns.

Each weapon was designed by men who served in the Second World War, and who each had a talent for tinkering. The AK-47 was the creation of Red Army tank mechanic Mikhail Kalashnikov (1919-2013), while the AR-15 was developed by Eugene Morrison Stoner (1922-1997) who served in the United States Marine Corps.

Apart from the fact that they were gun designers who served their respective nations, the two men shared little in common.

The Soviet Peasant

Kalashnikov was a loyal citizen, a self-taught peasant turned tank mechanic who never finished high school and yet created a truly revolutionary weapon that would be used by countless revolutionaries. Chambered in the 7.62x39mm cartridge it was a weapon that was rugged, reasonably accurate, and easy to maintain.

For his efforts, he was awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union, the highest decoration his nation could bestow – yet he lived a modest life in a small apartment. Even after the fall of the Soviet Union, Kalashnikov never received royalties for his design, and yet today, the Russian military company that produces small arms for its military bears his name. The weapon he designed has also been on the flags of Mozambique and Hezbollah and the coat of arms of East Timor and Zimbabwe.

In a visit to Germany in 2002, Kalashnikov also admitted that he regretted creating the weapon that was used in innumerable conflicts around the world. "I would prefer to have invented a machine that people could use and that would help farmers with their work – for example, a lawnmower," The Guardian Newspaper quoted him as stating.

The American Engineer

Stoner by contrast was a trained engineer and worked at ArmaLite, a division of Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corporation. By the time he finally found limited success with his AR-5 survival rifle, the Kalashnikov-designed AK-47 was already in widespread use throughout the world.

Stoner then worked on his equally revolutionary ArmaLite AR-10, a select-fire infantry rifle that was chambered for the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge. It showed promise, but not enough at the time to interest the military. He was given a chance to refine it, and that resulted in the AR-15 – a firearm that has become as infamous as the AK-47 even if few people even know the name Eugene Stoner.

Even among shooting aficionados, Stoner isn't even that well known. Yet, while Kalashnikov lived in near poverty, Stoner was reportedly paid $1 for every single M16 produced. He wasn't awarded any medals, but he made enough money that he could afford his own plane. He later went to work at the Colt Firearms Company, which also happened to buy the rights to his AR-15 from ArmaLite.

While the AK-47 was nearly "perfect" when it was introduced because of its simplicity, the M16 had a difficult beginning when it was used in Vietnam. It was more complicated to maintain and required more cleaning than soldiers expected. Yet, it proved a success when refined, and it remains the basis of American infantry small arms to this day.

Beyond the AK-47 and M16: Other Guns By the Greats

Kalashnikov proved to be a successful designer who later worked on the AKM, a modernized variant of the AK-47; as well as the PKM and AK-74 among other firearms. Even today his legacy is seen in the latest Kalashnikov firearms used by the Russian military.

Stoner may have gotten rich from the AR-15, but he never really had another successful design. The Stoner 63 Weapons System was a forward-thinking modular platform that could be configured as an automatic rifle, light machine gun, medium machine gun or even solenoid-fired fixed machine gun. While it saw limited use in the Vietnam War, it was too complicated a design.

In the end, Kalashnikov has had statues erected in his honor, and he has been commemorated on stamps, while he was also awarded the Order of St. Andrew, Hero of Socialist Labour, Order of Lenin, Order of the Red Banner of Labour, and Hero of the Federation.

Stoner simply made money, a lot of it. The differences of the firearms can also be seen in the differences of the men and the systems under which they worked.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Image: Reuters

TNI Staff

Su-35, Eurofighter, Europe

The Eurofighter is likely able to more than hold its own against late generation Flanker variants like the Sukhoi Su-35S.

Here's What You Need to Remember: There is no question that Russian jets have come a long way technologically since the end of the Cold War. The Su-30 and especially the Su-35 are excellent fighters—and they’ll be a handful for any Western fourth-generation fighter in the event of a war.

With heightened tensions in Europe over Russia’s actions Ukraine, NATO countries have stepped up their air patrols over the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. While the U.S. Air Force often deploys aircraft to help police the air space over those former Soviet republics, often the task falls to European air arms to keep Moscow in check.

For many of those European forces, including Great Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain, their aircraft of choice is the Eurofighter Typhoon. Developed originally as a purebred air superiority fighter, the Typhoon excels in the air-to-air arena. In the unlikely event of a conflict, the Eurofighter is likely able to more than hold its own against late generation Flanker variants like the Sukhoi Su-35S.  While the Russian and European machines each have their advantages, the jets are very comparable overall.

Indeed, Royal Air Force (RAF) Typhoons recently trained with their Indian Air Force (IAF) Su-30MKI Flanker-H counterparts and found that to be true. “First impressions of the Flanker are very positive,” Wing Commander Chris Moon, commander of 3(F) Squadron said in a statement. “It is a superb aeroplane and it’s a privilege to operate our Typhoon alongside it.”

The Indians were also fairly impressed with the Typhoon—noting that the two machines are more or less evenly matched. “Both are fourth generation aircraft and so are matched evenly, so the learning value comes from the person to person contact,” said IAF Squadron Leader Avi Arya in a statement to the RAF. “It’s the man behind the machine which matters.”

As Arya noted, most fourth-generation fighters like the Su-35 or Typhoon offer comparable performance. Pilots of each type of aircraft have to learn how to operate their aircraft to the limits of their capabilities. That means exploiting the strengths of your aircraft and avoiding its weaknesses.

In the case of the Flanker, that means using its excellent low speed handling—thanks to its thrust vectoring capability—to offset the Typhoon’s very, very high turn rate and excellent energy addition while exploiting its poor high angle of attack capability. That’s similar to how U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force pilots flying the F/A-18 Hornet and the F-15 Eagle fight the Typhoon in a visual range engagement. It pretty much comes down to the individual—and luck.

Beyond visual range, technology plays a greater role, but tactics, training and procedures are key. Groups of fighters have to coordinate with each other and their AWACS or ground controllers. As an example, one senior U.S. Air Force instructor pilot explained that if there were a four-ship of F-15s versus another four-ship of F-15s using standard “blue” tactics—unless someone makes a mistake—the each engagement would end in a draw. Moreover, those tactics are generally held close to the vest. For example, U.S. Air Force units don’t generally employ their cutting edge tactics during international exercises since that might compromise those techniques.

Technology wise, neither the Su-35 Flanker nor the Typhoon is currently equipped with an active electronically scanned array radar, but both have good beyond visual range capability. Both jets are designed for high speed, high altitude beyond visual range engagements, and as such, can impart an enormous amount of launch energy to their beyond visual range weapons. But it is not known how effective Russian combat identification systems are—you have to know what you’re shooting at. Further, the Typhoon’s cockpit and pilot vehicle interface are excellent—much better than anything found on the current Flanker variants.

The Typhoon also has one other advantage. In the coming years, the RAF will start to deploy the MBDA Meteor missile. The Meteor, which is a long-range ramjet powered weapon, is quite possibly the best beyond visual air-to-air missile developed to date. It has excellent end-game performance and could be the Typhoon pilots’ trump card—at least until the Russians develop an equivalent.  

There is no question that Russian jets have come a long way technologically since the end of the Cold War. The Su-30 and especially the Su-35 are excellent fighters—and they’ll be a handful for any Western fourth-generation fighter in the event of a war. But at the end of the day, the Russian machines still lag behind on in terms of sensors and pilot vehicle interfaces. As such, the smart money is on the Typhoon.

This article first appeared several years ago.

Image: Wikipedia.