The National Interest

Caleb Larson

History, World

These planes made their mark on the world of aviation.

Know This: These three planes represent some of the fastest birds to have ever flown.

MiG-25

One of the early jet fighters that can be counted among the fastest jets ever designed was the MiG-25. The Soviet Mikoyan-Gurevich airframe made extensive use of stainless steel, as a typical aluminum airframe would not have been able to cope with the stresses at the high speeds the MiG-25 was intended for. The airframe’s more robust steel construction came at a cost, however. The MiG-25 was a beast of a plane and tipped the scales at about 64,000 pounds—without fuel or a full weapons load out—adversely affecting flight performance.

The heavy airplane was intended to be the Soviet Union’s premiere interceptor, and although it could achieve Mach 2.8 speeds, Soviet pilots were advised to not fly over Mach 2.5 in order to extend engine life. Still, one Mig-25 was tracked at Mach 3.2 over the Sinai Peninsula. The record flight came at a cost, however. After the flight, the airframe’s engines had to be written off.

Today, the MiG-31 is the successor to the MiG-25, and features similar, but improved design elements, including a two-man cockpit and around double the range of the gas-guzzling MiG-25. It is one of the fastest military aircraft currently in service today.

Concorde

On the commercial side of flight, the jointly Franco-British designed Concorde is the fastest commercial successful airliner ever. The iconic modified delta wing design could achieve sprints in excess of Mach 2, and set the record for fastest flight from London to New York in just over 2 hours and 52 minutes.

Fast thought the design was, it was severely hindered by its incredibly loud sonic boom. When flying over more densely populated areas, the Concorde has was forced to fly at subsonic speeds, increasing flight time for an aircraft designed to be the fastest commercial airliner ever, and ultimately contributing to the retiring of the airframe in the mid-2000s.

Blackbird Singing

The one bird that takes the cake set a number of speed records throughout its legendary career—the SR-71 Blackbird.

In the aftermath of Gary Powers U-2 spy plane incident (Powers was shot down by a Russian surface-to-air missile battery while overflying the Soviet Union. At the time, the belief was that the U-2 flew too high to be targeted by Russian SAMs), Lockheed’s Skunkworks designed an airframe that was unstoppable.

A number of exotic materials went into the design, including extensive use of lightweight and high-strength titanium, as well as a specially-formulated iron ferrite paint coating that was somewhat radar absorbent.

Rather than flying above or beyond Soviet SAM range, the SR-71 Blackbird could comfortably fly within airspace covered by anti-air batteries. If it detected a SAM launch, the Blackbird pilot would simply hit the thrust lever—outflying SAM missiles at speeds in excess of Mach 3, or three times the speed of sound.

In 1976, the official Blackbird record was set at an altitude of 85,000 feet. On that fateful day, The SR-71 flew at a mind-numbingly fast Mach 3.3, easily outflying anything in existence. Though unofficial, another Blackbird pilot claimed to have blown past the 1976 record while on a bombing run over Libya. During that flight, the pilot claimed to have achieved a top speed of Mach 3.6.

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: Reuters

Stephen Silver

Politics, Americas

Will it help to stop any further surprises in 2020?

Social media firms were heavily criticized, during the 2016 election, of failing to do enough to stop the spread of false news, including some campaigns that were directed by from overseas by state-sponsored efforts.

Facebook and Twitter, especially, have made moves to avoid that mistake, including Facebook’s recent crackdown on QAnon, and both platforms’ moves to block or remove posts that spread coronavirus-related misinformation. Twitter even recently rolled out a prompt encouraging users to read entire stories, rather than share them on the strength of their headline, and cracked down on “copypasta.”

Twitter this year has removed tweets from President Trump, something it had always resisted doing in the past. When the president was hospitalized last week, it was widely reported that Twitter would remove any posts that openly wished for Trump’s death, although the company later clarified that “tweets that wish or hope for death, serious bodily harm or fatal disease against *anyone* are not allowed and will need to be removed.”

With Election Day less than a month away, Twitter has announced some additional moves to prevent abuse of its platform.

Twitter said Friday that they will “not allow anyone to use Twitter to manipulate or interfere in elections or other civic processes.”

These steps will include removing any tweets, from candidates or anyone else, that “claim an election win before it is authoritatively called.” This means that such declarations will not be allowed until such a win has been declared by state election officials, or by “at least two authoritative, national news outlets that make independent election calls.” Such calls are made on election nights by the Associated Press, as well as the decision desks of television news networks and other media outlets.

Twitter will also remove posts that “encourage violence or call for people to interfere with election results or the smooth operation of polling places.” The rules, including one that bars interference with the election process, will apply to elections for Congress, in additional to the presidential race.

The company also said that starting later this month, users will be prompted with the note “this is disputed” when they attempt to retweet tweets that have been flagged by Twitter for being misleading. And Twitter will soon begin encouraging users to quote tweet rather than retweet others’ messages.

“Twitter plays a critical role around the globe by empowering democratic conversation, driving civic participation, facilitating meaningful political debate, and enabling people to hold those in power accountable,” Kayvon Beykpour, Twitter’s product lead, wrote in a blog post published Friday. “But we know that this cannot be achieved unless the integrity of this critical dialogue on Twitter is protected from attempts—both foreign and domestic—to undermine it.”

Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to 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.

Image: Reuters

Stephen Silver

Technology,

Could it crack into the American market and fight Apple for a slice of the market?

TCL this week announced the launch of the TCL Tab, a new tablet being brought out in collaboration with Verizon.

While mostly associated with TVs, TCL has been releasing products in the United States in other categories, including the TCL Pro smartphone, which arrived in the spring. Now, the TCL Mobile devision has also brought out a tablet, as part of a collaboration with Verizon.

The TCL Tab weighs 11.5 ounces and comes with 4G LTE capability. It also offers an eight-inch Full HD+ display and comes with Android 10 pre-installed. The device, which does not come in a WiFi-only version, is available now and retails at $199.99, in Suede Black color.

“There has been a large increase in demand for affordable tablets capable of supporting in-home initiatives for learning and working, while also keeping the entire family entertained and connected,” Eric Anderson, Senior Vice President of TCL Communication, North America, said in the announcement.

“With the TCL TAB, we have engaged with Verizon to create an Android tablet that will provide family households with the network and tools necessary for both a productive and entertaining mobile experience.”

Android tablets have been around since 2009, even before the debut of the iPad in 2010, but most of the early ones, such as the Verizon-exclusive Motorola Xoom, failed to displace Apple’s tablet. Eventually, Samsung’s Galaxy Tab and Amazon’s Kindle Fire emerged as the main challengers to Apple in the category, although the competition has never been especially close.

As of last month, per Statcounter, Apple held nearly two thirds of the North American market share in the tablet category, with Amazon and Samsung second and third, each with just over 13 percent of the market. This was roughly even with where those numbers had been for much of the last year.

Beta News describes the TCL Tab as a “spiritual successor to the Nexus 7,” which it describes as “undoubtedly the greatest Android tablet of all time.” The Nexus 7, which Google developed along with Asus, released two generations but was discontinued in 2015.

Along with its new mobile endeavors, TCL continues to release well-received TVs, mostly with the Roku TV interface, although the company has started to put out lower-end models with Android TV.

Trendforce said this week that a record number of TVs were shipped in the third quarter of 2020, and that TCL moved 7.33 million units, representing a 29 percent increase quarter over quarter and a 52.7 jump year over year. That was good for third worldwide, behind only Samsung and LG, both of which are more established as global TV brands.

Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to 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.

Image: TCL.

Rachel Bucchino

Politics,

Republicans will turn up the heat on Democrats over court-packing as the Amy Coney Barrett hearings begin next week.

Republicans continue to press Democratic nominee Joe Biden and running mate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) in recent days over whether the pair would “pack” the court if conservative-leaning Amy Coney Barrett gets a seat on the bench, a question that the two have avoided to answer. If the Democrats were to proceed with court-packing, it would represent a momentous step that would erode another guardrail of American democracy and turn the court into a rubber stamp for the president rather than a separate branch of government. The last time it was attempted was in 1936, when Franklin Roosevelt suffered a humiliating defeat in Congress after he tried to add new members to the Supreme Court. Would Biden and the Democrats seek to go down the same road?

Biden faced the court-packing question at a campaign stop in Phoenix on Thursday, providing yet another bland response. “You will know my opinion on court-packing when the election is over,” Biden told reporters at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. “The moment I answer that question, the headline in every one of your papers will be about that rather than focusing on what’s happening now. This election has begun. There’s never been a court appointment once the election has begun.”

Court-packing — a radical idea that broadens the highest court by adding more judges than what exists now — would tilt the Supreme Court to be more left-leaning if Biden is elected and Democrats rally enough federal level support to pass the law. Although the constitution doesn’t state how many justices must sit over the court, Republicans argue that there have been nine justices on the Supreme Court for well over a century, so swelling the bench would radically interfere with the highest court’s practice and history.

“I think the reason they won’t answer it is because their answer is yes,” Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) told the Daily Caller on Thursday, “and they know that’s incredibly impossible so they’re trying to hide just how radical their agenda is.” “They are ready to pack the court. If they win, if they take a majority, if we have Biden, Schumer and Pelosi in charge, I believe they will pack the court,” Cruz added.

At the vice-presidential debate Wednesday night, Vice President Mike Pence pressured Harris to provide a clear answer if the Democratic ticket plans to pack the court, accusing her of giving a “non-answer” when asked about the issue in the past. Harris refused. “The American people deserve a straight answer,” Pence said. "And if you haven’t figured it out yet, the straight answer is they are going to pack the Supreme Court if they somehow win this election.”

The issue of court-packing resurfaced after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in mid-September when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) vowed to push for President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee before Election Day. If the Republican-controlled Senate passes Barrett’s nomination, she would become the third Supreme Court justice appointed by Trump and potentially impose an ideological tilt that would put conservatives in power on the bench, 6 to 3.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told his colleagues that “everything Americans value is at stake” if Senate Republicans convene to fill Ginsburg’s seat, as the lifetime appointment would mend ideology on the highest court for generations. Schumer, who potentially faces a challenge from AOC in 2022, moved decisively to the left: “Let me be clear: If Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans move forward with this, then nothing is off the table for next year. Nothing is off the table.”

McConnell, the leader of the effort to swiftly fill the vacant seat, has been labeled as a hypocrite by Democrats because he blocked Merrick Garland, an appeals court judge, when former President Barack Obama nominated him to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia after he passed away in February 2016, arguing that the nomination should wait until after voters decide the 2016 election. The majority leader added that a vacant Supreme Court justice seat should not be filled during election season, a reversal from his initiative now.

Whether Biden and Harris will seek to pack the court if Barrett is granted the seat, in the event that the Democratic ticket wins the election. Nearly 11 candidates during the Democratic presidential primaries were open to the idea of court-packing, including Harris. Biden, however, did not support it “because we’ll live to rue that day,” he said last July. “We add three justices; next time around, we lose control, they add three justices,” Biden said last October. "We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all.”

If Biden provides a clear indication that he intends to pack the court, the stance would likely deter moderate or independent voters that he needs to win the tight race to the White House. In recent weeks, Biden said giving a response to the question “will shift the focus” of the election.

“That’s what [Trump] wants. He never wants to talk about the issue at hand and he always tries to change the subject. … The discussion should be about why he is moving in a direction that’s totally inconsistent with what the founders wanted. The Constitution says voters get to pick a president who gets to make the pick and the Senate gets to decide,” Biden told WBAY News last month. “We’re in the middle of the election right now,” he added. "You know, people are voting now. By the time this Supreme Court hearing would be held, if they hold one, it’s estimated 30 to 40 percent of American people already have voted. It is a fundamental breach of constitutional principle. It must stay on that and it shouldn’t happen.”

As the Barrett hearings next week loom large, however, Republicans will turn up the heat on Democrats over their court-packing plans. It could prove to be a potent political weapon in a turbulent election.

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. 

Kris Osborn

Security,

The military wants to use lots of unmanned-manned and unmanned-unmanned pairings to win on the battlefield.

The Army’s use of manned-unmanned teaming, wherein human operators control air and ground robotic vehicles to conduct reconnaissance, carry supplies or even launch attacks has long been underway. This developmental trajectory is demonstrated by the Army’s most recent successes with unmanned-unmanned teaming. 

Progress with drone to drone connectivity, from ground to ground and ground to air is fast gaining momentum following successful recent experiments where the Army passed key targeting data from larger drones to smaller mini-drones in the air. This happened in September at Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz., during the Army’s Project Convergence experiment, wherein the ability to massively shorten sensor-to-shooter time and network time-sensitive combat information was demonstrated between drones. 

During the experiment, an Army Gray Eagle drone networked with a forward operating mini-drone called Air Launched Effects. This, as Army leaders described, extended the range, scope and target envelope for attack missions well beyond “line of sight” and what service leaders described to me as the “visibility line.” Moreover, Gen. John Murray, Commanding General of Army Futures Command, told The National Interest that more drone-drone operations were planned for coming years. 

“You saw unmanned-unmanned teaming with two air vehicles that were completely autonomous. We are going to continue to expand that. Next year, we are looking at four and then we will continue to scale that up,” Murray said at Project Convergence in Yuma. 

The technology is also connecting ground-operated robotic vehicles to aerial drones through platforms such as Textron Systems Ripsaw vehicle. The RIPSAW M5 medium-sized Robotic Combat Vehicle, now being developed as part of an Army program, is an armed robot-vehicle engineered with advanced sensors, scalable armor, high-fidelity targeting sensors made by FLIR Systems, weapons and advanced algorithms for autonomous navigation and networking operations. 

Textron developers emphasize that the RIPSAW is built to be scalable, meaning it can accommodate different weapons, suspension, drive-train and chassis configurations. It also has a diesel range extender which allows it to expand its combat range out to 400 miles. 

In recent experiments and tests with the Army, Textron has demonstrated the ability for the RIPSAW to operate in conjunction with an aerial drone called SkyRaider. The ability for a ground robot vehicle to share surveillance, targeting and force-position data with an aerial drone brings new tactical dimensions to ground warfare. Of course it increases stand-off range for human soldiers operating in a command and control capacity, but also expands the scope of the battlefield, something the Army expects will greatly impact the future of warfare. As sensors and weapons-ranges continue to expand, areas of combat operations will only become larger, better networked and more dispersed. A forward aerial drone could, for instance, operate over hostile areas to identify points of entry for robotic ground vehicles to attack enemy fortifications. 

Kris Osborn is defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.

Image: Textron.

Martin Weiser

Security, Asia

This story illustrates what is wrong with coverage of North Korea. Too many assume North Koreans believe anything.

Since April, academics and politicians in South Korea have been rushing to address the problem of false reporting on North Korea. Progressive legislators held a discussion with civil society in May on how to respond to fake news on North Korea, while Kyungnam University’s Institute of Far Eastern Studies recently published a report and then a whole book on the topic.

The instigator was an April DailyNK report that sparked global rumours about North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s supposed ailing health and possible death following heart surgery. The outlet later issued a correction after several reporting mistakes came to light — ‘heart surgery’ was in fact a cardiovascular procedure and ‘sources’ was actually a single source. When Kim Jong-un appeared in early May after an unusual absence, he did have a mark on his right wrist that could imply a medical procedure, but South Korean intelligence had long stressed there were no signs of health problems as alarming as speculated.

The story made clear that sensationalist reports on North Korea cannot be blindly trusted — the context, ambiguities, inconsistencies and news agency biases have to be carefully considered in the process of digesting information on North Korea. Anonymous single sources strongly colour what information eventually reaches readers.

Despite renewed vigilance, in late May another apocryphal story reached a global audience thanks to South Korean media. South Korean outlet Dong-A Ilbo and others reported that North Korea’s newspaper of record Rodong Sinmunhad finally ‘debunked the myth of Kim Il-sung’s teleportation ability’. South Korean outlet Chosun Ilbo claimed this was a ‘rare admission’ from North Korea, adding that ‘some bright spark in the propaganda department in the 1950s invented the story’.

Radio Free Asia even quoted the South Korean Ministry of Unification as stating it ‘marked the first time that [North Korean] state media flatly denied that a Kim family myth was true’. In South Korea, the story found its way onto television via Chosun Ilbo-affiliated ChosunTV, declaring that this was the first time the North had made such an acknowledgement. Broadcaster KBS reached an even wider South Korean audience with their ‘Inter-Korean Window’ segment reproducing the same narrative.

All of these assertions were so outrageously wrong it is surprising that no outlet or scholar, South Korean or foreign, sought to set the record straight.

The actual story published in Rodong Sinmun on 20 May was a reprint of a Kim Il-sung anecdote that quoted him as saying: ‘Actually, humans cannot move by folding space and disappearing and reappearing’. This was part of his response when asked in November 1945 about his apparent ability to ‘teleport’ (chukjibop) — employing stealth tactics to evade capture as a guerrilla fighting the Japanese.

Rodong Sinmun’s 20 May story did not reveal a new ‘rare admission’, as South Korean outlets claimed — and versions of it had previously been published in the North already in 2015 and 2018 in the same newspaper. Just months after Rodong Sinmun first featured the story in 2015, South Koreans were still told by Yonhap that Kim Il-sung is deified in Northern schools using his alleged ability to teleport as an instance. The 2015 and 2018 North Korean reports included that same sentence on teleportation being impossible, but it was only in May 2020 that reporters took an interest.

The earlier North Korean reports could have been found easily. Journalists just needed to search the Rodong Sinmun website for the word ‘teleportation’ to find the 2018 report. South Korea censors all North Korean websites, but journalists are not deterred by this as the reporting demonstrates.

Even easier would have been to use commercial services like Korea Press Media or KCNAWatch, which few South Korean media outlets seem to do, though the South Korean state has censored these as well. In any case South Korea’s main library for North Korean material, run by the Ministry of Unification, offers a database that no journalists seem to have used to confirm fact.

The original source for the story appears to be a major North Korean publication, the Anecdotes on Kim Il-sung Collection, released in a number of volumes between 2013 and 2017. Volume six, covering November 1945, was released in 2015, coinciding with the first time the story was run by Rodong Sinmun.

This makes it impossible to tie Rodong Sinmun’s 20 May ‘admission’ to the failure of the 2019 Hanoi Summit or some recent propaganda strategy of Kim Jong-un, as some South Korean outlets claimed. And South Korea’s Ministry of Unification never stated that the May 2020 piece was the first time that North Korea had denied the ‘myth’. Radio Free Asia was the only outlet that carried this claim and it is not included in their Korean version. There are also no sentences in the Korean article that could be misunderstood that way. Either the translator or the English writer, known for omitting or bending fact, generated this Ministry ‘quote’ without an editor catching the additional fake news.

This story illustrates what is wrong with coverage of North Korea. Too many assume North Koreans believe anything. Few appreciate that the North Korean government holds dear the socialist dogma, one that inherently assumes religion, magic and unicorns as blatant superstition. Reporters need to be more willing to invest time and care in reporting on North Korea for accuracy and integrity, lest they become what they mock. For now, too little is done to catch or correct blatant mistakes, whether internally or externally and before publication or after, making healthy discussion around North Korean issues ever more difficult.

Martin Weiser is an independent researcher based in Seoul.

This article first appeared at the East Asia Forum.

Image: Reuters.

Ethen Kim Lieser

Technology,

Could TCL breakout from being known for HDTVs and make a big move into smartphones? This new phone screams a resounding yes. 

Chinese tech giant TCL is more well known for its strong lineup of budget and mid-tier HDTVs, but it is also trying to gain some global traction in the smartphone market.

It appears that the company has found a winner with its 10 Pro—which was released in late spring—and can now be had for a bargain-bin price of $380 (be sure to clip the coupon) on Amazon.

This particular model, often seen as a strong competitor to the Samsung Galaxy A line and the iPhone SE, is perfect for those who want to stay in the Android universe and not break the bank—but know that it still packs plenty of punch.

What immediately strikes you is the highly attractive sleek and modern design. And the screen—a curved 6.47-inch AMOLED display—that it contains is immersive, vibrant, and sharp, perfect for watching TV shows and movies and scrolling through social media sites. You can also rest easy knowing that the display has full-HD resolution and HDR 10 certification.

Also know that multitasking likely won’t be an issue, as the 10 Pro boasts the Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 processor and the 6 GB of RAM is more than enough for everyday usage. Even while gaming, the experience is excellent overall despite sometimes stretched out load times. There’s also 128 GB of storage, of which 113 GB is available out of the box.

The 10 Pro features a healthy set of cameras that can get the job done—just not on the levels of higher-end and more expensive smartphones out there. The quad-lens camera system combines a 64-megapixel primary wide-angle shooter with a 16-MP ultrawide one, a 5-MP macro camera, and a 2-MP sensor that is more for low-light shots. Not to be outdone, your selfies will be taken by a 24-MP camera.

For some people, the camera lenses ramp up the saturation too much, which do provide plenty of color, but the end result is that photos often lose its more lifelike aspects. Still, for a sub-$400 phone, it’s hard to be too critical of the cameras.

If you’re worried about getting through a full day without charging your smartphone, you can rest assured that the 10 Pro will surpass your expectations. TCL’s offering comes with a generous 4,500-mAh battery that has been shown to keep the device running for eleven to twelve hours—that’s markedly better than the Galaxy A51 and iPhone SE. However, be aware that wireless charging is not supported.

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.

Doug Bandow

Security, Asia

Pyongyang will attempt to communicate with America through a parade. It won’t be a message Washington wants to hear. But that is the price of the Trump administration failing to effectively follow up on the president’s diplomatic breakthrough.

North Korea’s Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un may show his hand for future dealings with America on October 10. The anniversary of the founding of the Korean Workers’ Party (KWP) is always an important occasion, but 2020 is the seventy-fifth anniversary of the formation of what passes for a communist party.

Although he caucused with communist states, Kim Il-sung, originally appointed by Moscow as its occupation frontman, never admitted being beholden to anyone. Alone among communist states, the North displayed not one image of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or any other communist notable. After all, what would juche represent if the nation’s founding ideals were based on the ramblings of a couple of long-dead Germans?

However, the claim of North Korean exclusivity means the KWP celebration is likely to be substantial despite the country’s economic troubles and the world’s coronavirus pandemic. Most everyone in Pyongyang, at least, will be watching. Foreign analysts and journalists will study the parade closely. Which makes it a perfect opportunity for the Kim regime to showcase a new weapon capable of striking the United States.

President Donald Trump’s dramatic opening to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea effectively ended a year after it started, in February 2019 at the failed Hanoi summit. The administration’s continued demand for full denuclearization before the DPRK received any meaningful concessions doomed additional talks. So Pyongyang largely disengaged from diplomacy with the United States and around the globe. Even unofficial contacts withered.

Yet Kim did not return to the North’s traditional policy of brinkmanship. Most notably, he did not restart nuclear and long-range missile testing. Nor did he launch another invective assault, highlighted by insults directed at the president—such as famously calling Trump a “deranged U.S. dotard.” Last December Pyongyang threatened to resume verbal combat if the president renewed hostilities, but there have been few rhetorical contretemps since.

The North more directly and roughly rejected Seoul’s attempts at conversation, likely because the former sees little positive to be gained so long as the Moon government refuses to challenge U.S. sanctions policy. However, the recent killing of a South Korean official in unclear circumstances prompted an apology of sorts from Kim, which might presage a softening attitude. Or perhaps Kim is veering toward conciliation with the South to prepare for an increasingly likely Biden administration, which seems unlikely to resume Trump-style summitry.

The parade provides an excellent opportunity to make implicit threats and increase tensions without testing American red lines. Resuming ICBM and/or nuclear testing would break a commitment, ostentatiously accelerate military developments, and increase threats to the U.S. homeland. The consequences would be unpredictable, but possibly dangerous.

For instance, Trump, especially if looking for a miracle deus ex machina to win reelection, might restart his “fire and fury” policy. Although a President Joe Biden likely would be more measured, his first reaction would not be to ease sanctions and attend summits. Indeed, with Iran likely much higher on an incoming Biden administration’s agenda, he might decide on a tougher response to North Korea to gain leverage in reinstating and/or renegotiating the nuclear deal with Tehran.

In contrast, a parade exhibition is less provocative. It is as likely to showcase possibilities, desires, wishes, dreams, and bluffs as realities. The threats are more theatrical and look more theoretical, offering more opportunity to dissuade Pyongyang from moving forward without considering military options.

Nevertheless, the DPRK could put on quite a show. A 38 North analysis of satellite data indicates that the North Koreans have built temporary shelters large enough to hold missiles and transport vehicles. The Carnegie Endowment’s Ankit Panda predicted: “The North Koreans are going to come out with potentially scores of solid propellants, medium range missiles.”

Although even mid-range missiles are nuclear-capable and able to strike U.S. bases in the region, their limited range makes them less fearsome for Americans and American policymakers. So something more is likely. The regime hasn’t showcased an ICBM since early 2018, when the Kim-Trump show debuted. As 2020 dawned Kim promised a “new strategic weapon,” which remains as yet unseen. It most likely is one or more long-range missiles.

An apparent transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) was spotted at the capital’s parade ground, which could be significant. Chad O’Carroll of NKNews noted that “North Korea suffers from a historic inability to develop its own heavy launcher vehicles, so the country has only shown small numbers of medium and long-range missiles at military parades. Therefore, if many heavy launcher vehicles are shown transporting an expanded missile arsenal at the parade in October, it would mean the country has markedly improved its capabilities.”

Such a missile display—even if mock-ups were used—would provide a powerful reminder to Washington on why negotiations are in America’s as well as North Korea’s interest. Moreover, the North might emphasize numbers by parading several ICBMs. Some analysts believe that the number of storage units suggest deployment of as many as a dozen. The larger the number, the more difficult for the United States to either preempt or defeat an attack. However, displaying what might merely be a model is not likely to panic America and drive a president or president-elect to act precipitously.

Another possibility would be to highlight development of an SLBM, or submarine-launched ballistic missile. However, the smaller weapons would look less formidable on parade. The threat also would be less. Although submarine-launched missiles have a formidable reputation, the North is far from having a workable fleet capable of carrying SLBMs and the United States has long invested heavily in anti-submarine technology to counter the Soviet Union and now China. Pyongyang could more cheaply and effectively increase the number of mobile land-based missiles.

North Korea also likely aspires to develop multiple independent re-entry vehicles, which allow one missile to carry several warheads. There are no reports that Kim’s engineers have produced such a device, which also would not be much of a parade prop. Some conventional weapons look impressive, but the regime has been devoting its limited resources elsewhere for years. Which is another reason the North is likely to emphasize its missiles in the parade: in this field Pyongyang’s progress has been significant, including the development of ICBMs and solid fuels.

Whatever occurs at the parade likely will constitute the North’s full “provocation” ahead of the Nov. 3 election. Pyongyang would prefer a Trump victory, but any dramatic threats would undermine the president and/or might trigger a violent reaction.

However, additional provocations are probable after the election. The DPRK might seek to encourage another presidential foray into dealmaking if Trump wins; reminding him of the North’s capabilities would encourage him to be more flexible and offer smaller deals involving at least some sanctions relief.

If Biden is victorious, the North probably will raise tensions to increase its leverage with the new administration. Creating a sense of crisis might be the only way to force Korea onto the Biden agenda. And to encourage a more active stance and willingness to negotiate than was evident in the Obama administration.

As in the past, Pyongyang will attempt to communicate with America through a parade. It won’t be a message Washington wants to hear. But that is the price of the Trump administration failing to effectively follow up on the president’s diplomatic breakthrough. The next administration should recognize that the North doesn’t plan to abandon its nukes and shape policy accordingly.

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Tripwire: Korea and U.S. Foreign Policy in a Changed World and co-author of The Korean Conundrum: America’s Troubled Relations with North and South Korea.

Image: Reuters.

Desmond Lachman

economy, Americas

A delay in a second stimulus package while the coronavirus is wreaking havoc across the country would increase the odds that the U.S. economy will experience a double-dip economic recession.

History will judge the American political class harshly if Congress and the White House prove themselves unable to compromise on a fiscal stimulus package before the November election. 

A delay in a second stimulus package would increase the odds that the U.S. economy will experience a double-dip economic recession. Additionally, it would make it all the more difficult for the United States to extricate itself from its worst economic recession in the past ninety years. It would do so as an increasing number of households and companies would be forced into bankruptcy and debt default.

That the U.S. economy now needs another sizable fiscal stimulus package would seem to be beyond question. As Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell keeps noting, the high-frequency data, including the recent disappointing employment numbers, strongly suggest that the U.S. economic recovery is already stalling and in need of more policy support. Worse yet, it is doing so at a time that the economy has regained only around half of the twenty-two million jobs that it lost in the pandemic’s wake.

Heightening the urgency of the need for an early fiscal boost are growing indications that the US economy could soon be hit by economic shocks coming from at home and abroad. 

At home, the health experts are warning of the real risk of a damaging second wave of the pandemic as the fall and winter months approach. Were that to happen, it could result in at least the partial rolling back of the lockdown’s easing that would be a drag on the economy. As to the potential shocks that could emanate from abroad, both the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are now warning of a very much less favorable international economic environment in general and the risk of a record wave of emerging market debt defaults in particular.

Further heightening the need for an additional fiscal stimulus package is the desperate economic straits in which many households and small businesses now find themselves. The supplemental unemployment insurance benefits for those losing their jobs as a result of the pandemic ran out at the end of July. Meanwhile, the generous Paycheck Protection Program that helped small businesses keep open and stave off bankruptcy ran out in August. Without additional early support, all too many of these businesses will permanently go under.

Making the lack of a compromise between Congress and the White House all the more difficult to understand is that both sides acknowledge that the economy is in urgent need of major budget support. While Congress thinks that a package of some $2.4 trillion, or over 10 percent of GDP, is needed, even the White House is suggesting that a fiscal boost on the order of $1.5 trillion, or around 7 percent of GDP, would be appropriate.

Beyond the dollar amount of any new package, what further separates the two sides is the composition of any such package. Both sides agree that there should be another round of checks sent out to lower-income households and that additional support should be provided to small businesses and to the airline industry. However, the White House disagrees with Congress’s idea that the $600 a week supplemental insurance benefit should be reinstated or that generous aid should be provided to troubled state and local governments.

In today’s charged political climate, it would seem to be all the more urgent to have Congress and the White House reach a compromise on a fiscal boost before the November election. With the economic recovery already stalling and with unemployment still very high, the economy can ill-afford another few months of policy inaction. Yet that is what is all too likely to happen in the event that an agreement is not reached before the election especially were the election results to be challenged or were there to be a change in administration.

Earlier this year in the depth of the recession, in the country’s best interest, parties from both sides of the aisle put aside their differences to enact the CARES Act—the largest peacetime fiscal stimulus on record. With the U.S. economy still so fragile and so vulnerable to another leg down, one would hope that bipartisan agreement can once again be reached to address the current difficult economic situation. Unfortunately, however, all the clues seem to suggest little likelihood of that happening anytime soon.

Desmond Lachman is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He was formerly a deputy director in the International Monetary Fund's Policy Development and Review Department and the chief emerging market economic strategist at Salomon Smith Barney.

Image: Reuters

Mark Episkopos

Security, Asia

Be on the lookout for a new ICBM or SLBM.

The Kim Jong-un regime is preparing to mark the 75th anniversary of the founding of the ruling North Korean Workers’ Party with a major military parade, where North Korea is poised to unveil several of its latest missile systems.

On October 10th, thousands of troops and masses of vehicle columns will line the streets of Pyongyang with all of the pomp and tightly rehearsed choreography befitting a major North Korean holiday. The last North Korean military parade was held in September 2018, following the Singapore summit between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim earlier that summer. In keeping with the spirit of then-ongoing denuclearization talks, North Korea opted not to display either of its new strategic weapons or its older stock of nuclear weapons delivery systems, at that celebration.

But a constellation of recent military and technical circumstances suggests that Pyongyang aims to use the 2020 parade as a high-profile venue to flaunt a slew of nuclear-capable missile systems. Late last month, reports emerged of a spike in activity at North Korea’s Sinpo Shipyard. The Sinpo Shipyard is the primary construction site for North Korea’s upcoming Sinpo-C ballistic missile submarine, the presumed successor to North Korea’s Soviet-derived Sinpo-B submarine line. North Korea has likewise made strides in developing and testing a nuclear-capable submarine-launched missile (SLBM) that can be deployed outside of Washington’s land-based THAAD network of missile defenses in East Asia, potentially posing an existential threat to critical South Korean infrastructure. Given the recent strides made in both of these projects, there is good reason to expect a Pukguksong-3 SLBM launch during the upcoming parade. This was already done last year, but likely from a submersible barge—demonstrating a Pukguksong-3 launch from a fully operational submarine, perhaps even a Sinpo-C prototype, would be a compelling testament to North Korean naval modernization.

The 75th-anniversary celebration could also become a showcase for North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) technology. Late last year, Kim announced at a Workers’ Party meeting that “the world will witness a new strategic weapon to be possessed by North Korea in the near future.” This could mean several different things in the context of the upcoming parade. South Korean news agency Yonhap, citing South Korea officials, posits that North Korea could be preparing to unveil a new long-range ballistic missile. This may be the solid fuel, nuclear-capable ICBM that a growing number of Korea experts believe is currently being developed by Pyongyang.

Another, somewhat more tame possibility is a parade demonstration of North Korea’s reported capacity to indigenously produce transporter erector launchers (TEL’s) for ICBM’s, which previously had to be imported and converted. A vehicle strongly resembling a TEL was recently spotted at the Mirim Parade Training Ground in the vicinity of Pyongyang, suggesting that TEL’s will take part in the parade. A larger supply of functioning TEL’s allows North Korea’s nuclear arsenal to be more widely deployed, enhancing both its first and second-strike capabilities.

For North Korea’s leadership, the 75th-anniversary parade raises issues of political timing. On the one hand, Pyongyang has recurrently threatened to destabilize U.S. politics ahead of the upcoming presidential election; to this end, a North Korean ICBM demonstration could burden the embattled Trump administration with a fresh foreign policy controversy a mere three weeks from election night. On the other hand, North Korea tends to save its major military provocations until shortly after new U.S. presidents are sworn in. If Pyongyang plays its nuclear hand now and Donald Trump goes on to lose the election, North Korea risks diluting what could later be a source of diplomatic leverage against a prospective Joe Biden administration.

Mark Episkopos is a frequent contributor to The National Interest and a PhD student in History at American University.

Image: Reuters.

Warfare History Network

History, Asia

Despite its shortcomings, the Grumman fighter more than held its own against Japan's Zero fighter at Coral Sea, Midway, and in the battles over Guadalcanal.

Key Point: Although the Wildcat was not as graceful as its opponent, American pilots exploited the plane’s weight to negate the Zero’s agility.

The Grumman F4F Wildcat is usually described as chunky, “square,” squat, or stubby—not exactly adjectives that suggest grace or elegance. The Wildcat is also frequently criticized for being slow, heavy, and lacking in maneuverability, especially in comparison with its main adversary, the famous Japanese Zero fighter. Despite its shortcomings, the Grumman fighter more than held its own against the Zero at Coral Sea, Midway, and in the battles over Guadalcanal.

Designers at Grumman intended the Wildcat to be rugged and heavily armed, a fighter that could absorb punishment as well as attack with six .50-caliber machine guns. The Zero, on the other hand, was built to be light and maneuverable at the cost of strength and toughness. It was certainly graceful and nimble, but it did not have the armor or the self-sealing fuel tanks that would have made it better protected but less agile.

The Wildcat in Combat

In performance, the Zero greatly outclassed the Wildcat, but because of their plane’s rugged design and construction, Wildcat pilots were able to survive attacks by Zeros that would have killed their Japanese opponents.

Japanese ace Saburo Sakai was greatly impressed by the Wildcat’s ability to withstand damage. “For some strange reason, even after I had poured about five or six hundred rounds of ammunition directly into the Grumman, the airplane did not fall but kept on flying,” Sakai wrote after a fight with a Wildcat. “I thought this very odd—it had never happened before— and closed the distance between the two airplanes until I could almost reach out and touch the Grumman. To my surprise, the Grumman’s rudder and tail were torn to shreds, looking like an old torn piece of rag.”

Sakai concluded with a note of amazement, “A Zero which had taken that many bullets would have been a ball of fire by now.”

Lieutenant Commander James Flatley, who commanded USS Yorktown’s fighter group at Midway, discovered that the best way to fight the Zero was to use the Wildcat’s weight and speed to advantage—gain altitude and dive at full throttle no matter what the enemy did. This tactic allowed Wildcat pilots to zoom through any screening Zeros and attack enemy bombers.

“Sooner or later they had to take you on on your terms,” Flatley explained. “If you should be jumped from behind, they had difficulty following, particularly when you rolled at high speed.”

These tactics produced results. During the Guadalcanal campaign, Wildcat pilots decimated Sakai’s fighter wing, which was stationed at Rabaul and made up entirely of Zeros. Although the Wildcat was not as graceful as its opponent, American pilots exploited the plane’s weight to negate the Zero’s agility.

This article first appeared on the Warfare History Network.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Kris Osborn

Security,

It would be a great boon, but there may not be enough of the planes to go around.

Should an entire U.S. Navy Carrier Strike Group finds itself in a great power war on the open ocean, it seems possible that surface ships might struggle to defend against attacks from enemy fifth-generation stealth fighters. Unless, that is, large numbers of carrier-launched F-35Cs were operational and able to engage in air-to-air combat against approaching enemy aircraft. 

But how about F-22 stealth fighter jets? During the U.S. Navy’s Valiant Shield exercise in the Pacific in September, the service began to explore the idea of having F-22 Raptors defend surface ships such as destroyers, amphibious assault ships and carriers. 

Perhaps the stealth fighter, believed by many to be the most dominant and advanced air-superiority platform in existence, could defend carriers? Why not? 

Speaking of carriers, Retired Lt. Gen. David Deptula, Dean of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, makes the point that damage to surface ships such as carriers in open-ocean warfare can bring catastrophic effects. 

“You can’t sink land-bases. They can be rapidly reconstituted. Carriers present a huge footprint that is potentially more vulnerable...but is that the best use of an F-22?” Deptula said. 

Given that the F-22 program was, in the minds of many, prematurely truncated years ago, there may not be sufficient numbers of available F-22s for a mission of this kind. More importantly, would they have the reach and staying power to preserve vulnerable air space above surface ships? It seems availability, and the number of nearby F-35Cs, might also be pertinent factors. 

For the first time, the joint Valiant Shield exercise included an Army unit focused on Multi-Domain Operations and the event tested air-ground-sea networking technologies merging Navy ships, Poseidon spy planes and even mine warfare capable B-52s to conduct integrated operations. 

Broadly speaking, a Navy report referred to the mission scope as “maritime security operations, anti-submarine and air-defense exercises, amphibious operations, and other elements of complex warfighting.” 

Carrier strike groups are of course known for their many defenses such as air-and-missile defense interceptors, long-range guns and close-in-defenses such as Phalanx guns or anti-torpedo technologies. Could ship self-defense systems, which increasingly include weapons such as lasers and electronic warfare systems, be better served by having F-22s operate overhead? 

Such a prospect presents interesting options, should an F-22 be able to reach the right ranges and be sufficient to conduct missions overhead. Refueling an F-22 with the Navy’s emerging MQ-25 Stingray carrier-launched drone refueler, however, might extend dwell time and mission scope in a significant fashion. Existing ship defenses may be well equipped to defend against anti-ship missiles, enemy boats and even ballistic missiles, yet it does seem apparent that they could be vulnerable to fifth-generation enemy aircraft. Clearly these threat circumstances are why the Pentagon developed the F-35, yet they also raise the question as to whether an air-to-air dominant fighter like an F-22 might also be well suited to preserve air security in ocean warfare. 

Certainly the advent of Russian and Chinese fifth-generation stealth aircraft changed the threat equation in a substantial way, regarding the kinds of attacks possibly faced by surface ships. China, for instance, is fast-tracking a carrier-launched variant of its J-31 to rival the F-35B. 

“F-18s are not going to bring much utility in a high-end fight,” Deptula said. 

Kris Osborn is the defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University. This first appeared earlier and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Image: Reuters

Bill Bradley

Politics, Americas

As we disregarded Russian fears and ignored the chance for a true partnership, Steve worried about the resumption of hostile relations between our two countries and possibly a new Cold War.

I knew Steve Cohen for over fifty years from my time with the New York Knicks (he loved basketball) to the U.S. Senate (he loved politics) to business (it couldn’t hold his attention). He was a public intellectual with core convictions informed by history. His magisterial biography of Nikolai Bukharin established his academic reputation. When I read it in the 1970s, it changed the way I thought about the origins of the Soviet Union. For Steve, ideas lived and language made a difference. He often marshaled his great clarity to challenge the status quo. Whether he was smuggling Solzhenitsyn novels into the Soviet Union in the 1970s, advising CBS News during the Gorbachev years, pleading with everyone to avoid a second Cold War or lecturing to a rapt class, he always expressed what he saw as the truth. Above all, he felt the Russian spirit, the pain of Russian history, and the irrepressible humanity of the Russian people.

As a U.S. senator, I traveled often to Russia during the 1980s when Mikhail Gorbachev was in power. Steve saw Gorbachev as having potentially a seminal role in the history of the world and he made no bones about it. With literally hundreds of Russian friends in the arts, journalism, academia, and government, Steve encouraged me to get to know the Russian people and the Russian land. So for six years between 1985 and 1992, I would travel the country from Moscow/St. Petersburg to Irkutsk with just one staff member and a friend of Steve’s who worked for the U.S. Information Agency and was a Ph.D. in Russian culture and language. We would often have meetings with Soviet officials in their offices and then we would go out and meet people in the streets or subways, at literary societies, and around Russian kitchen tables. On one of these trips, I asked a woman exiting the Tashkent subway what Perestroika and Glasnost meant to her. She paused before replying, “A new life for my children.”

When I came back from those trips, I would have lunch with Secretary of State George Shultz and tell him what I had seen, heard, and felt, which he said was much different from those things that the CIA was telling him. Through many sources, Shultz recognized that Gorbachev was a special leader, convinced Reagan of it and the Cold War ended.

When Boris Yeltsin succeeded Gorbachev and the economy went into a free fall with inflation at 1000 percent and a poverty rate of over 30 percent, Steve would say that Russia needed an FDR and instead got a Milton Friedman, leading to the rise of a kleptocracy.

Any good politician knows that when someone is down you call them up and tell them you’re with them and that you know they’ll get through the difficult times. The United States didn’t do that with Russia. We sent free-market ideologues without any understanding of Russian history and with little appreciation for the emotional trauma and wounded pride that the end of the Soviet Union brought to Russia. When the Russian intelligentsia offered advice on how we could work together in the world we just kept on doing what Russians felt was contrary to their interests—NATO expansion, missile defense, Iraq, Kosovo, and Libya.

As we disregarded Russian fears and ignored the chance for a true partnership, Steve worried about the resumption of hostile relations between our two countries and possibly a new Cold War. He held out hope that America would come to its senses. That view increasingly was not popular among the American foreign policy establishment and the media. In fact, in Steve’s last seven years, the New York Times rejected every op-ed he submitted. Some people even labeled him “Putin’s apologist.” Those comments hurt Steve deeply because he was first and always an American but one who could appreciate the legacy of Russian history and the opportunity that existed when tectonic plates shifted. Above all, he knew that it took courage and real leadership at the highest levels to create something new.

The relation between Steve and Gorbachev extended to their families. Gorbachev once told Steve that Steve’s relationship with his wife Katrina reminded Gorbachev of the one he had had with his wife Raisa, who was his inseparable soul mate until she died in 1999. And when Steve’s number two daughter, Nika, developed a consuming interest in both basketball and Russia, she honored her father’s roots in Kentucky and his contribution to the world.

For those of us who knew and cared for him, we will carry with us the memory of a good man who tried to make a difference on a very large stage and who never let the slings and arrows of criticism slow him from calling it as he saw it.

Bill Bradley is a former member of the New York Knicks, a former U.S. Senator, and a presidential candidate in 2000.

Image: Reuters.

Ethen Kim Lieser

Technology,

Does it provide the right features at the right price? 

If you have a strong desire to dip your toes into the waters of Samsung’s QLED HDTV offerings, the 65-inch Q70R Series would be a great place to start.

Sporting a reasonable price tag of $1,600, know that the Q70R is much cheaper than its OLED TV rivals—which can easily dig deep into the $2K to $4K range. Despite the smaller investment, you can be rest assured that you’ll still be getting the second-best panel on the planet.

With this particular model, you’re on the receiving end of outstanding overall image quality with plenty-deep black levels. The high light output—a major strength of QLEDs—and next-generation full-array local dimming also work wonderfully well, so you’ll surely enjoy the lively and accurate colors.

You’ll also be blessed with a true 120Hz panel, which does improve the TV’s overall motion performance, and know that it fully supports HDR content in HLG and HDR10+ formats. The set’s robust video processing is known to be a welcome boon for hardcore gamers and lovers of intense action films.

Other reviewers had a similar take. “With a 120Hz refresh rate and software features to reduce motion blur and optimize the smallest of details (dew flying off a football, for example), and an approachable price tag, the Samsung Q70R is the perfect TV to catch up on all your favorite sports action,” Digital Trends recently wrote.

“It’s one of the best in its class, and the QLED screen with its higher brightness potential brings to life scenes brimming with natural light, like baseball, football, and soccer.”

Be aware that wide-angle viewing falls a bit short of the Q80 Series model, so if you have wider or wraparound seating arrangements, make sure to take note of that. And if you find yourself often watching TV during the daytime or in a bright room, the Q70R really does an honorable job of masking those annoying glares and reflections.

For the Q70R and many other QLED models, Samsung employs its own built-in digital assistant Bixby—but many users have shared their frustrations with this feature.

It, unfortunately, doesn’t come close to the skills of Google Assistant or Amazon Alexa, which can often be found on rivals from LG to Sony. Keep in mind that the 2019 and later versions, though, will be able to respond to voice commands issued via Alexa and Google Assistant smart speakers.

The set also comes with the ultra-cool Ambient Mode, enabling you to display a digital photo that matches the wall behind the panel.

The design of the Q70R Series can be described as classic Samsung. The panel is as thin as you can get for a QLED TV right now and it does exude a slick and refined look.

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.

Image: Samsung. 

Kris Osborn

Security,

A new upgrade means that the battle-tested drone just got more deadly.

The U.S. Air Force MQ-9A Reaper drone is getting nearly double the amount of firepower, due to a new software upgrade that enables the aircraft to carry eight Hellfire missiles instead of four. 

The Reaper flew with eight live AGM-114 Hellfire missiles September 10 as part of what the service calls the drone’s “persistent attack” role. More weapons, coupled with longer-range, higher-fidelity sensors and improved fuel tanks naturally increases dwell time over enemy targets, an ability to re-task to new targets as intelligence emerges and of course put more effects on target when needed. 

The added weapons are part of an Air Force software upgrade program called the MQ-9 Operational Flight Program 2409. 

“Previous to this software, the MQ-9 was limited to four AGM-114s across two stations. The new software allows flexibility to load the Hellfire on stations that previously were reserved for 500-pound class bombs or fuel tanks,” an Air Force report states. 

The Reaper can still be armed with 500-pound bombs on any of the stations as well, so the platform will retain its attack flexibility, depending upon mission requirements. 

The Reaper will now fire the AIM-9X in addition to the AGM-114 Hellfire missile, a 500-pound laser-guided weapon called the GBU-12 Paveway II, and GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munitions or JDAMs. These are free-fall bombs engineered with a GPS and Inertial Navigation Systems guidance kit.

This added Hellfire attack possibility introduces several new tactical possibilities and, one could certainly observe, helps transition the platform into a modern warfare posture in an area of great power competition. Certainly in a large-scale mechanized warfare scenario, additional tank-killing Hellfire missile attack options could prove tactically useful.

During the last fifteen years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Reaper operated with great success conducting precision-drone strikes against terrorists and other high-value targets. 

Now the Air Force seems to be working toward further transitioning the combat-tested drone into preparations for great power warfare. This appears to be a sensible next step along an evolving trajectory for the drone through which the Air Force has consistently added new weapons and expanded mission scope for the aircraft. 

The move to fire an AIM-9X is significant as well, given that it adds additional possibilities for major power warfare, such as air-to-air combat. Earlier this year, the MQ-9 Reaper successfully destroyed a drone cruise missile target with the well-known and highly effective AIM-9X precision air-to-air missile. The AIM-9X fires from the F-35 and F-22 stealth fighter jets and has in recent years been upgraded with improved precision-guidance technologies. Other upgrades also include “off boresight” targeting, enabling pilots to destroy enemy targets behind the aircraft. This is quite significant, as “off-boresight” technology can actually guide the AIM -9X to turn around and change course while in-flight using a pilot’s helmet-mounted cueing system. This massively expands the Reaper’s target envelope. 

Engineering a Reaper for air-to-air combat missions does seem to represent a sensible and technically advanced evolution of the platform, greatly expanding its mission purview. Armed with an AIM-9X, a Reaper can perform new offensive or defensive operations by virtue of using the missile as an “interceptor” stopping approaching enemy cruise missiles or an offensive attack against enemy aircraft. 

Kris Osborn is defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.

Image: Reuters

Rachel Bucchino

Security, Americas

The president has repeatedly downplayed the severity of the coronavirus since the start of the pandemic, as he’s said it was “going to disappear” and that it was “rounding the corner,” despite it infecting more than 7.2 million Americans. 

President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump have tested positive for the coronavirus, pushing the nation into another period of uncertainty in terms of the country’s leadership, as the virus’s death toll outstrips 208,000 people and millions remain sickened from the deadly disease. 

President Trump, seventy-four, was diagnosed after a suspenseful evening when a close aide to the president, Hope Hicks, tested positive Thursday morning. Hicks is among Trump’s closest staffers to have contracted the virus. The two of them had been aboard Air Force One and Marine One this week together and attended a campaign rally in Minnesota on Wednesday. The president took to Twitter to break the news, assuring the nation that the first couple “will get through this.” 

“Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19,” Trump tweeted, “We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!”

Just moments later, White House physician Dr. Sean Conley released a statement, noting that Trump and the first lady “are both well at this time, and they plan to remain at home within the White House during their convalescence." 

“The White House medical team and I will maintain a vigilant watch, and I appreciate the support provided by some of our country’s greatest medical professionals and institutions. Rest assured I expect the President to continue carrying out his duties without disruption while recovering, and I will keep you updated on any future developments," Conley added. 

The first lady also added to the Twitter feed and echoed the president’s remarks, saying “we are feeling good.” Melania reported that like “too many” other Americans, she and her husband would quarantine for the proper amount of time, forcing her to postpone “all upcoming engagements.” 

Both Trump and Melania have come into close contact with dozens of people on the campaign trail, considering there are only thirty-two days until Election Day. The news comes after he told an audience Thursday night that “the end of the pandemic is in sight.” The president and his entourage also flew to New Jersey for a fundraiser at his gold club in Bedminster on Thursday after hearing of Hicks’s diagnosis, where he came into close contact with a number of other people, including campaign supporters. Officials close to Trump told The Washington Post that the president did not wear a mask at the event. 

The New York Times reported that Trump is experiencing mild, cold-like symptoms Friday morning, but it’s unclear how far the infection has spread among the White House team. Vice President Mike Pence and second lady Karen Pence tested negative for the coronavirus on Friday, hours after news surfaced about the first couple. Pence’s press secretary Devin O’Malley took to Twitter to make the formal announcement, noting that the vice-president “wishes the Trumps well in their recovery.” 

In the meantime, aides will continue to be tested and contacts traced for the virus, with the heavy encouragement to remain home in quarantine. All presidential and political travel will be temporarily canceled, according to The Washington Post, which will impose enormous pressure on Trump’s campaign trail during the last four weeks heading into the election.  

Although he appears to be mildly symptomatic, the president will miss crucial time on his campaign trail against Democratic nominee Joe Biden. The White House did not indicate how long the first couple will remain contained, but it did cancel his in-person events for Friday in Florida, leaving the only measure on his public schedule a telephone call about “Covid-19 support to vulnerable seniors.” Other events for the weekend in key battleground states have also been squashed, posing a threat to his re-election chances in an already competitive race to the White House. The president has repeatedly downplayed the severity of the coronavirus since the start of the pandemic, as he’s said it was “going to disappear” and that it was “rounding the corner,” despite it infecting more than 7.2 million Americans.  

Trump also mocked Biden at the first presidential debate for wearing a mask. The president has been known to question the effectiveness of masks and placed distrust in public health experts in combating the virus. “I don’t wear masks like him,” he said, referring to his political opponent. “Every time you see him, he’s got a mask.” It’s unclear if Biden has been infected by the coronavirus after coming into contact with the president Tuesday night. 

The White House did not provide any statement regarding the next presidential debate on Oct. 15.  

If Trump does appear to be severely symptomatic, considering he places in several high-risk categories for the virus, questions will arise if he should still plea for a second term in the White House. 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, adults between the ages of sixty-five and seventy-four experience ninety times greater risk of death from the coronavirus compared to adults between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine. The president is also clinically overweight, which is another factor that boosts the risk of the severity of the virus. 

It is unknown if Trump assumes any other health conditions that could place him in a high-risk group, but past physicals indicate a growing heart disease. 

His most recent physical with Conley said “there were no findings of significance or changes to report,” as there were no signs of cancer, kidney disease, diabetes or other severe conditions. The physician did report, however, that his blood pressure was somewhat elevated. 

Two years ago, Trump’s physical indicated that his coronary calcium CT scan score was 133, according to CNN. Anything in-between one hundred and three hundred “means moderate plaque deposits,” correlating with the threat of a heart attack or other form of heart disease within the next three to five years. In 2009, the president’s score was thirty-four and in 2013, it was ninety-eight, suggesting there’s been a build-up of plaque for a number of years. 

Another area of concern was Trump’s cholesterol levels and his LDL, of “bad cholesterol,” as the figures both jumped in 2017 and 2018, with the president taking the statin drug that serves to lower cholesterol, called Crestor. 

Trump and the first lady join the millions of people who have contracted the coronavirus in the United States, throwing the country in the lead for the number of reported cases. 

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

History,

She was old by the time World War II was waged, but she made some serious history. 

If World War II had come a decade earlier it might have been the Martin B-10 rather than the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and Consolidated B-24 Liberator that might have been the workhorse of the U.S. Army Air Corps (USAAC). The aircraft was developed in the early 1930s but was largely antiquated by the time the war came – yet, the B-10 started a revolution in bomber design.

The plane began as a private venture in early 1932 at the Glenn L. Martin Company as the Model 123. It was not bound to any military specification and that gave the engineers at Martin free rein in the aircraft's development, and the focus was on maximum performance over other considerations for a military bomber. It was powered by two 750hp Wright R-1820-E Cyclone engines, which gave it a top speed of 207 mph, more than 22 mph faster than its competition of the era.

The plane was also the first all-metal monoplane and first all-metal bomber, and it featured many innovations including retractable landing gear, an enclosed rotating turret for defense and enclosed cockpits. In trials it was found that the aircraft would carry a bomb load of 2,200 pounds over a distance of 650 miles and at a maxim speed of 197mph. It also had a ceiling of 6,000 feet, which was higher than contemporary fighters.

Military planners saw that the bomber could successfully attack strategic targets without long-range fighter escort.

The Army immediately ordered 14 of the aircraft, but eventually, a total of 121 B-10s were ordered from 1933 to 1936, the largest procurement of bomber aircraft by any nation since the First World War. Another 32 were ordered with 700hp Pratt & Whitney R-1690 Hornet engines and designated as the B-12.

Notable Achievements

The B-10 was awarded 1932's Collier Trophy for outstanding achievement in American aviation and the trophy was presented to Martin by President Franklin Roosevelt shortly after he took office in 1933. That would be the first of six times that Martin received the prestigious award.

Military aviation pioneer General Henry H. "Hap" Arnold called the Martin bomber "the air power wonder of its day," and he led 10 B-10s  on a 8,290-mile flight from Washington, D.C. to Fairbanks, Alaska and back in 1934.

Even as the B-17s and B-18 Bolos began to replace the Air Corps' B-10s/B-12s, the plane was exported to the Chinese and Dutch air forces, and it was used in combat against Imperial Japanese forces – and actually saw its baptism of fire during the Sino-Japanese War in May 1938. The Martin B-10 was also used by the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army (Koninklijk Nederlands Indisch Leger or KNIL) in the Defense of the Dutch Indies in late 1941 and early 1942.

While a total of 348 of all variants including 182 export versions were produced in total, there is only one complete B-10 in the world today. It is in the collection of the National Museum of the United States Air Force and was actually found in Argentina, where it was used by engineering students at the "Jorge Newberry" National School of Technical Education, No. 1 in Buenos Aires. As a gesture of friendship the Argentine Navy donated the aircraft to the museum in August 1970.

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.

Image: Photo of a Martin B-10 variant of the 23d Bombardment Squadron taken in 1941 over Oahu, Hawaii.

Peter Suciu

Security, Europe

Would they give Moscow any sort of edge in a future conflict? 

The Russian military has been developing its next generation of combat gear and it could be integrated with new micro-drones that provide a tactical level automated command system. Such equipment was designed to enhance each soldier's situational awareness, facilitate the performance during combat missions and even minimize the level of physical effort of individual soldiers while reducing their risk of life.

"One of the current research and development projects, being carried out at the request of the ground forces' command, envisages the creation of a new generation combat gear incorporating elements that enhance the personnel's physical abilities, such as combat and special exoskeletons, and the integration of combat and support robots as well as reconnaissance and attack drones of small and mini-class," explained commander of ground forces, General of the Army Oleg Salyukov, in an interview with the government-published Rossiiskaya Gazeta on Thursday.

Tass reported that Russian defense contractor Rostec was working on a new generation combat gear called Sotnik (Centurian), which would replace the current Ratnik (Warrior) infantry equipment. It is being developed by one of the company's affiliates, the Central Scientific-Research Institute for Precision Machine Engineering TasNIItochMash.

The Russian military has announced plans to have the first batch of Sotnik equipment delivered to special operations troops by 2025 and to the entirety of the Russian military within another five years. It has been suggested that such a timeline could be overly ambitious due to the fact that Sotnik consists of a great deal of high-tech items that may not be ready for combat troops in just a decade.

Some of the equipment already exists, including anti-mine boots and special cloth that could reduce thermal (heat) signatures that identifies troops to thermal sensors – making them essentially invisible to those sensors – while other cloth could reduce radar effectiveness.

The equipment could also be integrated with micro-drone technology, which would be connected with a tactical level automated command system. This could provide images from cameras on the drones that are transmitted and project to a soldier's helmet visor or protective glasses along with commands, maps of the terrain and other crucial information – sort of a "Google Glass" solution for the battlefield.

Tass reported that nothing has been said about plans to integrate attack drones with the new generation of combat gear, but that could be the next step for Russia's soldiers of the future.

Research and development for the new generation of equipment will reportedly last from 2020 to 2023, and the final list of Sotnik items is expected to be completed until at least then, but the equipment has been reported to be about 20% lighter than the current Ratnik equivalents. It is expected that the Sotnik combat gear will consist of new ammunition and firearms.

While this could mark the end of the line for the Ratnik, experiences with it have proved information. The last major upgrade in terms of equipment was earlier this year when the new Russian assault rifle, the AK-12, was finally delivered to regular infantry units.

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.

Image: Sukhoi Su-35 jet fighters of the Russian Knights aerobatic team perform during International military-technical forum "Army-2020" at Kubinka airbase in Moscow Region August 25, 2020. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov.

Peter Suciu

Security, Europe

This month the commander-in-chief of Russia's ground forces told state media that its tanks could be armed with far larger caliber guns. Why is that needed? 

While the first batch of T-14 Aramata main battle tanks (MBTs) is set to finally be deployed to the Russian military later this year, it will be years before the nation's older armored vehicles are retired from service. For this reason, the older tanks could soon be deployed with increased firepower.

This month the commander-in-chief of Russia's ground forces told state media that its tanks could be armed with far larger caliber guns.

The current tanks – T-72B3, T-72B3M, T-80BVM and T90M are armed with 125-millimeter guns and can be used to fire different types of ammunition to successfully cope with their tasks," General of the Army Oleg Salyukov told the government-published daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta according to Tass.

"At the same time it is not ruled out the caliber of tank guns may be increased," Salyukov added during his interview on the occasion of Ground Forces Day, a professional holiday established in 2006.

Cold War Weapons Upgraded:

The tanks Salyukov mentioned are older platforms, but still largely feared ones that have been substantially modernized over the years. The T-72B3 version was introduced in 2010, and while it is part of the family of Soviet MBTs that first entered production in 1971, it was considered a third-generation MBT.

The further upgraded T-72B3M, which was first exhibited at the 2014 Tank Biathlon World Championship, provided the Cold War tank with true 21st century capabilities. The layout of the tank is nearly identical to the original T-72, but it features an advanced fire controls system and new thermal sights. The mobility and combat characteristics have been improved to allow the T-72B3M to compete with some of the most advanced tanks in the world today.

Likewise, the T-80BVM is a modernized version of the T-80, and this newest model was first publically revealed only in 2017. Originally, the Russian military had planned to retire its T-80 series tanks by 2015, but instead, the first batch of 31 of the tanks was upgraded to the T-80BVM standard and revealed during a military parade in 2018. Among the improvements is slightly improved Relikt explosive reactive armor protection. However, due to high operational costs, many of the T-80BVM are kept in reserve, according to Military-Today.

The T-80BVM are unlikely to be retired anytime soon as the Cold War-era design works quite well in cold conditions! The turbine engine used in the tanks, which is more expensive to operate and maintain, has the benefit of functioning better in the northern parts of Russia where the temperatures can be very low. While Russian diesel tanks can take around 45 minutes to start at -30 degrees Celsius, gas turbine tanks can be up and running in around one minute. T-80s are also said to be more comfortable and warmer for the crew in such climates than other tanks.

The T-90M, which remains arguably Russia's most advanced front-line tank, is a modernized version of a vehicle that first entered service in 1993. The Russian Army received the first new T-90M tanks as part of a batch of 400 last year.

Clearly, the Russian military has been continuing to keep the tanks up and running with the latest advances, and based on Salyukov's latest statements the next round of upgrades could see these tanks have a bit more hitting power.

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.

Image: A Russian T-90S tank fires during the "Russia Arms Expo 2013", the 9th international exhibition of arms, military equipment and ammunition in the Urals city of Nizhny Tagil, September 26, 2013. REUTERS/Sergei Karpukhin (RUSSIA - Tags: MILITARY)

Jacob Heilbrunn

Health,

Without Trump at the helm as impresario, his campaign and presidency, more than ever, are in danger of completely unraveling.

President Donald Trump’s announcement that he and first lady Melania Trump have contracted the coronavirus is a political disaster for him and the GOP. This October surprise could not have come at a worse moment for him.  “Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19,” he tweeted. “We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!” Now that Trump himself has a positive diagnosis, the implications for his campaign and the country are numerous.

For a start, there is the question of Trump’s own health. As a 74-year-old, he has comorbidities that put him at risk for serious complications. He will have to quarantine at the White House as will the first lady. White House operations may be compromised if it turns out that numerous other staffers were infected apart from Hope Hicks, who has been traveling with Trump on Air Force One. Vice President Mike Pence and his wife Karen have tested negative for the coronavirus.

The highest priority will be to ensure the health of both Trump’s now that they have been stricken by the coronavirus. CNN’s Stephen Collinson notes, “A President in medical peril is a situation that calls for humanity. The most serious known threat to a commander-in-chief's health for decades also calls for unity since it can bear on the security of the nation itself should US enemies seek advantage and probe a potential leadership vacuum.”

How did it get to this point? There will be serious questions about the White House’s flouting of pandemic protocols, including holding large-scale events at the White House where few wore masks such as the Republican Convention. Trump is also coming under fire for traveling to his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey after Hope Hicks was diagnosed with the virus. Trump may have exposed dozens of his staunchest donors and fundraisers at the club to the coronavirus.

As Politico observed, “Trump’s diagnosis will raise serious questions about whether the White House’s coronavirus protocols were adequate — and whether the West Wing took the threat of the virus seriously enough.”

Trump’s campaign will also be in turmoil. It is unlikely that there will be any further debates between him and Joe Biden. Trump will be unable to lead the political rallies that were instrumental to his campaign in 2016. Above all, his campaign message has been crippled. It was predicated on the contention that the coronavirus was a mere speed bump that had already been left behind in the rearview mirror. “I just want to say that the end of the pandemic is in sight,” Trump declared on Thursday night in a videotaped message to the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, “and next year will be one of the greatest years in the history of our country.”

At the same time, Trump consistently mocked former Vice President Joe Biden for wearing a mask. “I don’t wear masks like him,” he said. “Every time you see him, he’s got a mask. He could be speaking 200 feet away from it. And he shows up with the biggest mask I’ve ever seen.” For Trump wearing a mask was synonymous with a lack of virility. He also branded Biden a physical wreck and declared that the virus would disappear “like a miracle.” Instead, it has struck him and his inner circle. Trump’s botched approach to the coronavirus has been a hallmark of his presidency over the past year. Indeed, writing in the National Interest, Dimitri K. Simes astutely observed,

“a lack of adequate preparation to a fairly predictable pandemic, an absence of minimally adequate supplies, a failure to organize mass testing comparable to what was done in most of Europe, China, Korea, and even Russia, has made the pandemic more severe than in most other advanced nations. The president’s emphasis on reopening the economy no matter what has also now contributed to a new wave of the virus, which in turn triggers new closings of the economy, more unemployment, zig-zags in financial markets, and a general uncertainty.”

Now the stakes have grown even higher. Trump, who wanted to shift the focus to a law and order campaign and Biden’s own record, will be the almost exclusive focus of the media in the coming weeks as his handling of the coronavirus and own health come under intense scrutiny. New polls indicate that Biden may be headed for a landslide victory. Without Trump at the helm as impresario, his campaign and presidency, more than ever, are in danger of completely unraveling.

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump walks with first lady Melania Trump at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport in Cleveland, Ohio, U.S., September 29, 2020. Picture taken September 29, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo