US-Soldaten in Afghanistan

Defense One


»http://www.defenseone.com«

suche-links1 2 3 4 5suche-rechts

18.09.2018

"Cognitive Science Helps Explain How We Blunder Into War"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/09/cognitive-science-helps-explain-how-we-blunder-war/150905/?oref=
d-river

Brian VanDeMark von der U.S. Naval Academy hat in seinem neuen Buch "Road to Disaster" aus der Perspektive der Kognitionswissenschaft untersucht, wie die USA nach 1945 immer tiefer in die Krise des damaligen Indochinas hineingezogen wurden und schließlich den Krieg in Vietnam begannen. "In 1945, Vietnam’s Ho Chi Minh wrote to President Truman, thanking him for U.S. assistance in their mutual fight against the Japanese and asking for help against France’s effort to reassert colonial control in Indochina. Truman never got the letter — but there’s little reason to think it would have diverted America from its path to war in Southeast Asia. In his new book, Road to Disaster, U.S. Naval Academy professor Brian VanDeMark explores why. By using the insights of cognitive science to dissect the flawed perceptions and decisions of the Vietnam era, he teaches today’s leaders to spot their own."

Mehr lesen


04.09.2018

"Washington Won’t Keep Rebuffing Moscow’s Cyber Proposals Forever"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/09/washington-wont-keep-rebuffing-moscows-cyber-proposals-forever/1
51003/?oref=d-river

Alex Grigsby erwartet, dass die USA mit Russland trotz der Vorkommnisse während der Präsidentschaftswahlen und anderer Vorbehalte bei der Bekämpfung von Cyberangriffen auf kritische Infrastrukturen zusammenarbeiten werden. Moskau habe ein entsprechendes Angebot zuletzt auf dem Gipfeltreffen in Helsinki unterbreitet und werde dies im Herbst bei der UN wiederholen. "The United States and Russia recognize that despite their significant differences, they have to talk to each other to avoid uncontrolled escalation in cyberspace. That’s why even after the 2014 Russian invasion of Ukraine, the United States kept meeting with Russian cyber experts despite having cut cooperation elsewhere. (...) The most promising opportunity for U.S.-Russia cyber cooperation will come this fall at the United Nations. (...) The United States is unlikely to be enthused at the prospect of another GGE [Group of Governmental Experts on Information Security] process when it would rather spend its time enforcing existing cyber norms instead of talking about creating new ones. Despite these misgivings, it is one of the few options that keeps Moscow and Washington at the bargaining table."

Mehr lesen


21.08.2018

"Boko Haram’s Deadly Impact"

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018/08/boko-harams-deadly-impact/150697/?oref=d-river

Einer neuen Studie zufolge sind dem Terror der radikalislamischen Gruppe Boko Haram deutlich mehr Menschen zum Opfer gefallen als bisher angenommen. "The study shows that though Boko Haram’s territorial control is now limited to some small villages and pockets of countryside, a shift in tactics has helped the group stay a threat to millions. It has turned to suicide bombings, which accounted for almost a third of all casualties in the first half of 2018, and has increasingly attacked Muslim places of worship. (...) This new compilation of data is based on an analysis of publicly available data from CFR’s Nigeria Security Tracker (NST) and the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), an independent nongovernmental organization based at the University of Sussex. (...) From June 2011 through June 2018, the NST documented 2,021 incidents involving Boko Haram, in which 37,530 people were killed, nearly double the conventionally cited estimate of twenty thousand. Over the same period, ACLED identified 3,346 incidents, in which 34,261 people were killed. Both totals reflect deaths of alleged Boko Haram fighters, government forces, and civilians combined."

Mehr lesen


10.08.2018

"Trump’s Secret War on Terror"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/08/trumps-secret-war-terror/150448/?oref=d-river

Präsident Trump habe den Drohnenkrieg der USA gegen mutmaßliche Terroristen "dramatisch" ausgeweitet, berichtet Daniel Rosenthal. Details und Regeln der Operationen würden der Öffentlichkeit und dem Kongress dabei weitgehend vorenthalten. Neben der Tötung möglichst vieler feindlicher Kämpfer sei zudem keine weitergehende Strategie erkennbar. "According to leaks to The New York Times and other outlets, last fall he introduced a new policy that moved responsibility for counterterrorism operations outside traditional war zones to lower-level commanders, and lowered the threshold for such strikes. (Targets are no longer required to pose a 'continuing, imminent threat' to the United States, but rather may be lower-level foot soldiers, and there is purportedly no longer a requirement for 'near certainty' that the target be on-site for strikes.) (...) The narrow objective for drone strikes, of course, is to kill the terrorists who are targeted and, thus, remove them from the battlefield. By that standard, the program may be deemed a success insofar as, according to government-released statistics, the program has resulted in the deaths of over 3,000 combatants. (...) But there has been insufficient attention, both within government and from NGOs, in assessing the broader-view net result of the drone program; said differently, and channeling former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, are we killing more terrorists than we are creating?"

Mehr lesen


31.07.2018

"Pentagon To Start Creating Space Force — Even Before Congress Approves It"

https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2018/07/pentagon-create-space-force/150157/?oref=d-topstory

Das Pentagon hat Marcus Weisgerber zufolge erste Schritte unternommen, um die von US-Präsident Trump geforderte Weltraum-Armee ("Space Force") aufzubauen. Ob es dabei tatsächlich zur Schaffung eines eigenständigen Teils der US-Streitkräfte kommen wird, hängt allerdings vom Kongress ab. "In coming months, Defense Department leaders plan to stand up three of the four components of the new Space Force: a new combatant command for space, a new joint agency to buy satellites for the military, and a new warfighting community that draws space operators from all service branches. These sweeping changes — on par with the past decade’s establishment of cyber forces — are the part the Pentagon can do without lawmakers’ approval. Creating the fourth component — an entirely new branch of the military with services and support functions such as financial management and facilities construction — will require congressional action."

Mehr lesen


24.07.2018

"The US and Russia Have Plenty of Areas for Cooperation. Let’s Get to Work."

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/07/us-and-russia-have-plenty-areas-cooperation-lets-get-work/149996
/?oref=d-river

Debra Decker vom Stimson Center nennt einige konkrete Sachgebiete, auf denen die USA und Russland künftig stärker kooperieren könnten. Bei der Organisation der Zusammenarbeit sollte die US-Regierung ihrer Ansicht nach einen Vorschlag Wladimir Putins aufgreifen. "Trump promised that 'representatives from our national security councils will meet to follow up on all of the issues we addressed.' But who? Neither Trump’s heavy-handed National Security Advisor John Bolton nor some of the staff new to the National Security Council and diplomacy are the best choices for leading this work. President Putin — surprised? — has a better suggestion: seek positive 'points of contact' for U.S.-Russian engagement, as he called them (at least in the English translation), assisted by 'an expert council that would include political scientists, prominent diplomats and former military experts from both countries.' Such experts would know the history of Russian-U.S. engagement — the duplicity but also how the two countries can work positively together."

Mehr lesen


10.07.2018

"Don’t Give Russia the Gift of Extending New START"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/07/dont-give-russia-gift-extending-new-start/149605/?oref=d-river

Matthew Costlow würde eine Verlängerung des START-Vertrags ohne russische Gegenleistung dagegen als "Geschenk" an Russland betrachten, das nicht leichtfertig vergeben werden sollte. "Prudence (...) dictates waiting until February 2021 to see whether the extension of the New START Treaty remains in the U.S. national interest. (...) This is not to say that President Trump should not pursue risk reduction measures when he meets with President Putin, he should. But extending the New START Treaty now is unnecessary, would reduce future bargaining leverage, and sends a signal of accommodation to President Putin – the opposite of what he needs."

Mehr lesen


10.07.2018

"A No-Cost, No-Brainer of a Nuclear Deal"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/07/no-cost-no-brainer-nuclear-deal/149603/?oref=d-river

US-Präsident Trump sollte das Gipfeltreffen mit Russlands Präsident Putin nach Ansicht von Joe Cirincione nutzen, um eine Verlängerung des START-Vertrags zu vereinbaren und damit die nukleare Rüstungskontrolle neu zu stärken. "The New START Treaty will expire in 2021. If it does, both nations could bust through the ceiling the accord places on each side’s long-range nuclear forces — the missiles and bombers that can span oceans to deliver nuclear bombs in as little as 30 minutes after launch. For the first time since President Richard Nixon negotiated the SALT Treaty in 1972, there would be no limit to the number or types of strategic weapons Russia and the United States deploy. Worse, Russia and the United States would lose all inspections, tracking and verification of these arsenals, which account for over 92 percent of all the nuclear weapons in the world. (...) With little effort and no cost, Trump can secure five more years of verified limits on Russian forces. It would be the best deal of his presidency so far."

Mehr lesen


02.07.2018

"For America, More War in Syria Is All Risk, No Reward"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/07/america-more-war-syria-all-risk-no-reward/149371/?oref=d-topstor
y

Eine Weiterführung des amerikanischen Militäreinsatzes in Syrien würde nach Ansicht von Bonnie Kristian nicht im amerikanischen Interesse liegen. Die Risiken und die Kosten könnten angesichts der kaum erreichbaren Ziele nicht mehr gerechtfertigt werden. "Whether there was ever anything worthwhile to be gained by U.S. military intervention in Syria’s near-decade of conflict may be subject to debate, but it is increasingly evident there is no good reason to stay there now. In Syria, the United States finds no reward, only risks. It is time to make our exit. The gravest plausible risk, of course, is greatpower conflict with Russia. (...) But this sort of catastrophic escalation is not the only way that continued U.S. intervention in Syria may have unwanted and unintended results. Trump campaigned against the nation-building of past administrations, but the longer the United States stays in Syria and the more changes we effect, the more we will own its eventual reconstruction. (...) The recklessness of keeping U.S. soldiers in harm’s way in Syria is compounded by the fact, often sidestepped by Washington, that there are no vital American interests at stake."

Mehr lesen


24.06.2018

"An Extraordinarily Expensive Way to Fight ISIS"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/06/b2-bomber-air-force-isis/149221/?oref=d-topstory

William Langewiesche erzählt in dieser Reportage die detaillierte Geschichte eines amerikanischen Bombenangriffs auf 70 Extremisten in Libyen. "The tale of a 2017 bombing raid in the Libyan desert that pitted stealth bombers and 500-pound bombs against 70 ragtag fighters. (...) The Air Force has three types of heavy bombers, any of which could have done the job. The choice of the B-2 was surprising because it is by far the most expensive airplane to fly and maintain, and Libya post-Qaddafi had no air defenses that might require a stealth capability to penetrate. Bombing ignorant gunmen camped out in a desert of a non-country is a far cry from launching an attack against a modern military adversary. But the high cost of the mission was perhaps an attraction by bureaucratic if not military logic — you may lose money if you don’t spend it — or the B-2s might have just needed some work to do. The Air Force says simply that after a formal process of consideration, the B-2 was deemed the appropriate platform."

Mehr lesen


17.06.2018

"Has Trump Irreversibly Altered the GOP’s Foreign Policy?"

https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2018/06/has-trump-irreversibly-altered-gops-foreign-policy/149015/?or
ef=d-river

Gerade in Europa hoffen immer noch viele, dass die USA nach der Amtszeit Donald Trumps auf die gewohnten außenpolitischen Pfade zurückkehren werden. Ronald Brownstein erklärt, warum diese Hoffnung enttäuscht werden könnte. Präsident Trump habe einen Konflikt unter den Republikanern wiederaufleben lassen, der bereits in den 1950er Jahren ausgefochten worden sei. Diesmal werde der isolationistische Flügel der Partei den Kampf wohl gewinnen. "(...) the principal Republican divide over international involvement is now demographic. Trump’s insular nationalism resonates powerfully with his core constituency of Republicans without a college degree, a group that is almost entirely white. College-educated Republicans, who are also almost entirely white, are generally more skeptical — though even many of them have grown more suspicious of global engagement. (...) On U.S. alliances, the data paint a similar picture. While more college-educated than non-college-educated Republicans believe NATO is essential, both groups were far more likely than Democrats at either education level to question its value. (...) for now, Trump has demolished Eisenhower’s consensus, and routed the forces of global engagement inside the GOP as Taft never could. The only question is whether Trump’s victory lasts as long as Ike’s did."

Mehr lesen


11.06.2018

"This Is Bigger Than a Meeting With Kim Jong Un"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/06/bigger-meeting-kim-jong-un/148916/?oref=d-topstory

Uri Friedman hat sich in Seoul mit dem Korea-Experten John Delury unterhalten, der Donald Trumps Nordkorea-Strategie im neuen internationalen Kontext als angemessen und "mutig" einschätzt. "Delury disagreed with Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the nuclear agreement with Iran, and acknowledged that America’s relations with Iran are even more toxic than its relations with North Korea because Washington and Tehran are on opposing sides of conflicts across the Middle East. Still, he maintained that Obama’s 'complicated, technical' deal may have been 'too focused' on constraining Iran’s nuclear capabilities. 'It wasn’t a deep political settlement,' he explained, whereas 'what I see Trump working on with Kim Jong Un is … a fundamental transformation of the relationship.' And what Trump is facing is nothing less than a new nuclear age, when the strategies that kept the world safe during the Cold War may no longer apply. (...) 'I think Trump gets it,' Delury told me. Fundamental transformation is 'the way to get progress with North Korea.'"

Mehr lesen


20.05.2018

"What the North Koreans Told Me About Their Plans"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/05/what-north-koreans-told-me-about-their-plans/148345/?oref=d-rive
r

Der Korea-Experte Joel S. Wit hat vor wenigen Jahren an Treffen früherer Mitarbeiter der US-Regierung mit nordkoreanischen Offiziellen teilgenommen. Er schlussfolgert, dass Verhandlungen über einen schrittweisen und langfristig angelegten Prozess zur Denuklearisierung Nordkoreas durchaus Aussichten auf Erfolg hätten. "(...) what they outlined was a step-by-step process of denuclearization accompanied in each phase by U.S. measures of their own. It is entirely different from the 'Libya model' espoused by John Bolton, which involves giving up its program first and only then getting benefits in return. Indeed, the Trump administration doesn’t necessarily endorse Bolton’s view. Susan Thornton, the acting assistant secretary of state in charge of Asia, said last week that it was obvious there would be multiple steps in a long process of denuclearization, and the key issue was what happened first. How those differences over denuclearization are resolved inside the Trump administration, and whether common ground can be found with the North Koreans, will determine the future of the Korean peninsula. The stakes are nothing less than the success or failure of the world’s best current chance to disarm North Korea. The Thornton approach could mean, over the long term, that it really happens. The Bolton approach would assure that it won’t."

Mehr lesen


15.05.2018

"A Reckoning for Obama’s Foreign-Policy Legacy"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/05/reckoning-obamas-foreign-policy-legacy/148211/?oref=d-river

Die Außenpolitik von US-Präsident Trump ist nach Ansicht von Eliot A. Cohen auch eine durchaus verdiente "Abrechnung" mit dem Erbe der Obama-Administration. Viele der außenpolitischen Erfolge Obamas seien durch Dekrete des Weißen Hauses und ohne Einbeziehung des Kongresses erreicht worden. Dieser Makel habe nun ermöglicht, dass die vermeintlichen Errungenschaften Obamas ebenso leicht zurückgenommen werden können. "(...) the veterans and supporters of the Obama administration (...) are learning a hard lesson: that policies constructed by executive order and executive agreement are just as easily blown up by them. (...) Their big foreign-policy achievements are smoking (in one case, poison-gas-reeking) ruins — from the recognition of Cuba to the Iran deal, from the Trans-Pacific Partnership to the Libya intervention, and from the supposed pivot to Asia to the treaty eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons. They deserve their mortification, in part because, while in office, they thought they could treat constitutional requirements and everyone else’s opinions with contempt."

Mehr lesen


24.04.2018

"Experts Say AI Could Raise the Risks of Nuclear War"

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/04/experts-say-artificial-intelligence-could-raise-risks-nucle
ar-war/147673/?oref=d-topstory

Patrick Tucker stellt die Ergebnisse eines Experten-Workshops der RAND-Stiftung vor, denen zufolge Waffensysteme mit künstlicher Intelligenz bisher geltende strategische Konzepte entwerten und das empfindliche nukleare Gleichgewicht zwischen den Großmächten gefährden könnten. "New smarter, faster intelligence analysis from AI agents, combined with more sensor and open-source data, could convince countries that their nuclear capability is increasingly vulnerable. That may cause them to take more drastic steps to keep up with the U.S. Another worrying scenario: commanders could make decisions to launch strikes based on advice from AI assistants that have been fed wrong information. (...) Absent some means to better verify the validity of data inputs (...) and a better understanding of enemy intent, adversaries could turn the vast U.S. intelligence collection and digestion tools against them, especially as those tools work faster and more efficiently. In other words, fake news, combined with AI, just might bring about World War III."

Mehr lesen


16.04.2018

"For Not-Quite-Wars, Italy Has a Useful Alternative to Traditional Troops"

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/04/todays-not-quite-wars-italy-has-alternative-traditional-troops/1
47457/?oref=d-river

Italien besitzt Elisabeth Braw zufolge eine "hybride" Polizeieinheit, die aufgrund ihrer militärischen Fähigkeiten auch im Ausland eingesetzt werden könne. Das Konzept sei als Alternative zu konventionellen Streitkräften attraktiv, da es sich heute bei vielen internationalen Konflikten nicht um ausgewachsene Kriege handle. "Indeed, the Carabinieri play a crucial role in international stability-projection. 'Their dual identity has allowed the Carabinieri to take part in Italian military missions abroad both as a combat unit, as a Military Police unit, as a specialized anti-riot crowd control unit, and as trainers of the indigenous police forces and security units in a crisis area,' General Claudio Graziano, Italy’s Chief of Defense, told me. That unusual combination has made the Carabinieri popular among countries emerging from armed conflict. Unlike UN peacekeepers, they can both train local police forces and help maintain public order. Currently some 500 Carabinieri are on foreign deployment, serving as part of 33 missions."

Mehr lesen


14.04.2018

"Pentagon Declares Strike Successful. Here’s A Look at What Went Into It"

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018/04/pentagon-declares-strike-successful-heres-look-what-went-it/14
7449/?oref=d-topstory

Patrick Tucker erläutert die vom Pentagon veröffentlichten taktischen Details des Militärschlags der USA, Großbritanniens und Frankreichs in Syrien. "Saturday’s U.S.-French-British strike 'overwhelmed' the Syrian air defenses and degraded the Assad regime’s chemical weapons capabilities, Pentagon leaders told reporters this morning. Three facilities were targeted in the 4 a.m. strike, in which allied warships and -planes fired 105 weapons, including the first combat use of the Joint Air to Surface Standoff, or JASSM, missile, Lt. Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, Jr. said. McKenzie said the Syrians responded by firing 40 surface-to-air missiles, most of them after the allied munitions had already struck their targets. The head of the joint staff called the defensive fire 'materially ineffective' against the coalition forces, but said it likely did pose a threat to civilians on the ground."

Mehr lesen


30.03.2018

"AI: The Pros, Cons, and What To Really Fear"

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/03/ai-pros-cons-and-what-really-fear/147096/?oref=d-topstory

Defense One hat sich in einem Dossier mit den sicherheitspolitischen und militärischen Konsequenzen der fortschreitenden Entwicklung von Künstlicher Intelligenz beschäftigt. Ben Watson schreibt in seiner Einleitung: "From the moment the word “robot” was first uttered in a Czechoslovakian play nearly 100 years ago, man has feared his creation will someday kill the creator. It’s a narrative that has stuck with us, said Patrick Tucker, Defense One’s Technology Editor, at a recent event in Washington called Genius Machines: The Next Decade of Artificial Intelligence: 'The idea of artificial intelligence eventually killing us is actually borne into our first fever dreams about what it would be.' The 1920 play was R.U.R., subtitled in English as Rossum’s Universal Robots. Now 98 years later, robotics researchers across the globe are seeking inroads into AI, machine-learning, and human-machine teaming. And it’s all happening under the changing shadows of great-power dynamics."

Mehr lesen


13.02.2018

"Why Human Rights Have Taken Center Stage in the US-North Korea Crisis"

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/02/why-human-rights-have-taken-center-stage-us-north-korea-crisis/14
5962/?oref=d-river

Joseph Bosco macht darauf aufmerksam, dass US-Präsident Trump in seiner Nordkorea-Rhetorik die Lage der Menschenrechte in der Diktatur in den Mittelpunkt gerückt habe. Frühere Administrationen hätten das Thema nur beiläufig erwähnt, um Nordkorea und China zu signalisieren, dass eine militärische Intervention mit dem Ziel des Regimewechsels in Washington nicht in Erwägung gezogen werde. "Based on his increasing focus on the human rights catastrophe that is North Korea, President Trump may have decided that the best route to denuclearization, short of preventive military action, is through the rehumanization of the North Korean people. The confluence of strategic and human rights concerns should help convince Beijing and Moscow that this administration is serious about changing the situation in North Korea one way or another, and help persuade the American public that the course is both necessary and just. It will not be the first time in recent history that moral concerns and realpolitik coincide rather than conflict. But it will be ironic that this president should be the one to remind us of that truth."

Mehr lesen


09.02.2018

"The US Must Stop Turkey Now"

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/02/us-must-stop-turkey-now/145891/?oref=d-river

Meghan Bodette von der Organisation Kurdistan Aid kritisiert die abwartende Position der US-Regierung gegenüber der türkischen Offensive im Norden Syriens. Washington müsse und könne sich dem völkerrechtswidrigen Vorgehen Ankaras entschieden entgegenstellen, so ihre Forderung. "There are three clear steps that can be taken to accomplish these goals. U.S. leaders must fully condemn the attacks and make it clear that they will not tolerate further Turkish incursions into Afrin. There is little political reason to avoid a stronger condemnation. (...) The condemnation must come with material consequences. (...) Blocking weapons to Turkey as long as it employs al-Qaeda-aligned proxies and attacks Kurdish civilians would be strategically effective abroad and politically popular at home. The U.S. could also apply targeted sanctions to Turkish officials responsible for the planning and execution of the operation in Afrin, as it targeted specific Russian officials in the wake of the Ukraine invasion. (...) While cutting off arms and resources to Turkey, the U.S. must increase its aid to the SDF. (...) A policy like this would show Turkey that the international community sees its actions in Afrin for what they are — unjustified aggression aimed primarily at a civilian population in order to neutralize Kurdish political power."

Mehr lesen


07.02.2018

"The Chance of Accidental Nuclear War Is Growing"

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/02/chance-accidental-nuclear-war-growing/145785/?oref=d-river

Auch Michael Krepon findet es bedenklich, dass die US-Regierung in ihrer neuen Atomstrategie dem erhöhten Risiko eines unbeabsichtigt ausgelösten Atomkrieges bisher zu wenig Beachtung schenke. "Trump’s nuclear posture focuses on the strategic competition between major powers, not the appearance of a singular mushroom cloud based on human error, unauthorized use, or accident that could lead to cataclysm. One paradigm seeks safety in nuclear excess and punishment; the other in diplomacy and prevention. This is not an either/or choice. It makes no sense to recapitalize the U.S. nuclear deterrent, at a cost of well over a trillion dollars, while short-changing diplomatic and preventive initiatives related to war by accident, miscalculation, and human error. Safety from nuclear dangers requires a far wider aperture than the one now on offer."

Mehr lesen


05.02.2018

"How Trump Just Might Close Guantanamo Prison"

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/02/how-trump-just-might-close-guantanamo-prison/145716/?oref=d-river

Könnte das umstrittene US-Gefangenenlager Guantanamo doch noch geschlossen werden? Alberto Mora schreibt, dass eine Pentagon-Analyse der amerikanischen Haftpolitik zu dem Schluss kommen könnte, dass die bisherige Praxis gescheitert sei und das militärische Vorgehen gegen Extremisten eher behindere. "The answer lies in two related actions recently taken by the president: his command to Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to 'reexamine our military detention policy' and report back to him within 90 days and his request to Congress to ensure that 'we continue to have all necessary power to detain terrorists.' The two actions in conjunction represent an unexpected open-mindedness on the part of the president with respect to detention policy. By seeking a broad-focus, 'blank-sheet-of-paper' review, asking Mattis to take charge, and inviting Congress to join with them, President Trump acted prudently and, dare I say it, wisely. (...) Mattis, who prizes boldness and whose command history shows no tendency for reinforcing failure, will likely recommend a break with the dead-end Bush and Obama detention policies. When he does, will President Trump and Congress abandon campaign rhetoric and act in the national interest? My hope is that they will."

Mehr lesen


02.02.2018

"No, the US Won’t Respond to A Cyber Attack with Nukes"

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/02/no-us-wont-respond-cyber-attack-nukes/145700/?oref=d-river

Seit der Vorlage des Entwurfs für eine neue nukleare Strategie der USA wird die Sorge geäußert, dass die US-Regierung künftig Cyberangriffe mit dem Einsatz von Mini-Atomwaffen beantworten könnte. Patrick Tucker schreibt nach Gesprächen mit US-Offiziellen, dass diese Option tatsächlich nicht kategorisch ausgeschlossen wird. In der Praxis werde ein solcher Fall jedoch äußerst unwahrscheinlich bleiben. "On Friday, John Rood, defense undersecretary for policy, was asked whether a service disruption would prompt a nuclear retaliation. He did not directly respond. But he did say that the threshold for launching a nuclear strike is going up, not down. Before launching a strike in response to a cyber attack on a power plant, for instance, U.S. officials would want a lot of questions answered. 'In the hypotheticals you cite, would that also involve the use of biological weapons against the U.S. population or allies? Would it involve the use of chemical weapons against our people? Would it involve a conventional attack against the U.S. or our allies in other parts of the world? The context in which an attack occurred would be how we would evaluate an appropriate response.'"

Mehr lesen


31.01.2018

"Half of the US Military’s Sites Are Vulnerable to Climate Change. Now What?"

http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018/01/half-us-militarys-sites-are-vulnerable-climate-change-now-what/
145629/?oref=d-river

Für das Pentagon könnte der Klimawandel bald ganz konkrete Folgen haben, da einer neuen Untersuchung zufolge etwa die Hälfte der weltweiten Stützpunkte des US-Militärs anfällig für extreme Wetterphänomene ist. "Individual anecdotes abound about how climate change and increasingly extreme weather threaten specific bases, but the qualitative survey released Friday by the Office of the Undersecretary of Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics offers a global snapshot of the 3,500 sites’ recent experiences of flooding, droughts, and other extreme weather. In doing so, it hints at which installations may be affected in the future by changing climates. The most common types of extreme weather were droughts, damaging high winds, and flooding unrelated to storms — each affected about one-fifth of the sites. Disruption to airfield operations was the most commonly cited effect, followed by impacts on ground transportation and energy infrastructure."

Mehr lesen


29.01.2018

"US General to Turkey: We’re Not Pulling Back"

http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018/01/us-general-turkey-were-not-pulling-back/145545/

US-General Joseph Votel hat der türkischen Forderung nach einem amerikanischen Rückzug aus dem nordsyrischen Manbij eine Absage erteilt. Kevin Baron berichtet, dass Votel dabei auf die legitimen Sicherheitsinteressen aller Parteien hingewiesen habe. "With Turkish leaders threatening to push into territory protected in part by the U.S. military, Votel has walked the line between both sides but repeatedly has said the U.S. would stand by the SDF counterterrorism force of Syrian Kurds, Arabs, and Turkmen that has routed ISIS on the world’s behalf. 'There’s two key objectives we have to keep in mind,' Votel said. 'One is we have to address Turkey’s very real concerns about security along their border and terrorist organizations, particularly the PKK that has terrorized their country for a long, long period of time. That is a legitimate concern. We acknowledge that; we have always acknowledged that.' 'The other objective we have to do is we have to ensure a lasting defeat of ISIS.' (...) Votel last week called on the world to come to the SDF’s aid as the coalition shifts to so-called stability operations meant to keep liberated areas safe for civilians to return. The general suggested the world owes a debt to the SDF. 'In many ways, the Syrian Democratic Forces, with the coalition, is taking on the world’s enemy, here.'"

Mehr lesen


27.01.2018

"Shrugging Toward Doomsday"

http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018/01/shrugging-toward-doomsday/145529/?oref=d-river

Das Magazin Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists hat seine "Weltuntergangsuhr" in der vergangenen Woche vorgestellt und gewarnt, dass die Welt heute so gefährdet sei wie seit 1953 nicht mehr. "Speaking to reporters, experts from the group said that while the Doomsday Clock is based on the risk of many existential threats — like world war, climate change, major epidemics, or new technologies — there was one that outweighed all others this year. 'Unlike in the last few years when we’ve been focusing on both nuclear [weapons] and climate change … this year the nuclear discussions took center stage in our conversations,' said Bronson. The threat of a nuclear war with North Korea — and the increasingly suspicious atmosphere between China, Russia, and the United States — have lent themselves to a chaotic and destabilized environment."

Mehr lesen


23.01.2018

"The Most Dangerous Word in the Draft Nuclear Posture Review"

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/01/most-dangerous-word-draft-nuclear-posture-review/145403/?oref=d-r
iver

Michael Krepon macht darauf aufmerksam, dass im aktuellen Entwurf der neuen Atom-Doktrin der USA (Nuclear Posture Review) offenbar vorgesehen ist, künftige Abrüstungsvereinbarungen zur Not auch gewaltsam durchzusetzen. "The relevant passage of the pre-decisional draft is, 'The United States is committed to arms control efforts that advance U.S., allied, and partner security; are verifiable and enforceable.' Verifiable agreements? Yes, absolutely. That’s how we’ve gotten to reduce U.S. and Russian strategic forces by 85 percent from Cold War-era highs. Enforceable nuclear arms control? That’s novel. Enforceable arms control requires a prostrate adversary, or world government, or a United Nations with strong enough powers of enforcement because permanent members of its Security Council have given up their veto powers and contributed to large standing armies carrying out joint operations flying the UN flag. Not going to happen? Well, there’s another option: war and occupation. If someone cheats on an agreement and diplomacy and sanctions fail to rectify the situation, what other enforcement options does the aggrieved party have?"

Mehr lesen


19.01.2018

"What A Nuclear Missile Attack On Hawaii Would Look Like"

http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2018/01/what-nuclear-missile-attack-hawaii-would-look/145319/?oref=d-to
pstory

Der versehentlich ausgelöste Raketenalarm in Hawaii hat die Bedrohung der amerikanischen Inseln durch nordkoreanische Atomwaffen ins Bewusstsein der Öffentlichkeit gerückt. Patrick Tucker erläutert, welche konkreten Folgen ein Atomangriff auf Hawaii haben würde. "Jeffrey Lewis, Middlebury professor and noted arms control watcher, says the North Koreans would probably use the largest warhead that they’ve tested, 'which exploded with a force equivalent to a few hundred kilotons of TNT. Basically an order of magnitude bigger than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.' Last year, North Korea demonstrated a weapon whose yield was roughly estimated at 200 kilotons, and a missile with enough range to fly the 7,350 miles from Pyongyang to Honolulu. Plug those variables into Nukemap, a tool from Alex Wellerstein for approximating the devastation of nuclear events, and a terrible picture emerges: such a strike would kill nearly 158,000 people and injure 173,000 more."

Mehr lesen


17.01.2018

"As America’s Nukes and Sensors Get More Connected, the Risk of Cyber Attack Is Growing"

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/01/americas-nukes-and-sensors-get-more-connected-risk-cyber-att
ack-growing/145229/?oref=d-river

Die Modernisierung des amerikanischen Atomwaffenarsenals wird Patrick Tucker zufolge mit einer stärkeren Vernetzung der Waffen- und Warnsysteme einhergehen. Dies habe viele Vorteile, erhöhe einer neuen Studie von Chatham House zufolge aber auch die Gefährdung durch Cyberangriffe z.B. aus Nordkorea. "A new report from London-based think tank Chatham House notes that while some risks associated with nuclear weapons have been around for decades, 'new technology has exacerbated these risks. With each new digital component embedded in the nuclear weapons enterprise, new threat vectors may emerge.' During the Cold War, for instance, the United States could much better guarantee the provenance of the microchips, microelectronic components, and other pieces of computer and digital equipment. In 2018, that becomes harder to do, especially as you loop in more pieces of complex equipment. (...) So cyber insecurity is more than just a complicating factor for the United States as it builds new nuclear weapons. It changes the entire cost-benefit analysis. North Korea doesn’t have to hack locations or components, it just has to credibly threaten to do so. If you can’t be sure that your nuclear response has not been hacked, then you aren’t effectively deterring anything. And that’s the only reason to have nuclear weapons."

Mehr lesen


suche-links1 2 3 4 5suche-rechts

Hier finden Sie die Redaktion der Sicherheitspolitischen Presseschau.

Mehr lesen

Internationales

Internationales

Europa, Asien, Afrika, Amerika und weltweite Phänomene und Institutionen. Die bpb bietet ein breites Angebot zu internationalen Themen.

Mehr lesen

Online-Angebot

Informationsportal Krieg und Frieden

Wo gibt es Kriege und Gewaltkonflikte? Und wo herrscht am längsten Frieden? Welches Land gibt am meisten für Rüstung aus? Sicherheitspolitik.bpb.de liefert wichtige Daten und Fakten zu Krieg und Frieden.

Mehr lesen auf sicherheitspolitik.bpb.de

Dossier

Innerstaatliche Konflikte

Vom Kosovo nach Kolumbien, von Somalia nach Süd-Thailand: Weltweit schwelen über 280 politische Konflikte. Und immer wieder droht die Lage gewaltsam zu eskalieren.

Mehr lesen

Zahlen und Fakten

Globalisierung

Kaum ein Thema wird so intensiv und kontrovers diskutiert wie die Globalisierung. "Zahlen und Fakten" liefert Grafiken, Texte und Tabellen zu einem der wichtigsten und vielschichtigsten Prozesse der Gegenwart.

Mehr lesen

Publikationen zum Thema

Coverbild Internationale Sicherheit im 21. Jahrhundert

Internationale Sicherheit im 21. Jahrhundert

Die internationale Sicherheit ist fragil und bedroht. Wie können und müssen demokratische Systeme ...

Internationale Sicherheitspolitik Cover

Internationale Sicherheitspolitik

Seit Ende des Ost-West-Konflikts hat sich die internationale Sicherheitspolitik deutlich verändert....

Zum Shop