Incoming Secretary of Defense Robert Gates declares one of his goals will be improving our military's performance in postwar environments. It's tempting to assume any pullback from Iraq signals the end of messy nation-building efforts, but recent history says otherwise, making Gates' commitment vitally important.
During the Cold War, America engaged in nation building once every decade, but since then it's been closer to once every couple of years, especially when you consider the inevitable splintering of fragile states.
This higher frequency in what the Pentagon calls "post-conflict reconstruction and stability operations" corresponds to the sharp rise - since Bush 41, mind you - in the use of American forces in both crisis responses and regime-toppling exercises designed to round up bad guys.
The problem is that bad guys get smarter, shifting their efforts from a "first half" (war) they cannot win against our world-class forces to a "second half" (postwar) where they can prevail against our rather mediocre nation builders. Simply put, insurgents avoid our Leviathan force during war, waiting until the follow-on peace can be sabotaged by terrorism and the battered populace co-opted by their superior forms of tribe building.
It's easy to call it a clash of civilizations and bail, but let me give you several reasons why that is utterly unrealistic.
First, failed states are the essential pawns in this "long war" against radical extremism. The global jihadist movement lives for such opportunities because, despite the holy warriors' vaunted reputation, they can't possibly achieve power anywhere but in the most debilitated regimes.
Second, globalization links our security to these failed states, and this historic phenomenon is picking up speed. Too many Americans live under the delusion that globalization can be stopped with tariffs and a tall border fence, like it'll go away if we just decide we've had enough.
But, guess what? Those 3 billion-plus new capitalists recently added in the East and South want some version of our good life, and they're not simply abandoning the dream because Iraq turns out badly for us. China and India, for example, are all over Africa, linking their economies' booming resource needs to raw material providers.
Trust me, it'll always be somebody's blood for somebody's oil or diamonds or platinum, or ... .
Third, rogue regimes love to meddle in failed states, as Lebanon's recent woes amply demonstrate.
Fourth, defaulting to local dictators as the answer simply delays state failure without curing it. Sure, many strongmen, like Egypt's Hosni Mubarek, aim to replicate the Chinese model of economic reforms prior to political change, but most will fail in that quest simply because China blocks entry into globalization's low-cost tier.
Fifth, waiting on the United Nations to become that second-half peacekeeping kingpin is a dream that died more than a decade ago on the streets of Mogadishu, the capital of Somalia that's now run by a radical Islamist party. Yes, NATO can provide some modest help, but don't expect the "been there, done that" Europeans to resurrect a colonial-era can-do spirit too far beyond their borders.
Sixth, the fundamental nature of war versus peace has been transformed: Wars have gotten shorter, easier to win, cheaper and less labor intensive while the peace has grown dramatically longer, far more complex, a lot more expensive and inescapably labor intensive.
Our real challenge today?
As our overdeveloped war-fighting force gets stronger, it drives up the resource requirements of our underdeveloped peacemaking force. We write checks with airpower that boots on the ground cannot possibly cash.
The good news?
America's Army and Marines are changing this strategic mindset rapidly through improved training, doctrine and tactics. Now, if only our incoming secretary of Defense can shift the budget from smart weapons to smarter soldiers - something Donald Rumsfeld didn't manage - America will move far closer to fielding a second-half force that won't squander first-half leads like the one we once held in Iraq.
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Polonium: The Terrorists' Perfect WMD? by Andrew Cochran
The disclosure that seven workers at the Millennium Hotel, where former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko met a contact on the day he fell ill, have tested positive for low levels of polonium further expands the serious consequences of the investigation into Alexander Litvinenko murder.
A former KGB who met with Alexander Litvinenko in London has fallen into a coma from contact with a radioactive substance. A reader who graduated from M.I.T. wrote me recently with the following information on polonium:
"Polonium 210 can be manufactured in any small research reactor such as those found in universities around the world. The single poisoning seems to me to be a wakeup call that polonium 210 is probably the best WMD in the world. Wikipedia gives the lethal dose as 0.1 micrograms, think of a Vitamin C tablet divided into 10 million pieces. When dissolved in mild acid, such as is in the gut, a lethal dose will produce about 10 trillion atoms which tend to permeate the body and leak out of the pores. If divided and encapsulated (think time release capsule) a small amount of polonium 210 could be weaponized to float on the breeze like anthrax, it would be undetectable, indestructible and any residue would lose potency after just a few years."
Polonium poisoning is described as an unprecedented event. Polonium is available for purchase through the internet.
A former KGB who met with Alexander Litvinenko in London has fallen into a coma from contact with a radioactive substance. A reader who graduated from M.I.T. wrote me recently with the following information on polonium:
"Polonium 210 can be manufactured in any small research reactor such as those found in universities around the world. The single poisoning seems to me to be a wakeup call that polonium 210 is probably the best WMD in the world. Wikipedia gives the lethal dose as 0.1 micrograms, think of a Vitamin C tablet divided into 10 million pieces. When dissolved in mild acid, such as is in the gut, a lethal dose will produce about 10 trillion atoms which tend to permeate the body and leak out of the pores. If divided and encapsulated (think time release capsule) a small amount of polonium 210 could be weaponized to float on the breeze like anthrax, it would be undetectable, indestructible and any residue would lose potency after just a few years."
Polonium poisoning is described as an unprecedented event. Polonium is available for purchase through the internet.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
New World Record Achieved in Solar Cell Technology by Chris Kielich
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Alexander Karsner today announced that with DOE funding, a concentrator solar cell produced by Boeing-Spectrolab has recently achieved a world-record conversion efficiency of 40.7 percent, establishing a new milestone in sunlight-to-electricity performance. This breakthrough may lead to systems with an installation cost of only $3 per watt, producing electricity at a cost of 8-10 cents per kilowatt/hour, making solar electricity a more cost-competitive and integral part of our nation’s energy mix.
“Reaching this milestone heralds a great achievement for the Department of Energy and for solar energy engineering worldwide,” Assistant Secretary Karsner said. “We are eager to see this accomplishment translate into the marketplace as soon as possible, which has the potential to help reduce our nation’s reliance on imported oil and increase our energy security.”
Attaining a 40 percent efficient concentrating solar cell means having another technology pathway for producing cost-effective solar electricity. Almost all of today’s solar cell modules do not concentrate sunlight but use only what the sun produces naturally, what researchers call “one sun insolation,” which achieves an efficiency of 12 to 18 percent. However, by using an optical concentrator, sunlight intensity can be increased, squeezing more electricity out of a single solar cell.
The 40.7 percent cell was developed using a unique structure called a multi-junction solar cell. This type of cell achieves a higher efficiency by capturing more of the solar spectrum. In a multi-junction cell, individual cells are made of layers, where each layer captures part of the sunlight passing through the cell. This allows the cell to get more energy from the sun’s light.
For the past two decades researchers have tried to break the “40 percent efficient” barrier on solar cell devices. In the early 1980s, DOE began researching what are known as “multi-junction gallium arsenide-based solar cell devices,” multi-layered solar cells which converted about 16 percent of the sun’s available energy into electricity. In 1994, DOE’s National Renewable Energy laboratory broke the 30 percent barrier, which attracted interest from the space industry. Most satellites today use these multi-junction cells.
Reaching 40 percent efficiency helps further President Bush’s Solar America Initiative (SAI) goals, which aims to win nationwide acceptance of clean solar energy technologies by 2015. By then, it is intended that America will have enough solar energy systems installed to provide power to one to two million homes, at a cost of 5 to 10 cents per kilowatt/hour. The SAI is also key component of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative, which provides a 22 percent increase in research and development funding at DOE and seeks to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil by changing the way we power our cars, homes and businesses.
“Reaching this milestone heralds a great achievement for the Department of Energy and for solar energy engineering worldwide,” Assistant Secretary Karsner said. “We are eager to see this accomplishment translate into the marketplace as soon as possible, which has the potential to help reduce our nation’s reliance on imported oil and increase our energy security.”
Attaining a 40 percent efficient concentrating solar cell means having another technology pathway for producing cost-effective solar electricity. Almost all of today’s solar cell modules do not concentrate sunlight but use only what the sun produces naturally, what researchers call “one sun insolation,” which achieves an efficiency of 12 to 18 percent. However, by using an optical concentrator, sunlight intensity can be increased, squeezing more electricity out of a single solar cell.
The 40.7 percent cell was developed using a unique structure called a multi-junction solar cell. This type of cell achieves a higher efficiency by capturing more of the solar spectrum. In a multi-junction cell, individual cells are made of layers, where each layer captures part of the sunlight passing through the cell. This allows the cell to get more energy from the sun’s light.
For the past two decades researchers have tried to break the “40 percent efficient” barrier on solar cell devices. In the early 1980s, DOE began researching what are known as “multi-junction gallium arsenide-based solar cell devices,” multi-layered solar cells which converted about 16 percent of the sun’s available energy into electricity. In 1994, DOE’s National Renewable Energy laboratory broke the 30 percent barrier, which attracted interest from the space industry. Most satellites today use these multi-junction cells.
Reaching 40 percent efficiency helps further President Bush’s Solar America Initiative (SAI) goals, which aims to win nationwide acceptance of clean solar energy technologies by 2015. By then, it is intended that America will have enough solar energy systems installed to provide power to one to two million homes, at a cost of 5 to 10 cents per kilowatt/hour. The SAI is also key component of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative, which provides a 22 percent increase in research and development funding at DOE and seeks to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil by changing the way we power our cars, homes and businesses.
Intelligence VS. Politics (Syria Advanced Nuclear Program)
European intelligence sources are saying that Syria has an advanced nuclear program located in Al Hassaka.
European intelligence sources are also saying Colonel Maher Assad is in charge of the advanced nuclear program. The advanced nuclear program is based on Iraq material that was shipped to Syria before and during the war against Iraq, Iran contributes to the advanced nuclear program, and experts from the former Soviet republics.
European intelligence sources are also saying Colonel Maher Assad is in charge of the advanced nuclear program. The advanced nuclear program is based on Iraq material that was shipped to Syria before and during the war against Iraq, Iran contributes to the advanced nuclear program, and experts from the former Soviet republics.
Monday, December 04, 2006
US tells banks to shut down Iran operations by Andrew Murray-Watson
Several of the UK's largest banks fear they could face the full legislative wrath of the US government unless they bow to Washington's pressure to shut their operations in Iran.
It is believed that officials in President George Bush's administration have also put pressure on banks with operations in the US, including RBS, HSBC and Barclays, to stop acting on behalf of UK business customers in Iran. Barclays, it is thought, has already told its corporate clients that it will not accept deposits from transactions originating in Iran.
The finance director of an AIM-listed company with significant operations in Iran said: "Barclays told us that it is unable to act as our bank as far as Iran is concerned. We have not been told why." HSBC has said it will no longer accept dollar transactions from within Iran, while RBS declined to comment.
Although the UK banks involved are listed and incorporated in the UK, all have either a secondary listing or substantial operations in the US that makes them potentially vulnerable to US government action.
A senior executive at one of the banks affected said: "The consequences of not toeing the American line on Iran have not been made clear, but we were left in no doubt that we might not want to find out."
A spokeswoman for the US Treasury Department confirmed that meetings had taken place with senior UK bankers. However, she stressed that the talks had been set up so that US government officials could "equip banks with information" about the dangers of allowing Iran to remain part of the international financial community.
Business leaders in the UK have grown increasingly worried that they might fall foul of US legal or regulatory censure for actions that take place in the UK or in another country. It emerged last month that American victims of terrorist attacks were pursuing civil actions against US subsidiaries of NatWest and Crédit Lyonnais on the grounds that their parent companies provided banking facilities in the UK and France for charities that the US Treasury Department believes has links to Hamas, the militant Palestinian organisation.
The US has imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran - because of its alleged support for international terrorism - and individuals found to have breached the economic restrictions face a fine of up to $250,000 (£126,000) and 20 years in jail.
It is believed that officials in President George Bush's administration have also put pressure on banks with operations in the US, including RBS, HSBC and Barclays, to stop acting on behalf of UK business customers in Iran. Barclays, it is thought, has already told its corporate clients that it will not accept deposits from transactions originating in Iran.
The finance director of an AIM-listed company with significant operations in Iran said: "Barclays told us that it is unable to act as our bank as far as Iran is concerned. We have not been told why." HSBC has said it will no longer accept dollar transactions from within Iran, while RBS declined to comment.
Although the UK banks involved are listed and incorporated in the UK, all have either a secondary listing or substantial operations in the US that makes them potentially vulnerable to US government action.
A senior executive at one of the banks affected said: "The consequences of not toeing the American line on Iran have not been made clear, but we were left in no doubt that we might not want to find out."
A spokeswoman for the US Treasury Department confirmed that meetings had taken place with senior UK bankers. However, she stressed that the talks had been set up so that US government officials could "equip banks with information" about the dangers of allowing Iran to remain part of the international financial community.
Business leaders in the UK have grown increasingly worried that they might fall foul of US legal or regulatory censure for actions that take place in the UK or in another country. It emerged last month that American victims of terrorist attacks were pursuing civil actions against US subsidiaries of NatWest and Crédit Lyonnais on the grounds that their parent companies provided banking facilities in the UK and France for charities that the US Treasury Department believes has links to Hamas, the militant Palestinian organisation.
The US has imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran - because of its alleged support for international terrorism - and individuals found to have breached the economic restrictions face a fine of up to $250,000 (£126,000) and 20 years in jail.
Controversial X-ray scan to be used at Sky Harbor by Ginger D. Richardson
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport is about to become the first airport in the country to test a controversial new federal screening system that takes exceptionally clear X-rays of the human body in an effort to find concealed explosives and other weapons.
The technology, called backscatter, has been around for several years but has not been widely used in the U.S. as an anti-terrorism tool because of privacy concerns.
But the Transportation Security Administration now says it has found a way to refine the machine's images so that the normally graphic pictures can be blurred in certain areas while still being effective in detecting bombs and other threats.
The agency is expected to provide more information about the technology at an official unveiling later this month. For now, the agency will say only that one machine will be up and running at Sky Harbor's Terminal 4 by Christmas.
"We're hoping to have it up for the increased traffic we are anticipating over the holiday and the bowl games," said Paul Armes, the agency's federal security director for the Phoenix region.
Not everyone will have to go through the machine.
The security agency's Web site indicates that the technology will be used initially as a secondary screening measure, meaning that only those passengers who first fail the standard screening process will be directed to the X-ray area.
Even then, passengers will have the option of choosing the backscatter or a traditional pat-down search.
A handful of other U.S. airports will have the X-rays machines in place by early 2007 as part of a nationwide pilot program, officials said.
The technology already is being used in prisons and by drug enforcement agents, and has been tested at London's Heathrow Airport.
The security agency says the machines will be effective in helping detect plastic or liquid explosives and other non-metallic weapons that can be missed by standard metal detectors. But some say the high-resolution images, which clearly depict the outline of the passenger's body, plus anything attached to it, such as jewelry, go too far.
Barry Steinhardt, head of the ACLU's technology and liberty program, told USA Today that the machines could lead to widespread abuse.
"It's absolutely predictable that as this technology becomes commonplace, you're going to start seeing those images all over the Internet," Steinhardt said.
But the agency argues that it has taken the necessary precautions to prevent that from happening.
"It's my understanding that this is the latest and best version (of the technology), and it meets our (country's) standards for privacy," Armes said.
The agency says that the X-rays will be set up so that the image can be viewed only by a Transportation Security Officer in a remote location. Other passengers, and even the agent at the checkpoint, will not have access to the picture.
In addition, the system will be configured so that the X-ray will be immediately deleted as soon as the individual steps away from the machine. It will not be stored or available for printing or transmitting, agency spokesman Nico Melendez said.
And Sky Harbor administrators say the technology is sophisticated enough to protect passengers' privacy.
"We did have concerns about the privacy issue before this current technology was available," Deputy Aviation Director Deborah Ostreicher said. "But we are assured that passengers will be protected."
Some residents find the idea a little unsettling.
"I know they are going to block out the private areas, but I am not convinced they couldn't keep from saving the pictures," said Tempe resident Genny Vogt, who flew from Sky Harbor to the East Coast several times this year. "I understand that Big Brother has to watch in this day and age, but I hope this doesn't become a necessary evil."
The new X-ray machine will be in Terminal 4, which serves US Airways and Southwest Airlines, and handles nearly 80 percent of the airport's passenger traffic. The security agency is already testing another anti-terrorism tool there called the Explosive Detection Trace Portal.
That machine, commonly known as a "puffer," is also designed to screen people for explosives without pat-downs. It works by releasing several puffs of air on the passenger, and then analyzing dislodged particles from the person's clothing for explosive residue.
The technology, called backscatter, has been around for several years but has not been widely used in the U.S. as an anti-terrorism tool because of privacy concerns.
But the Transportation Security Administration now says it has found a way to refine the machine's images so that the normally graphic pictures can be blurred in certain areas while still being effective in detecting bombs and other threats.
The agency is expected to provide more information about the technology at an official unveiling later this month. For now, the agency will say only that one machine will be up and running at Sky Harbor's Terminal 4 by Christmas.
"We're hoping to have it up for the increased traffic we are anticipating over the holiday and the bowl games," said Paul Armes, the agency's federal security director for the Phoenix region.
Not everyone will have to go through the machine.
The security agency's Web site indicates that the technology will be used initially as a secondary screening measure, meaning that only those passengers who first fail the standard screening process will be directed to the X-ray area.
Even then, passengers will have the option of choosing the backscatter or a traditional pat-down search.
A handful of other U.S. airports will have the X-rays machines in place by early 2007 as part of a nationwide pilot program, officials said.
The technology already is being used in prisons and by drug enforcement agents, and has been tested at London's Heathrow Airport.
The security agency says the machines will be effective in helping detect plastic or liquid explosives and other non-metallic weapons that can be missed by standard metal detectors. But some say the high-resolution images, which clearly depict the outline of the passenger's body, plus anything attached to it, such as jewelry, go too far.
Barry Steinhardt, head of the ACLU's technology and liberty program, told USA Today that the machines could lead to widespread abuse.
"It's absolutely predictable that as this technology becomes commonplace, you're going to start seeing those images all over the Internet," Steinhardt said.
But the agency argues that it has taken the necessary precautions to prevent that from happening.
"It's my understanding that this is the latest and best version (of the technology), and it meets our (country's) standards for privacy," Armes said.
The agency says that the X-rays will be set up so that the image can be viewed only by a Transportation Security Officer in a remote location. Other passengers, and even the agent at the checkpoint, will not have access to the picture.
In addition, the system will be configured so that the X-ray will be immediately deleted as soon as the individual steps away from the machine. It will not be stored or available for printing or transmitting, agency spokesman Nico Melendez said.
And Sky Harbor administrators say the technology is sophisticated enough to protect passengers' privacy.
"We did have concerns about the privacy issue before this current technology was available," Deputy Aviation Director Deborah Ostreicher said. "But we are assured that passengers will be protected."
Some residents find the idea a little unsettling.
"I know they are going to block out the private areas, but I am not convinced they couldn't keep from saving the pictures," said Tempe resident Genny Vogt, who flew from Sky Harbor to the East Coast several times this year. "I understand that Big Brother has to watch in this day and age, but I hope this doesn't become a necessary evil."
The new X-ray machine will be in Terminal 4, which serves US Airways and Southwest Airlines, and handles nearly 80 percent of the airport's passenger traffic. The security agency is already testing another anti-terrorism tool there called the Explosive Detection Trace Portal.
That machine, commonly known as a "puffer," is also designed to screen people for explosives without pat-downs. It works by releasing several puffs of air on the passenger, and then analyzing dislodged particles from the person's clothing for explosive residue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)