Search This Blog

Wednesday, January 3, 2024

American Weakness On Display In The Red Sea

 by Christopher Roach via American Greatness,

The United States used to be the undisputed international shot caller. Twenty years ago, we were number one economically and militarily. There were no real “peer competitors.” But lately, our power is in doubt.

The United States has deployed warships to stop Yemen’s harassment of commercial shipping destined for Israel, as well as to prevent direct missile attacks on Israel itself. Yemen is a poor and war-torn nation hobbled by severe sanctions and a years-long bombing campaign by Saudi Arabia. The United States has provided the Saudis with weapons and logistical support since 2015. Remote, impoverished Yemen’s civil war concerns the United States because one of the belligerents, the Houthis, acts as a proxy for Iran.

In spite of sanctions and years of war, Yemen’s Houthis have established firm control over the country’s south and managed to accrue an asymmetric drone warfare capability. One may recall Yemeni drone attacks on Saudi oil infrastructure just a few years ago. These same weapons have now been deployed against Israel and in defense of Yemen itself.

Naval Power is Important to Maintaining American Sovereignty

The United States tried and failed to build a naval coalition to stop the Houthi’s interdiction of shipping en route to Israel. At first, the Pentagon announced Operation Prosperity Guardian with great fanfare. But soon it scaled back the operation, admitted a lack of sufficient ships, and sustained a prestige hit when France, Spain, and Australia all dropped out of the planned operation.

While taking sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seems ill advised—the Middle East is consistently a tar baby that the U.S. obtains no advantage from engaging with—American control of the seas, the preservation of open shipping lanes, and our ability to influence the actions of other nations are important elements of American power. The security of the oceans will always be a legitimate foreign policy priority for a commercial and maritime republic like the United States.

lot has changed in the last 20 years. In 2003, even though the Iraq War was very controversial abroad, the United States lined up over 30 countries to help, including stalwart allies like the United Kingdom and Australia, as well as smaller countries seeking favor, including Georgia, Poland, Ukraine, Romania, and even Honduras and the Dominican Republic. Of course, when necessary, the United States went completely alone, as with the Libyan bombing of 1986 or the Panama Invasion of 1989.

But this recent history is instructive. Just a mere 20 years ago, the U.S. projected significant power, commanding the rest of the world’s respect and often its cooperation. This often led to the imposition of favorable terms in any international dispute. Even when the Ukraine war began, the U.S. was able to strongarm Europe into an aggressive sanctions regime against Russia. Germany even remained silent when Ukrainian (or American) saboteurs blew up the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline, on which German industrial output depended.

Signs of Decline

But cracks in U.S. dominance are beginning to show. 

For starters, the ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 was a stark display of American weakness and fecklessness. Many years of happy talk and billions of dollars deployed for nation-building went up in smoke within a fortnight.

The departure could not have possibly been more chaotic and humiliating, and it was a direct result of the uniformed military’s attempts to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely, even after the Taliban and the United States signed a treaty requiring our troops’ departure. When our people should have been packing up their trash and destroying sensitive equipment, nothing was happening. Describing this withdrawal and the introduction of thousands of illiterate Afghanis into our country as some great success was the icing on the cake. This reminded us that the military and its leadership are lately far more concerned with image than with winning wars.

A second crack in America’s reputation arises from the Ukraine War. This war began with a lot of bravado about the strength of the NATO alliance, and the Biden administration stated its goal of fomenting regime change in Russia and otherwise reducing its power and influence. Instead, the war has not gone as planned.

Western wonder weapons have not significantly changed Ukraine’s fortunes, and equipment like M2 Bradleys and Leopard tanks has been destroyed faster than it can be replaced. Deficiencies in western military production, along with the desire to maintain small, professional militaries have revealed weaknesses among the United States and its NATO allies that would impair our efforts in any land war with a peer competitor. Finally, massive defects of imagination were apparent in the American-planned Ukrainian “counteroffensive,” a debacle that barely dented the Russian lines.

While the early stages of the Russian campaign exposed deficiencies in Russia’s own planning and logistics, those problems have mostly been rectified. This is evident from Russia’s sustained and significant production of weapons and ammunition, the expansion of the Russian military itself, as well as recent advances along the entire front from Zaporozhye to Artemovsk.

Finally, the American contribution to the war in Gaza may also provide a lesson to hostile observers. While America is not a direct participant, we have deployed substantial naval assets to the region in order to prevent the expansion of the war by nation-state supporters of Hamas, such as Iran and Yemen. But in this endeavor, asymmetries arising from drone and missile weapons have shown that America’s large weapon systems, like aircraft carriers, while powerful, are also very vulnerable.

There’s a reason that our aircraft carriers are on the leeward side of Cyprus. If they get closer, they may be vulnerable to known and unknown missile threats from Syria, Yemen, Russian and Chinese vessels, and even Gaza itself.

Accelerating Decline Through Hubris

In its attempts to maintain unipolarity, the Biden administration has instead accelerated the rise of multipolarity. Not merely multipolar, we have driven the other poles together. A hostile coalition of Russia, China, and Iran has formed because they are all similarly aggrieved by the lopsided “rules-based international order,” or whatever euphemism is being employed for American dominance these days. Driving China and Russia together could have been avoided through a less ideological and more restrained policy on Ukraine. Now we’re stuck.

Not only have these hostile nations refused to assist the United States in deflecting Yemeni attempts to interdict cargo vessels, but formal allies like Spain have demurred, and others have only contributed a few staff officers. Operation Prosperity Guardian is a week old, and it is already failing. Yemeni missiles and drones are still being fired at Israel, and the United States appears to have no appetite and likely a limited capability to easily influence events on the ground in Yemen itself.

A proper national security strategy prioritizes objectives and then designs a military capability around those ends. The current American military force structure, size, and logistical pipeline do not easily support the maximalist goal of maintaining American hegemony as the “sole superpower.”

The investment in bespoke, high-tech weapon systems rests on questionable assumptions about the coming “revolution in military affairs” that have not been demonstrated in recent conflicts. Instead, there is now a significant mismatch between means and ends.

American strategy must navigate a multipolar world by setting priorities, abandoning vanity projects, reducing the scope of its ambitions, and tailoring the force structure to achieve objectives commensurate with our existing military power, industrial capability, and the probability of sustained public support.

The recent spate of ideologically driven wars to liberalize the Middle East and topple Russia is actually hurting our reputation and national power. Getting involved in similar wars of choice will further hasten our national decline.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/american-weakness-display-red-sea

'Nothing' Left In UK's Military Stockpiles After Arming Ukraine: Times Of London

 In part of a continuing trend of major Western publications belatedly admitting that all is not well with Ukraine policy and the state the war, The Times of London reported Sunday that the UK has "nothing" left it its own military stockpiles after being among Ukraine's biggest weapons suppliers for nearly two years of conflict.

British defense officials and European leaders are now busy "cranking through the gears" to ramp up weapons production, the report says, citing an unnamed staffer from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s office.

The report also relied on an unnamed Ukrainian source. The dwindled UK stockpile is being reported on at a time that "Britain’s military intelligence chiefs believe Ukraine cannot win the war against Russia in 2024 because it does not have the manpower or the weapons for a big battlefield breakthrough," The Times wrote.

An internal UK government debate and divide has emerged over the future course of London's policy, with some arguing that the Western allies simply need more "time" to ramp up arms production.

But one big uncertainty at a moment the West is generally feeling "war fatigue" - according to most public polling among various countries' citizenry - is the question of who will be in the White House in 2025. European officials are nervous that a Trump victory would spell the end of efforts to fuel the proxy war against President Vladimir Putin.

At the same time, President Volodymyr Zelensky is clearly becoming more and more unpopular, even on an international stage. A former Ukrainian official told the Times that he's losing support because of the immense death toll, but with no end-game or plans for negotiations in sight. The source described there's growing anger and pushback at the spectacle of men and women being "sent to the front line to die."

A British source additionally explained to the Times that if the US is forced to take a backseat due to its domestic politics (and with Republicans still holding up Biden's billions more in defense aid for Kiev), then Europe will have to step up and keep aid flowing.

"Can continental Europe afford to fold just because Trump says no more US dollars? I think most realize that Putin can’t be allowed to win as consequences for European security are grave," the source said.

Below is an example of the kind of wishful thinking that still exists in Europe, as quoted in the Times report:

Although he did not provide comment on a future US presidency, Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, said he was speaking to his counterparts in Europe constantly about the need to back Ukraine in its “darkest hour”.

In comments to The Times after two days of major aerial assaults by both sides, he said: “We need to pull together to help them in a war that will define Europe for decades — both with hardware and also the support and moral leadership.”

But many analysts would view this as a pipe dream given that Washington's contribution far outweighs Europe's aid to Ukraine by a massive margin. Likely Europe simply won't be able to close so large a gap even if European countries have the collective will.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/nothing-left-uks-military-stockpiles-after-arming-ukraine-times-london

QIAGEN expands business in Middle East with new regional hqs, projects

 

QIAGEN to open regional headquarters in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, at the beginning of 2024 to support growing presence in the region // QIAGEN signed Memorandum of Understanding with the Ministry of Health of Saudi Arabia to support public health initiatives // QIAGEN to support Oman’s nationwide tuberculosis screening program for expatriates with hundreds of thousands of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus tests

Tuesday, January 2, 2024

'Hawkish' China military squeeze on Taiwan likely after election

 The arms race across the Taiwan Strait and Chinese military pressure against the island Beijing claims as its "sacred" territory is unlikely to end no matter who wins Taiwan's closely watched elections.

China has cast the Jan. 13 presidential and parliamentary elections as a choice between war and peace, warning an attempt to push for Taiwan's formal independence means conflict.

China has focused its anger in the run-up to the vote on Lai Ching-te, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) presidential candidate, rebuffing his calls for talks as it views him as a separatist.

Both the DPP and Taiwan's largest opposition party, the Kuomintang (KMT), say only they can preserve the peace, and both have also committed to bolstering Taiwan's defences and say only the island's people can decide their future.

The KMT traditionally favours close ties with China although it denies being pro-Beijing.

Wang Zaixi, a deputy head of China's Taiwan Affairs Office between 2000 and 2006 and a retired Chinese army major general, was quoted last month in China's Global Times newspaper as saying the DPP's Lai was an "extremist" independence supporter.

"If he is elected, you cannot rule out the possibility of a military clash across the Taiwan Strait. We need to be fully aware of this," Wang said.

Such an outcome could have grave geopolitical and economic outcomes, pitting China against the United States - the world's two leading military powers - while blocking key shipping lanes and disrupting semiconductor and commodity supply chains.

"I believe they will take more hawkish actions to try to warn the new president over his future policies towards China," Admiral Lee Hsi-ming, a former Taiwan military chief, told Reuters, referring to Beijing.

Western security officials are trying to gauge how serious China could be about a military response to the election outcome.

One official, speaking on condition of anonymity as they were not authorised to speak to the media, said Beijing may wait and see, with any strong reaction coming after May 20 when the next president takes office and gives an inauguration speech.

If the DPP wins the presidency but loses its majority in parliament, that could also temper China's response given it would weaken the DPP's ability to pass legislation, the Western official added.

China's defence ministry, which has decried Taiwan's government for deliberately "hyping up" a military threat from China for electoral gain, did not respond to a request for comment.

Taiwan defence ministry spokesperson Sun Li-fang told reporters its assessment of China's moves would not be based on whether there is an election or not.

"We'll look at the signs and what the enemy is up to as a basis for our judgement," he said.

NEW STATUS QUO

After Chinese and U.S. leaders met in San Francisco in November, President Xi Jinping reportedly stressed to President Joe Biden that while Taiwan is the most "dangerous" bilateral issue, he indicated China is not preparing for an invasion of Taiwan.

However, since the last Taiwan presidential poll in 2020, China has engaged in an unprecedented level of military activity in the Taiwan Strait, including holding two rounds of major war games near the island in the past year-and-a-half.

Chinese jets now regularly cross an unofficial median line in the strait, seeking to wear down Taiwan's far smaller air force by making them repeatedly scramble.

Some analysts see Taiwan's contiguous zone that is 24 nautical miles (44 km) off its coast, being increasingly challenged by the People's Liberation Army (PLA) in the coming years.

Taiwan is strengthening its armour.

A second Western security official said China was well aware that every year they wait to "resolve the Taiwan problem", it gives Taipei a further opportunity to beef up its defences.

"That is not good for the PLA," the official said.

Defence has featured prominently on the campaign trail.

The DPP has repeatedly brought up Taiwan's indigenous submarine, while other arms programmes including drones are being developed.

The KMT champions the "3Ds" - deterrence, dialogue and de-escalation.

Jaw Shaw-kong, the KMT's vice president candidate, said last month Taiwan should ramp up missile production to show it can strike into China in the event of war, although he also said China should allow in Taiwanese military observers as a sign of goodwill and to lessen tensions.

Whoever wins, Taiwan has a big weapons order backlog from the United States.

In the next few years, Taiwan is due to get advanced U.S. weapons including F-16V fighter jets, M-1A tanks, Harpoon anti-ship missiles and the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS.

OTHER OPTIONS

While clearly a superior military power, recent purges in the PLA that have felled generals in the Rocket Force, navy and air force and a former defence minister could lower the risk of conflict.

"The more problems they have, the more corruption they have, the better it is for us," said Lee, the former Taiwan military head. "I don't think there will be a full-scale invasion in the next few years because they have their own difficulties."

Over the past week or so, Xi has given two speeches where he reiterated the need for "reunification" with Taiwan. On both occasions he made no mention of using force, though Beijing has never renounced that possibility.

China could also wield economic pressure post-election, targeting a trade deal signed in 2010 which Beijing says Taipei has breached with unfair trade barriers. Beijing could also ramp up operations to influence people in Taiwan through its "United Front" department.

"China needs to be able to lead and control the situation in Taiwan, and we do that via a variety of means, not just by one means," said Wu Xinbo, a professor at Shanghai's Fudan University.

https://news.yahoo.com/hawkish-china-military-squeeze-taiwan-061555068.html

South Korea opposition leader in ICU after knife attack amid calls for stronger security

South Korea's opposition Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung remained hospitalised in intensive care on Wednesday, a day after a knife attack on him shocked political leaders who were vying for the upper hand in a major election three months away.

Surgeons operated on Lee for more than two hours late on Tuesday to repair a major blood vessel in his neck that was sliced when an assailant lunged and stabbed him with a knife.

"The act of terror against Chairman Lee Jae-myung was clearly a challenge against democracy and a threat against democracy," Democratic Party floor leader Hong Ik-pyo said at a party leadership council meeting.

He urged a speedy investigation and tougher security for high-profile political figures, echoing renewed questions about the safety on campaign trails in a country with a history of political violence despite tight restrictions on gun ownership.

Jin Jeong-hwa, a party supporter who was a witness at the scene of the stabbing, said the incident clearly showed the need for stronger and professional security protection for political leaders, not simply police who are deployed to monitor.

"People like opposition leaders really need a dedicated security detail," Jin said in an interview with Reuters. He added it was clear from his experience at political events that Lee was very much exposed to personal safety threats.

Lee, a tough talking progressive who narrowly lost the 2022 presidential election, had been rallying the party to retain the parliamentary majority it holds against President Yoon Suk Yeol's conservatives.

South Korea holds a pivotal election on April 10 where the conservatives will try to win back a majority for the first time since 2016 and help Yoon's pro-business policies including tax cuts, deregulation and social reforms.

The attack against Lee, which unfolded quickly but was widely captured in footage of the outdoors public event, shocked his party and his rivals alike, who condemned all violence against political figures.

Yoon again condemned the attack as "terror" and said: "It is an enemy of liberal democracy," according to his office. He wished Lee a speedy recovery, it said.

Lee was airlifted from Busan, where the attack occurred, to Seoul on Tuesday where he received surgery to reconstruct the jugular vein that pumps blood from the head back to the heart and insert a tube to support the damaged vessel.

He was conscious and recovering in the intensive care unit, party officials said.

The suspect, who was quickly subdued by party members and police officers at the scene, was a man born in 1957 from the central region who may have been in Busan for days, planning the attack with an 18-cm (7-inch) camping knife, police and news reports said.

He remains in police custody. The police have not commented on the detail of the investigation including a possible motive.

Investigators searched the suspect's home and office in the city of Asan, more than 300 km (186 miles) from the site of the attack, Yonhap news reported.

The leader of the conservative People Power Party scaled back scheduled public events, and both parties urged members to refrain from comments that could inflame voters as Lee recuperates.

Lee lost to Yoon by less than 1% point of votes, the narrowest margin, in a bitterly fought presidential election and has since faced bribery allegations stemming from a development project when he was mayor of a city near Seoul. He denies wrongdoing.

https://news.yahoo.com/korea-opposition-leader-icu-knife-021143799.html

China removes official after video games rules spark turmoil

China removed an official at a government body overseeing its press and publications regulator, five sources who were briefed on the matter said, days after Chinese gaming stocks were hit by proposed rules to curb spending on video games.

Feng Shixin was removed last week from his position as head of the publishing unit of the Communist Party's Publicity Department, the sources said. The department oversees the National Press and Publication Administration (NPPA) which in turn regulates China's vast video games sector.

China's State Council Information Office, which handles media queries on behalf of the Chinese government, including on personnel matters, did not immediately respond to a request for comment and Reuters was unable to obtain Feng's contact details to reach him for comment.

The five sources said Feng's removal was linked to rules the NPPA announced last month that sent stocks in the world's largest video games sector, including industry giant Tencent, plunging.

The sources declined to be identified as authorities had yet to officially announce Feng's departure.

Feng has in recent years represented the Chinese government at events to discuss authorities' efforts to regulate the industry, including game approvals and real-name verification requirements for gamers. Reuters was not able to establish how long he had served in his current role.

The NPPA's proposed measures, which seek to curb spending and the use of rewards that encourage the playing of video games, triggered fears that authorities were once again cracking down heavily on the sector and wiped nearly $80 billion off the market value of China's two biggest gaming companies.

Analysts also said the plans brought the risks of potential regulatory changes back to the fore in the minds of investors, hurting confidence at a time when Beijing has been trying to boost private sector investment to spur a slowing economy

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/china-removes-official-video-games-132012722.html

2024 Predictions for Biotech M&As

 Continued fallout from the IRA, heightened antitrust enforcement and the rise of AI will all shape the first wave of biotech mergers and acquisitions coming this year, experts tell BioSpace.

Last year was economically challenging for households and businesses alike, and biotechs are not immune to the market’s fluctuations, with layoffs and culled programs making regular headlines. But according to Adrienne Ellman, an M&A Partner at Hogan Hovells US LLP focusing on biotech transactions in New York City, the industry has thrived over the past year despite the pessimistic undertones.

“The long-standing innovative culture of the biotech industry was alive and well globally in the last five years, even in the face of inflation, rising debt costs [and] geopolitical uncertainty, among other headwinds,” she told BioSpace.

The biopharma industry will continue to see healthy M&A activity in 2024, according to a PwC report, with deals totaling $225 billion to $275 billion.

Ellman predicted that many mergers and acquisitions will follow the same trends that dominated 2023, including deals around gene-edited therapies, immunotherapies and mRNA technology. Karim Aly, CEO of Noze in Montreal, added that he also has his sights set on novel diagnostics and drug delivery systems.

Here are some of the top factors that experts predict will influence merger and acquisition trends this year.

The Inflation Reduction Act

The steady influence of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the broader economic context in the U.S. mean that plenty of acquisitions and mergers are likely coming in the new year, experts agree.

Behind the scenes in boardrooms, the IRA shaped business activity for biotechs throughout 2023. While the legislation is wide and includes a plethora of targets, it’s significant in the industry because of how the law will influence future federal regulation and drug pricing. 

Additional economic pressures such as higher interest rates will also play a role, Ellman said. Specifically, smaller firms may not be able to compete as long as they may have in past years. If they run out of funding, she added, these smaller players are ripe for acquisition by larger entities.

Marc Cikes, managing director of the cancer technology–focused Debiopharma Innovation Fund, noted that this trend toward more M&As is already underway, largely spearheaded by VC-backed companies pressuring leaders of smaller firms to sell due to the smaller firms’ capital constraints.

Antitrust Enforcement

The Federal Trade Commission’s current antitrust swing is prompting buyers to be cautious, measured and prepared, Ellman said. For example, they are filing for HSR paperwork (also called a “Notification and Report Form for Certain Mergers and Acquisitions”) preemptively before there are even signed acquisition deals in place, she noted.

Conversely, more efficient and lenient regulators such as the FDA are giving some firms more to offer potential buyers, Aly said. “It’s very encouraging to see the regulatory bodies offering more flexible pathways to expedite approvals for innovative solutions that target unmet medical needs,” he told BioSpace.

AI and Machine Learning

Cikes told BioSpace that he has been especially heartened to see the rise of AI and machine learning usage in biotechs across 2023. “It’s exciting to see how AI advancements, enabled by the increased availability of multimodal data, can be a force driving the convergence of research and cancer care,” he said.

Aly concurs that AI has been a game-changer across biotech, as it has helped to reduce time and costs while increasing accuracy and speed of tools and platforms. But how exactly this will play out in the industry remains to be seen.

For example, Ellman questioned the strong push to incorporate AI and machine learning, considering that there is still so much gray area around how the technology will be regulated. “The biotech industry has always been an early adopter of technology, but the industry’s full embrace of AI and interest in data-driven businesses has been very interesting,” she said. “It is a relatively new area of the law, heavily regulated globally and constantly evolving.”

Cikes agreed that while AI is an important consideration in 2024, the details remain murky. “The impact of AI for drug discovery is still largely unknown,” he said. “The public market valuation of the few AI-drug discovery companies is significantly down vs. their peak price, and a large chunk of the high-value deals announced between native AI companies and large pharmas are essentially based on future milestone payments which may never materialize.”

Manufacturing Capacities

One hot area of biotech right now is cell and gene therapies, and many deals in this area have involved companies with the means of ramping up production, even if they do not have proprietary technology, according to Ellman. Thus, if biotechs can offer internal manufacturing capability to support clinical development and eventual commercialization, this may power plenty of acquisitions and mergers in the new year, she said.

https://www.biospace.com/article/2024-predictions-for-biotech-m-and-as-/