United States Defense and Military Forces

Latest story

88 Shares79 Views

Blinken’s Visit to China: What to Know

by

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken is in China this week as tensions have risen over trade, security, Russia’s war on Ukraine and the Middle East crisis.Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken is meeting officials in China this week as disputes over wars, trade, technology and security are testing the two countries’ efforts to stabilize the relationship.The United States is heading into an election year in which President Biden will face intense pressure to confront China’s authoritarian government and offer new protections for American businesses and workers from low-priced Chinese imports.China is courting foreign investment to help its sluggish economy. At the same time, its leader, Xi Jinping, has been bolstering national security and expanding China’s military footprint around Taiwan and the South China Sea in ways that have alarmed its neighbors.Mr. Biden and Mr. Xi have held talks to prevent their countries’ disputes from spiraling into conflict, after relations sank to their lowest point in decades last year. But an array of challenges could make steadying the relationship difficult.Showdowns Over China’s Territory ClaimsThe United States has been pushing back against China’s increasingly assertive claims over swaths of the South China Sea and the self-governed island of Taiwan by building security alliances in Asia.That effort has prompted more concerns in Beijing that the United States is leading a campaign to encircle China and contain its rise.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Military Spending Emerges as Big Dispute in Debt-Limit Talks

    by

    President Biden has offered to freeze discretionary spending, including for defense. Republicans want to spend more for the military, and cut more elsewhere.Funding for the military has emerged as a key sticking point in reaching an agreement to raise the nation’s borrowing limit and prevent a catastrophic default, with Republicans pushing to spare the Defense Department from spending caps and make deeper cuts to domestic programs like education.President Biden has balked at that demand, pointing to a long series of past budget agreements that either cut or increased military spending in tandem with discretionary programs outside of defense.How the sides resolve that issue will be critical for the final outcome of any debt deal. It remains possible that in order to reach a deal that prevents a default, Democrats will accept an agreement that allows military spending to grow even as nondefense spending falls or stays flat.Mr. Biden’s aides and congressional Republicans deputized by Speaker Kevin McCarthy are trying to negotiate an agreement to lift the borrowing limit before the government runs out of money to pay its bills on time, which could be as soon as June 1. Republicans have refused to raise the limit unless Mr. Biden agrees to cuts in federal spending outside of the military.The talks over spending cuts have narrowed in focus to mostly cover a relatively small corner of the budget — what is known as discretionary spending. That spending is split into two parts. One is money for the military, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will total $792 billion for the current fiscal year. The other half funds a wide range of domestic programs, like Head Start preschool and college Pell Grants, and federal agencies like the Interior and Energy Departments. It will total $919 billion this year, the budget office estimates.A separate category known as mandatory spending has largely been deemed off limits in the talks. That spending, which is the primary driver of future spending growth, includes programs like Social Security and Medicare.Administration officials have proposed freezing both halves of discretionary spending for next year. That would amount to a budget cut, compared with projected spending, under the way the budget office accounts for spending levels. Spending for both parts of the discretionary budget would be allowed to grow at just 1 percent for the 2025 fiscal year. That could also amount to a budget cut since 1 percent would almost certainly be less than the rate of inflation. That proposal would save about $1 trillion over the span of a decade, compared with current budget office forecasts.Republicans rejected that plan at the bargaining table. They are pushing to cut nondefense spending in actual terms — meaning, spend fewer dollars on it next year than the government spent this year. They also want to allow military spending to continue to grow.“It just sends a bad message and Republicans feel like it would not be in our best interest to cut spending at this juncture, when you’re looking at China and Russia and a lot of instability around the world,” said Representative Robert B. Aderholt, Republican of Alabama, who sits on an Appropriations panel that oversees Pentagon spending. “That’s been the basic position that most Republicans have.”Mr. McCarthy sounded a similar note when speaking to reporters on Thursday. “Look, we’re always looking where we could find savings and others, but we live in a very dangerous world,” he said. He added, “I think the Pentagon has to actually have more resources.”Republicans included 10-year caps on discretionary spending in a bill they passed last month that also raised the debt ceiling through next year, and party leaders said they would exempt the military from those caps. Mr. Biden has vowed to veto the bill if it passes the Senate in its current form, which is unlikely.White House officials have hammered Republicans over concentrating their proposed discretionary savings on domestic programs, saying their bill would gut spending on border enforcement, some veterans’ care, Meals on Wheels for older Americans and a host of other popular programs.“Speaker McCarthy and I have a very different view of who should bear the burden of additional efforts to get our fiscal house in order,” Mr. Biden said on Thursday at the White House. “I don’t believe the whole burden should fall on the backs of the middle class and working-class Americans.”Congressional Democrats, including members of committees that oversee military spending, have attacked Republicans for focusing largely on nondefense programs.“If you’re going to freeze discretionary spending, there’s no reason on earth why defense shouldn’t be part of that conversation,” said Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. Republicans, he said, “are taking a hostage to advance their very narrow agenda. I’m not a fan of that. That’s not something I’m going to want to support.”Any agreement that increased military spending while freezing or cutting other discretionary spending would break from a budget-deal tradition that dates to 2011, when House Republicans refused to raise the debt limit until President Barack Obama agreed to spending cuts. The deal that avoided default was centered on spending caps that split their reductions evenly between defense and nondefense programs.The push to increase military funding while cutting more heavily elsewhere reflects a divide in the House Republican caucus. It includes a large faction of defense hawks who say the military budget is too small, alongside another large faction of spending hawks who want to significantly shrink the fiscal footprint of the federal government.Mr. McCarthy needs both factions to retain his hold on the speakership, which he narrowly won this year after a marathon week of efforts to secure the votes. And he will need to navigate them both as he tries to pass any debt-limit agreement with Mr. Biden through the House.Catie Edmondson More

  • 150 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Air Force Says Proposed Chinese-Owned Mill in North Dakota Is ‘Significant Threat’

    by

    A proposal for a corn mill, which had been welcomed as an economic development success, reflects just how much things have changed with Chinese investment proposals in the U.S.After more than a year of debate about whether a Chinese company’s plan to build a corn mill in North Dakota was an economic boon or a geopolitical risk, an assistant secretary of the Air Force has weighed in with a warning that the “project presents a significant threat to national security.”The letter from Assistant Secretary Andrew P. Hunter, released publicly on Tuesday by North Dakota’s senators, noted the proximity of Grand Forks Air Force Base to the proposed mill and said the project raised “near- and long-term risks of significant impacts to our operations in the area.”The debate over Fufeng USA’s plan to build a giant milling facility on the edge of Grand Forks, less than 15 miles from the Air Force base, divided the Republican power structure in North Dakota and showed just how swiftly the economic relationship between the United States and China had changed.Though the Air Force letter did not name specific threats, residents had voiced numerous concerns. Some in town said it was unwise to deepen economic ties with China, while others speculated that the mill could be used for spying on the Air Force, which the company denied.The city’s Republican mayor, Brandon Bochenski, a former supporter of the project, said on Tuesday that because of the federal guidance, he would move to block construction by trying to deny building permits and by refusing to connect city infrastructure to the building site.More on U.S. Armed ForcesKorean War Wall of Remembrance: Many names of American service members who died in the conflict are misspelled or missing from the new memorial wall in Washington, relatives and researchers say.Parental Leave: The Pentagon announced a new policy that would double the amount of leave that is available to military service members.Defense Bill: Congress passed a $858 billion defense bill that would rescind the coronavirus vaccine mandate for troops and increase the defense budget $45 billion over President Biden’s request.A Boost for the N.R.A.: Instructors in military-sponsored J.R.O.T.C. classes have offered to promote the gun rights organization in high schools in exchange for money for their marksmanship programs.“The Air Force left ambiguity off the table,” the state’s two senators, John Hoeven and Kevin Cramer, both Republicans, said in a joint statement that called for Grand Forks officials to work with them “to find an American company to develop the agriculture project.”The corn mill was the sort of job-creating opportunity that cities have long fought over, and one that just a few years ago would have been seen by most as an unambiguous win. Both Mr. Bochenski and North Dakota’s Republican governor, Doug Burgum, celebrated in late 2021 when Grand Forks landed the project, which would have been the city’s largest economic development project in recent history.But within months after Fufeng chose Grand Forks, a college and military city with 59,000 residents, many in town began speaking out against the project. While some of the opposition focused on property rights and water use, the company’s ties to China and the perceived national security risks became the focus of pushback. Still, the city moved forward, annexing the field where the mill would be built and entering into a development agreement with the company.Mr. Bochenski, a first-term mayor and a former professional hockey player, said in an interview last year that the shifting geopolitical winds had been a challenge for the city. “Are we going to be the first one to basically say no to globalism?” he asked at the time.But on Tuesday, in light of the Air Force’s letter, Mr. Bochenski said he would seek the City Council’s help to block construction, though he noted that Fufeng USA, the American subsidiary of a Chinese company, would still own the land where it had hoped to build.Work on the project had been paused in recent months while the federal government’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States reviewed the company’s plans. That committee ultimately decided that it did not have jurisdiction.“The response from the federal government during this process can only be viewed as slow and contradictory,” Mr. Bochenski said. “This directive leaves open the question of other entities with Chinese connections across the nation,” he added, including a Chinese-owned aviation company in Grand Forks “and Chinese students and professors at the University of North Dakota.”Mr. Burgum, who once called the Fufeng mill a “huge opportunity” for his state, said in a statement that he supported the mayor’s decision to stop cooperating with the company given the concerns voiced by the Air Force.The turnabout in North Dakota comes as the United States rethinks its longstanding trade relationship with China, and as politicians in both parties have come to view the country more as a threat than as an attractive economic partner. Several states are considering bills this year that would limit or ban Chinese land ownership.Eric Chutorash, Fufeng USA’s chief operating officer, has repeatedly denied that the mill would be used to spy on or harm the United States. He did not immediately respond to requests for comment about the Air Force’s letter. China’s embassy in Washington declined to comment. More

  • 138 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Ukraine Crisis: What Happens Next for the Rest of the World?

    by

    Europe faces a new refugee crisis, and harsh economic penalties to punish Russia are expected to reverberate worldwide.WASHINGTON — Much of the world woke up on Thursday to the specter of an all-out war in Europe after President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia ordered his troops to invade Ukraine. That left millions of people — in Ukraine and Eastern Europe, but also in the United States and elsewhere — wondering how the conflict would affect their lives.At least 40 Ukrainian solders were reported killed in the hours after the invasion, with estimates of tens of thousands of deaths over the course of the conflict. But beyond the anticipated bloodshed, economic penalties to punish Russia will reverberate worldwide.Rising energy costs and potentially slowing supply chains will take their toll on consumers. Russian cyberattacks could cripple electronic infrastructure. A new refugee crisis will require international assistance. And an era of relative calm in the West that has pervaded since the end of the Cold War might be coming to a close.Here is what might happen next on the military, economic and diplomatic fronts.More military forces head to NATO’s eastern borders.Many of the U.S. troops who arrived in Poland this month have been working with Polish forces to set up processing centers to help people fleeing Ukraine.Czarek Sokolowski/Associated PressNATO announced on Thursday that it was sending reinforcements to its eastern flank, joining some 6,500 U.S. troops the Pentagon has already dispatched to Eastern Europe and the Baltics.“We are deploying additional defensive land and air forces to the eastern part of the alliance, as well as additional maritime assets,” NATO said in a statement. “We have increased the readiness of our forces to respond to all contingencies.”The Pentagon is also repositioning about 1,000 troops in Europe. About 800 U.S. troops are moving to the Baltics from Italy; 20 Apache helicopters are heading to the Baltics from Germany, and 12 Apaches are going to Poland from Greece. Eight F-35 strike fighters are heading to Lithuania, Estonia and Romania from Germany, the Pentagon said.In addition, U.S. Army troops, including those from the 82nd and 101st Airborne divisions, are preparing to move closer to Poland’s border with Ukraine to help process people fleeing the country, an Army spokesman said on Thursday.Many of the 5,500 troops from the 18th Airborne Corps who arrived in Poland this month have been working with the State Department and Polish forces to set up three processing centers near the border to help deal with tens of thousands of people, including Americans, who are expected to flee Ukraine.In Jasionka, Poland, an indoor arena has been outfitted with bunk beds and supplies for up to 500 people; U.S. officials say that capacity could be quickly expanded. In Austria, Chancellor Karl Nehammer said on Wednesday that he was prepared to accept refugees. The State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development are funding relief organizations that are currently providing food, water, shelter and emergency health care to people in the region who have fled to escape the violence.In the days to come, the C.I.A. will assess what kind of assistance it can provide to Ukraine. If a Ukrainian resistance develops in parts of the country that Russia seeks to control, the agency could secretly supply partisan forces with intelligence and, potentially, armaments.“We need to support the resistance to the invasion and the occupation in all ways possible,” said Mick Mulroy, a former C.I.A. paramilitary officer and senior Pentagon official in the Trump administration. “Our special operations and intelligence assets with an extensive knowledge base from 20 years of fighting insurgencies should be put to immediate use.”‘Severe’ sanctions from the U.S. and Europe.The Treasury Department is likely to put one or more Russian state-owned banks on the agency’s list for the harshest sanctions.Natalia Kolesnikova/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesPresident Biden on Thursday plans to announce “severe sanctions” against Russia to try to deter Moscow from carrying out further violence in Ukraine and to punish it for its actions, U.S. officials said.The next set of economic sanctions is expected to be much harsher than what U.S. officials had described as a first tranche that was imposed on Monday and Tuesday. Mr. Biden is likely to order the Treasury Department to put one or more large Russian state-owned banks on the agency’s list for the harshest sanctions, known as the S.D.N. list. That would cut off the banks from commerce and exchanges with much of the world and affect many other Russian business operations.The Biden administration said on Tuesday that it was imposing that kind of sanctions on two banks, VEB and PSB, but those are policy banks with no retail operations in Russia.Administration officials have studied how sanctions would affect each of the big banks, including Sberbank and VTB, Russia’s two largest banks. Sberbank has about a third of the assets in the country’s banking sector, and VTB has more than 15 percent. Some experts are skeptical that the administration would put those two banks on the S.D.N. list for fear of the consequences for the Russian and global economies. For now, U.S. officials are not ready to cut off all Russian banks from Swift, the important Belgian money transfer system used by more than 11,000 financial institutions worldwide.The Treasury Department has other sanctions lists that would impose costs while inflicting less widespread suffering. For example, it could put a bank on a list that prevents it from doing any transactions involving dollars. Many international commercial transactions are done in U.S. dollars, the currency that underpins the global economy.The Treasury Department is also expected to put more Russian officials, businesspeople and companies on the sanctions lists.By Thursday afternoon in Russia, the nation’s stock market had fallen nearly 40 percent.The Commerce Department has been making plans to restrict the export of certain American technologies to Russia, a tactic that the Trump administration used to hobble Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications company. The controls would damage the supply chain for some Russian sectors. U.S. officials said their targets included the defense industry and the oil and gas industry.European officials are expected to announce sanctions similar to many of the ones planned by the United States, as they did this week. However, they have been more wary of imposing the harshest sanctions because of the continent’s robust trade with Russia.Although Mr. Biden has said he will contemplate any possible sanctions, U.S. officials for now do not plan big disruptions to Russia’s energy exports, which are the pillar of the country’s economy. Europe relies on the products, and surging oil prices worldwide would cause greater inflation and more problems for politicians. However, Germany announces this week that it would not certify Nord Stream 2, a new natural gas pipeline that connects Russia and Western Europe. On Wednesday Mr. Biden announced sanctions on a subsidiary of Gazprom, the large Russian energy company, which built the pipeline and had planned to operate it.Understand Russia’s Attack on UkraineCard 1 of 7What is at the root of this invasion? More