{"id":1984750,"date":"2023-07-27T23:46:01","date_gmt":"2023-07-28T03:46:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-national-security-threats-loom-and-government-agencies-arent-keeping-up\/"},"modified":"2023-07-27T23:49:54","modified_gmt":"2023-07-28T03:49:54","slug":"new-national-security-threats-loom-and-government-agencies-arent-keeping-up","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-national-security-threats-loom-and-government-agencies-arent-keeping-up\/","title":{"rendered":"Government agencies are falling behind as new national security threats emerge."},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">22<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fnew-national-security-threats-loom-and-government-agencies-arent-keeping-up%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1984750&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><h2>Age of Danger: Keeping America Safe in an \u2062Era of New Superpowers, New Weapons, and New\u2063 Threats<\/h2>\n<blockquote><p>Age\u200c of Danger: Keeping America Safe\u200c in an Era of New \u200cSuperpowers, New Weapons, and New \u200cThreats<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p> is a just-published book by Andrew Hoehn, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/senate-confirms-kathleen-hicks-as-deputy-defense-secretary\/\" title=\"Senate Confirms Kathleen Hicks as Deputy Defense Secretary\">senior vice president<\/a> at the RAND Corporation\u2062 and former <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/bidens-ex-doe-official-sam-brinton-was-on-taxpayer-funded-trip-during-luggage-burglary\/\" title=\"Biden's ex-DOE official, Sam Brinton, on taxpayer-funded trip during luggage theft.\">deputy\u200b assistant secretary<\/a> of defense for strategy \u200dduring\u200b President\u200d George\u200b W. Bush&#8217;s\u2063 administration, and Thom Shanker, director of the Project for Media and \u200cNational \u2062Security at George Washington University \u200cand former New York Times defense correspondent. Shanker talked with Washington Examiner \u2064senior writer Jamie McIntyre about \u200cthe book\u2019s premise: that \u200dthe U.S. \u2063national security \u200destablishment has been\u2064 asleep \u2063at the wheel for the past two decades and is badly in need of a course correction.<\/p>\n<p>The following interview was \u2062edited \u200dfor length \u2064and clarity.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: The title of your book is Age of Danger. Isn\u2019t the world always in an \u2064age \u2064of danger? How is it different now?\u2062 Or is it?<\/h3>\n<p>Thom Shanker: \u2064We make\u200c the case that this is an age of\u200c danger, unlike anything we&#8217;ve seen before for several significant reasons. One is that never before in world history have there \u2063been two adversaries, \u2064in this case, Russia and \u200cChina,\u200b who now have or who soon will have a nuclear arsenal sufficient to wipe\u2063 us off the face of the Earth. We&#8217;ve \u200bhad multiple adversaries before in World War \u200dII, but neither\u2062 of them could pose a \u2064truly existential threat. That&#8217;s problem one. Problem two is that all \u200cof the risks out there are coming at\u2064 us faster, at network \u200dspeed with AI and cyber, and with \u2063the truly hypersonic speed with China&#8217;s \u200chypersonic missiles \u200dfor which there&#8217;s no defense \u2062right\u2062 now. Then you add in globalization, the spread of disease, viruses, and\u2064 all that.\u200c We truly \u200dthink that the world is facing\u2063 an age of danger unlike \u2063any before.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: We have a lot of \u2062smart people in our\u200c government and\u2063 other places thinking about \u2063these threats, and the country spends a lot\u200b of money on defense and national\u2062 security. What are they missing?<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker:\u200d The annual amount that Andy\u2063 Hoehn and I figured \u2063goes to national security, which\u2063 includes the Defense\u2064 Department, intelligence community, Homeland Security, and law enforcement, all that is $1.2 trillion a year. We are not advocating\u2062 necessarily more or advocating it \u2063be spent in a wiser fashion. And one of\u200d the things is after 9\/11, the threat of terrorism \u200bwas mistakenly labeled an existential threat, which it wasn&#8217;t. \u2064It was a serious threat, but terrorism never threatened the existence of our country. The next 20 years \u200bwere a focus on counterterrorism that allowed all these other threats to rise without us doing\u200b much about\u2064 it. China caught up with us. So,\u200c we advocate\u200c a broader definition\u200c of what national security \u200cis, not just things that\u200c kill us or blow up, but a wider panoramic definition of national security to include food\u200d security, data security, climate security, \u200call the things that put\u2062 us at risk.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: In your book, you reference the \u201cwarning machine\u201d versus the \u201caction machine.\u201d Explain.<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: \u2064The \u201cwarning machine\u201d is part of our government that watches the world, collects \u200dinformation, and assesses \u2063it. And for sure, it&#8217;s the intelligence community, \u200bbut it&#8217;s also every diplomat that&#8217;s out there, every businessman who has an interesting conversation with a foreign official\u200b and then may write about it or \u2064share it. And\u2063 the warning machine \u200dworks pretty well. But unfortunately, because of bureaucratic \u2063problems, it too often sounds warnings with an uncertain\u2062 trumpet.\u200d They always have these caveats:\u2063 \u201cto be sure,\u201d \u201cmaybe not,\u201d\u200b and \u2063so \u200bproblems are sometimes\u200d missed. Even if the warning machine issues a clear and powerful warning, sometimes the action machine doesn&#8217;t accept \u200dit.<\/p>\n<p>The \u201caction machine\u201c is the\u2063 executive branch, all of those in government who can \u200cmake the decisions. The president&#8217;s inbox is always overflowing. Presidents don&#8217;t always have time \u200bor\u200d attention to deal with\u2063 every threat, or to consider them as threats, and they have to \u200bdeal with \u200cwhat the military calls \u201cthe crocodile closest to the canoe.\u201d But sometimes, the threat around the corner is\u200d the one that should\u2063 be dealt with, and not just\u200c the immediate, the current. We \u2062make the case that\u2064 the future has to\u2063 have a \u200bseat at the \u200dtable in\u2063 national\u2063 security decision-making.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington \u2063Examiner: Are you and your co-author trying to scare us \u2063into action?<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: I make the\u200b joke that\u200d I\u2063 want \u2062people to buy the\u2063 book, but not necessarily read it if you\u2062 want to sleep\u200b at night. But yes, we wrote\u2063 this book for \u2063a general audience.\u200d This is not an inside-the-Beltway policy \u200dwhite paper. It&#8217;s full\u200d of people.\u2062 We interviewed \u2064generals,\u2064 Cabinet secretaries, and people out\u200c in the\u2063 trenches\u2062 looking at \u200dbio-threats. We tried to humanize the national security process so\u2062 that a general readership, \u2062people all \u2062across \u2064America, can get involved in the discussion because these questions are too big to leave to our leadership in Washington. We really want to inspire a national debate.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: Let&#8217;s talk about some of \u2064the threats. \u2064The one getting the most attention in\u2062 Washington at the \u200cmoment, despite the hot war in Ukraine, is the increasing cold\u200c war with China.<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: In the\u200d 20 years the\u2062 U.S.\u200c was circling the strategic cul-de-sac of\u2063 the Middle East, China used those 20 years to catch up\u2062 with us \u2063in almost every capability \u2014 military, space, and, to \u200cbe sure,\u2063 economic. We \u2063were just too busy chasing terrorists around the world. I&#8217;m not saying that that was \u200cnot a \u2062valid mission, but it should not\u2064 have so\u2063 preoccupied all parts of our\u2063 national security. And as we know,\u200c the Chinese leadership has declared it\u200c wants to\u2062 have\u200b the capability to retake Taiwan by force by 2027, and it&#8217;s the American goal to beef up Taiwan&#8217;s defenses \u2064and\u2064 think of new styles of deterrent so that \u200dwe always make Chinese \u200bleadership\u200d wonder, &#8220;Will it work?\u2064 Will it\u2063 not?&#8221; That&#8217;s the essence of deterrence, \u2063just \u200binjecting doubt into Chinese decision-makers\u200b about whether they should actually move by force to retake Taiwan.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: In the book, you cite a long list of growing threats, including \u200cpandemics, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, climate change, the rise of drones. Is there any way to rank them, or are they all equally dangerous?<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: The one \u2064that weighs most on me right now is the fact \u2063that climate security is national security, that, truly, \u200bclimate change is an existential threat. I \u200cmean, we&#8217;ve seen what heat has done across our \u200dcountry, in Europe, and around the world just this summer.<\/p>\n<p>People aren&#8217;t even talking enough about the expected climate-related \u2062migration. Hundreds of millions, a billion people might \u2063be on the move over the\u2063 next couple of decades seeking water, \u200dfood,\u2062 a better place to \u2063live. The world&#8217;s just not ready to deal with that. And \u200deven here at home, the National Guard, \u200dwhich has been an important part of\u200b American overseas security, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, is going to be so <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-national-security-threats-loom-and-government-agencies-arent-keeping-up\/\" title=\"Government agencies are falling behind as new national security threats emerge.\">busy year-round fighting wildfires<\/a> \u200dand dealing with increased hurricanes, they simply \u200dwill not be able to deploy as part of \u2063the national security \u200bforce that they have been since their inception.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: What do you say to \u2062the large \u200dsegment\u2063 of \u200cAmericans who don&#8217;t\u200c believe climate change is an existential threat, who don&#8217;t believe the pandemic we just went\u2062 through was all\u2062 that serious,\u200c and that efforts to label\u2063 those problems national security threats distract from the \u2063military\u2019s\u200c primary mission\u200b of defending the nation and deterring wars?<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: \u200dThe American military is the most <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/kathleen-j-anderson-biden-defense-spox-john-kirby-denies-wokeness-hurting-military-recruitment-hes-wrong\/\" title=\"Kathleen J. Anderson: Biden Defense Spox John Kirby Denies \u2018Wokeness\u2019 Hurting Military Recruitment. He\u2019s Wrong\">lethal fighting force<\/a> \u2063in the world today. The\u200d U.S. spends more on \u200bdefense than I think the \u2063next 10 countries combined,\u200c and\u2062 more\u2064 than half of them are \u2063allies anyway. That\u2063 doesn&#8217;t \u200cmean that we can let down our \u2063guard,\u2064 especially against a pacing China and an aggressive Russia. But\u2064 just think, on 9\/11, 3,000 people died.\u200b Every death over zero \u2063is a tragedy, but we went on a war footing for 20 years and launched two wars.\u200d So far, under COVID, a \u200dmillion Americans have died and \u2064rising, and we never went on a war \u2063footing. So, people who say disease is not\u200c a \u2064problem, and climate\u2064 is not a problem equal\u2063 to other national \u2064security threats, I simply disagree with them. They&#8217;re wrong. And this country\u200d can do more than one thing in national security. For $1.2 trillion a year, we can do more.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: World War I French Prime Minister Georges\u200b Clemenceau famously said,\u2062 \u201cWar is too important to be left to the generals.\u201d What kind of fundamental changes are\u2062 needed to redirect the national security machine and \u2063point it in the \u200dright \u2064direction?<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: For example, on climate change, the Pentagon is the world&#8217;s \u200dlargest \u200cconsumer of fossil fuels. Even \u2063though\u2062 the Pentagon has a climate action plan, it&#8217;s \u2064not putting sufficient money to actually mitigate\u2064 all of the greenhouse\u2063 gases\u2062 that\u2063 the Pentagon emits. And a plan without a budget\u200c is a fantasy. So, the\u200d American public can demand accountability on climate all across the government, not just from \u2063the Pentagon, but from every aspect\u2062 of government.<\/p>\n<p>Coming out\u2062 of COVID, the \u200cAmerican\u2062 public can demand\u200d of its\u200d Congress, of its elected representatives, that it\u2063 set up task\u2064 forces \u2062to \u200bget us ready for the next pandemic. The public should have a voice in \u2064how national security is made, especially when it moves away \u200bfrom classified\u200d high-value targets \u2064like terrorists. Issues of climate change, food security, data security,\u200c and health security are things every\u2063 citizen can understand, and they need to make their voices heard.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: Washington is\u2064 known for appointing\u200c blue ribbon commissions to examine serious problems, politely thanking them for their work, and then ignoring their \u200crecommendations. Why do\u200c you think your book might make a difference?<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker:\u200b I guess I&#8217;m hopelessly optimistic. We&#8217;re at a point where there is a resonance for our book. Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of\u200b the\u200d Joint Chiefs, gave a speech a couple of months ago making the case\u2062 that we&#8217;re in a new age of danger. The\u200c CIA director, William Burns, \u200bgave a public speech in the U.K.\u2064 in recent \u2063weeks, and many of the things he spoke about, his view, and the agency&#8217;s view\u200b of\u200b the\u2063 world are\u2062 reflected in \u2063our book as well. We have to expand the definition of \u200dnational security. \u2062We have to be ready for threats that come at us not\u2062 as bombs\u200c and bullets \u200bbut \u200cas digits and as disease. So, I\u200d think this might just be a ripe moment for people to open their eyes and open the aperture on what it means to \u200dkeep\u200d our\u2063 country safe.<\/p>\n<h3>Washington Examiner: You joked that people who read the book might not be able to sleep at night, but tell me why this\u200d book would appeal to someone who, unlike you or me, is not \u2064a national security nerd.<\/h3>\n<p>Shanker: National security \u2063really is too important\u2064 just to leave in the hands of officials in Washington. I mean, we are a democracy. The American people have\u2064 to have a voice \u2062in how we keep our country safe and what \u200dconstitutes a \u2063risk. So, we hope \u200cour book is a readable, engaging tutorial on the issue so the public will join in the conversation. Do you know what? It&#8217;s their security, too, and it&#8217;s their\u200b kids&#8217; security, and it&#8217;s \u2063their grandkids&#8217; security. And \u2063if we don&#8217;t change the way we do business\u200d in national\u2064 security policy and the execution of national \u2064security, we are \u200dgiving away the\u200b future.<\/p>\n<p>CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON\u2063 EXAMINER<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Age of Danger, a recently released book by Andrew Hoehn and Thom Shanker, addresses the challenges of safeguarding America amidst emerging superpowers, advanced weaponry, and evolving threats. Hoehn, a senior VP at RAND Corporation and former defense official, collaborates with Shanker, director of the Project for Media, to shed light on this critical era.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1984751,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[538],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1984750","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-washington-examiner"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1984750","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1984750"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1984750\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1984751"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1984750"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1984750"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1984750"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}