thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-07-22--The Great American Firewall: On the Question of Censorship

t should not surprise anyone that China would take protective measures against the threat of U.S. imperialism in the realm of cyber technology .
The Great Firewall in China is a hot button subject that unites the most hawkish and militarist forces of the state with the so-called U.S. left .
China ’ s legal exclusion of Google , Facebook , and other American corporate media from acceptable consumption is often viewed as the most obvious example of “ authoritarianism.
” Few in the U.S. , even on the left , analyze censorship as a political question .
Many instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American exceptionalism .
Censorship is “ bad ” because it violates the right to “ free speech ” —which is supposedly a laudable feature of U.S. society .
Yet the United States has its own firewall that , while criticized for its overreach , has yet to be characterized on equal terms with China ’ s firewall .
This article sets out to demystify the two firewalls and the broader class struggle that undergirds their existence .
First , let us turn to China ’ s “ Great Firewall.
” China instituted the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 21st century .
The blockage of mainly Western and American websites has indeed caused a stir inside of China and has faced criticism from “ netizens ” for its lack of precision and convenience .
But many in China also understand why the central government would take a hard stance on the filtration of information into the country .
Even Hong Kong ’ s rightwing outlet , the South China Morning Post , has been forced to admit that China ’ s tough approach to cyber security has spurred the creation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country fend off attempts by U.S. imperialism to undermine national sovereignty .
“ Few on the left analyze censorship as a political question.
” While many consider the internet to be a public utility , the internet is also a weapon of U.S. militarism .
In fact , as Yasha Levine surmises in his book Surveillance Valley , the internet was first and foremost a weapon of the U.S. military to expand mass surveillance and counterinsurgency activity .
China is one of many countries that have fallen victim to these activities .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gong attempted to utilize the internet to organize opposition protests within the country .
The Falun Gong receives funding from the U.S. Agency for Global Media , a State Department-backed organization responsible for CIA mouthpieces such as Radio Free Asia and Voice of America .
China ’ s Great Firewall is in part a defense measure to curb possible infiltration of the anti-communist and pro-Trump Falun Gong organization , which in 2006 was given a press pass from the Bush Administration to interrupt and embarrass China ’ s President Hu Jintao during his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In March of 2020 , China ’ s cybersecurity firm Qihoo 360 analyzed WikiLeaks ’ Vault7 leak .
Qihoo 360 concluded that the CIA had hacked into the country ’ s aviation , petroleum , and a host of other industries and government agencies for eleven years ( 2008-2019 ) .
The U.S. often complains that China ’ s firewall creates unfair economic competition yet Qihoo 360 ’ s analysis suggests that business methods and possibly confidential information of consumers were stolen by the CIA to undermine China ’ s economic growth .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ CIA collects foreign malware with the potential aim of pinning its attacks onto other countries , the very real threat of cyberwarfare from the United States is an obvious factor in China ’ s adoption of strict cyber security measures .
There is a direct link between the Great Firewall and the need for China to defend itself from subversion from the CIA .
Google has maintained a partnership with the CIA since 2004 .
Facebook , Twitter , and other social media are routinely used by the CIA and other intelligence agencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dedicated to organizing information collected on these platforms .
Silicon Valley tech corporations such as Microsoft possess lucrative deals with the Pentagon to enhance the murderous capabilities of the empire .
It is no secret that the U.S. effort to “ contain ” China includes the use of military aggression whereby over half of all U.S. military assets now reside in the Asia Pacific .
It should also not surprise anyone , then , that China would take protective measures against the threat of U.S. imperialism in the realm of cyber technology .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Class struggle is not built on idealism .
Class struggle is a byproduct of the uneven social relations that exist between classes and nations of people .
In the case of China , a very conscious decision has been made to safeguard the self-determination of the country from the threat of imperial subversion through the worldwide web .
Millions of people in China use VPNs to defy the firewall .
However , millions more of the 800 million-plus internet users in China are satisfied with domestically produced sources of information precisely because “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an ample market for online activity .
While opinions on the firewall within China are diverse , it is ultimately up to the people of China to decide the best means of safeguarding their national interests .
“ A decision has been made to safeguard the self-determination of the country from the threat of imperial subversion through the worldwide web.
” The question of censorship can not be separated from the global class struggle , which is why China ’ s firewall catches the gaze of the U.S. and West while the Great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the United States is rampant .
As the hegemonic global imperial power , the U.S. has asserted the full weight of its repressive apparatus on the mass media .
A handful of corporations own all web browsing and social media , not to mention print and television outlets .
These corporations shape all content and work hand and foot with the intelligence apparatus to suppress those deemed antagonistic to their interests .
Russiagate accelerated this process through the rigging of algorithms to suppress the content of Black Agenda Report and other alternative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Social media corporations such as Twitter regularly ban accounts that express solidarity with China , Venezuela , and other nations that the U.S. seeks to destabilize and overthrow .
The Great American Firewall filters out the truth in place of imperialist lies .
Leftists are systematically excluded from corporate platforms , and in the case of YouTube , demonetized and rendered virtually invisible .
The Great American Firewall may allow social media profiles and YouTube channels to utter anti-establishment and revolutionary political ideas so long as they do not have any impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Julian Assange represents the highest form of repression leveled upon those who pierce the Great American Firewall to bring truth to the masses .
Assange is barely hanging onto life in the UK ’ s Belmarsh prison for the crime of exposing the inhumanity of U.S. wars and the farce that is the U.S. electoral process .
‘ The Great American Firewall filters out the truth in place of imperialist lies.
” The farcical myths of American exceptionalism such as “ free speech ” facilitate a mass ignorance of the deadly censorship that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real leftist movement in the United States would do well to reexamine the material conditions that create the need for censorship and let go of anti-communist and racist stereotypes which only serve to cloud political judgement .
While China is certainly a leading economic power , the Communist Party-led state is by no means a military hegemon .
That position rests with the United States .
The United States possesses the biggest military apparatus in the world by several proportions , one that is used to destroy and plunder the planet with impunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the struggles of oppressed people , whether Black Americans , Palestinians , Venezuelans , or Libyans , are systematically excluded from the U.S. ’ so-called “ free press , ” including its online channels .
The Great American Firewall is a massively important tool of the U.S. imperial state that protects the interests of private capital and its overlords .
How we talk about censorship is influenced by the ruling class ’ imposition of ideological hegemony to support its political and economic hegemony .
Censorship in China takes on a different character under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , living standards have improved dramatically , absolute poverty has been nearly abolished , and political and economic reforms have been implemented at a breakneck pace despite the existence of the firewall .
In the U.S. , increased censorship has been complimented by the growth of the prison population , the pauperization of all workers , and the development of a bipartisan consensus in Washington in favor of endless war and austerity .
In other words , while China has changed dramatically in less than half a century , the United States remains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colonial and imperialist project .
“ Corporate media censorship has ensured that the struggles of oppressed people are systematically excluded from the U.S. ’ so-called ‘ free press.
’ ” The principle aim of this article was to inspire a broader political and ideological debate on the question of censorship as it relates to the specific conditions that exist in relation to China and the United States .
The fact remains that the U.S. is moving closer and closer to a dangerous military confrontation with China in a futile attempt to contain its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has hit a low point .
A truly principled left and anti-imperialist movement expresses solidarity with anyone who , to paraphrase Malcolm X , is interested in ending the miserable conditions that exist on this planet .
This includes nations such as China .
As millions of people in the U.S. of all racial backgrounds begin to rethink the function of the police amid the uprising against the racist murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor , it is important that the issue of censorship be taken out of the narrow confines of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ context of the U.S. ’ power structure of empire , racism , and capitalism in mind .
Danny Haiphong is an activist and journalist in the New York City area .
He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence : A People ’ s History of Fake News -- From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror ( Skyhorse Publishing ) .
He is the co-host with BAR Editor Margaret Kimberly of the Youtube show BAR Presents : The Left Lens and can be reached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Haiphong is an activist and journalist in the New York City area .
He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence : A People ’ s History of Fake News -- From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror ( Skyhorse Publishing ) .
He is the co-host with BAR Editor Margaret Kimberly of the Youtube show BAR Presents : The Left Lens and can be reached at wakeupriseup1990 @ gmail.com Please join the conversation on Black Agenda Report 's Facebook page at http : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emailing us at comments @ blackagendareport.com

I
t should not surprise anyone that China would take protective measures against the threat of U.S. imperialism in the realm of cyber technology.
The Great Firewall in China is a hot button subject that unites the most hawkish and militarist forces of the state with the so-called U.S. left. China’s legal exclusion of Google, Facebook, and other American corporate media from acceptable consumption is often viewed as the most obvious example of “authoritarianism.” Few in the U.S., even on the left, analyze censorship as a political question. Many instead debate the issue from the lens of American exceptionalism. Censorship is “bad” because it violates the right to “free speech”—which is supposedly a laudable feature of U.S. society. Yet the United States has its own firewall that, while criticized for its overreach, has yet to be characterized on equal terms with China’s firewall. This article sets out to demystify the two firewalls and the broader class struggle that undergirds their existence.
First, let us turn to China’s “Great Firewall.” China instituted the firewall just prior to the turn of the 21st century. The blockage of mainly Western and American websites has indeed caused a stir inside of China and has faced criticism from “netizens” for its lack of precision and convenience. But many in China also understand why the central government would take a hard stance on the filtration of information into the country. Even Hong Kong’s rightwing outlet, the South China Morning Post , has been forced to admit that China’s tough approach to cyber security has spurred the creation of homegrown social media giants and helped the country fend off attempts by U.S. imperialism to undermine national sovereignty.
“Few on the left analyze censorship as a political question.”
While many consider the internet to be a public utility, the internet is also a weapon of U.S. militarism. In fact, as Yasha Levine surmises in his book Surveillance Valley , the internet was first and foremost a weapon of the U.S. military to expand mass surveillance and counterinsurgency activity. China is one of many countries that have fallen victim to these activities. In 1999, the U.S.-backed right-wing cult Falun Gong attempted to utilize the internet to organize opposition protests within the country. The Falun Gong receives funding from the U.S. Agency for Global Media , a State Department-backed organization responsible for CIA mouthpieces such as Radio Free Asia and Voice of America. China’s Great Firewall is in part a defense measure to curb possible infiltration of the anti-communist and pro-Trump Falun Gong organization, which in 2006 was given a press pass from the Bush Administration to interrupt and embarrass China’s President Hu Jintao during his speech on the White House lawn.
In March of 2020, China’s cybersecurity firm Qihoo 360 analyzed WikiLeaks’ Vault7 leak. Qihoo 360 concluded that the CIA had hacked into the country’s aviation, petroleum, and a host of other industries and government agencies for eleven years (2008-2019). The U.S. often complains that China’s firewall creates unfair economic competition yet Qihoo 360’s analysis suggests that business methods and possibly confidential information of consumers were stolen by the CIA to undermine China’s economic growth. Given that Vault7 also revealed that the CIA collects foreign malware with the potential aim of pinning its attacks onto other countries, the very real threat of cyberwarfare from the United States is an obvious factor in China’s adoption of strict cyber security measures.
“China’s Great Firewall is in part a defense measure.”
There is a direct link between the Great Firewall and the need for China to defend itself from subversion from the CIA. Google has maintained a partnership with the CIA since 2004. Facebook, Twitter, and other social media are routinely used by the CIA and other intelligence agencies to spy on citizens through private firms dedicated to organizing information collected on these platforms. Silicon Valley tech corporations such as Microsoft possess lucrative deals with the Pentagon to enhance the murderous capabilities of the empire. It is no secret that the U.S. effort to “contain” China includes the use of military aggression whereby over half of all U.S. military assets now reside in the Asia Pacific . It should also not surprise anyone, then, that China would take protective measures against the threat of U.S. imperialism in the realm of cyber technology.
The Great Firewall is not ideal. Class struggle is not built on idealism. Class struggle is a byproduct of the uneven social relations that exist between classes and nations of people. In the case of China, a very conscious decision has been made to safeguard the self-determination of the country from the threat of imperial subversion through the worldwide web. Millions of people in China use VPNs to defy the firewall. However, millions more of the 800 million-plus internet users in China are satisfied with domestically produced sources of information precisely because “socialism with Chinese characteristics” has provided an ample market for online activity. While opinions on the firewall within China are diverse, it is ultimately up to the people of China to decide the best means of safeguarding their national interests.
“A decision has been made to safeguard the self-determination of the country from the threat of imperial subversion through the worldwide web.”
The question of censorship cannot be separated from the global class struggle, which is why China’s firewall catches the gaze of the U.S. and West while the Great American Firewall is rarely discussed. Censorship in the United States is rampant. As the hegemonic global imperial power, the U.S. has asserted the full weight of its repressive apparatus on the mass media. A handful of corporations own all web browsing and social media, not to mention print and television outlets. These corporations shape all content and work hand and foot with the intelligence apparatus to suppress those deemed antagonistic to their interests. Russiagate accelerated this process through the rigging of algorithms to suppress the content of Black Agenda Report and other alternative outlets on social media and search engines. Social media corporations such as Twitter regularly ban accounts that express solidarity with China , Venezuela , and other nations that the U.S. seeks to destabilize and overthrow.
The Great American Firewall filters out the truth in place of imperialist lies. Leftists are systematically excluded from corporate platforms, and in the case of YouTube, demonetized and rendered virtually invisible. The Great American Firewall may allow social media profiles and YouTube channels to utter anti-establishment and revolutionary political ideas so long as they do not have any impact whatsoever on the development of society. Julian Assange represents the highest form of repression leveled upon those who pierce the Great American Firewall to bring truth to the masses. Assange is barely hanging onto life in the UK’s Belmarsh prison for the crime of exposing the inhumanity of U.S. wars and the farce that is the U.S. electoral process.
‘The Great American Firewall filters out the truth in place of imperialist lies.”
The farcical myths of American exceptionalism such as “free speech” facilitate a mass ignorance of the deadly censorship that Assange’s case represents. Any real leftist movement in the United States would do well to reexamine the material conditions that create the need for censorship and let go of anti-communist and racist stereotypes which only serve to cloud political judgement. While China is certainly a leading economic power, the Communist Party-led state is by no means a military hegemon. That position rests with the United States. The United States possesses the biggest military apparatus in the world by several proportions, one that is used to destroy and plunder the planet with impunity. Corporate media censorship has ensured that the struggles of oppressed people, whether Black Americans, Palestinians, Venezuelans, or Libyans, are systematically excluded from the U.S.’ so-called “free press,” including its online channels.
The Great American Firewall is a massively important tool of the U.S. imperial state that protects the interests of private capital and its overlords. How we talk about censorship is influenced by the ruling class’ imposition of ideological hegemony to support its political and economic hegemony. Censorship in China takes on a different character under the conditions of socialism. In China, living standards have improved dramatically, absolute poverty has been nearly abolished, and political and economic reforms have been implemented at a breakneck pace despite the existence of the firewall. In the U.S., increased censorship has been complimented by the growth of the prison population, the pauperization of all workers, and the development of a bipartisan consensus in Washington in favor of endless war and austerity. In other words, while China has changed dramatically in less than half a century, the United States remains stagnant and mired in a centuries-long settler colonial and imperialist project.
“Corporate media censorship has ensured that the struggles of oppressed people are systematically excluded from the U.S.’ so-called ‘free press.’”
The principle aim of this article was to inspire a broader political and ideological debate on the question of censorship as it relates to the specific conditions that exist in relation to China and the United States. The fact remains that the U.S. is moving closer and closer to a dangerous military confrontation with China in a futile attempt to contain its growth. U.S. public opinion of China has hit a low point. A truly principled left and anti-imperialist movement expresses solidarity with anyone who, to paraphrase Malcolm X, is interested in ending the miserable conditions that exist on this planet. This includes nations such as China. As millions of people in the U.S. of all racial backgrounds begin to rethink the function of the police amid the uprising against the racist murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, it is important that the issue of censorship be taken out of the narrow confines of American exceptionalism and scrutinized with the full context of the U.S.’ power structure of empire, racism, and capitalism in mind.
Danny Haiphong is an activist and journalist in the New York City area. He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: A People’s History of Fake News--From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror (Skyhorse Publishing). He is the co-host with BAR Editor Margaret Kimberly of the Youtube show BAR Presents: The Left Lens and can be reached at and Twitter @spiritofho. Danny Haiphong is an activist and journalist in the New York City area. He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: A People’s History of Fake News--From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror (Skyhorse Publishing). He is the co-host with BAR Editor Margaret Kimberly of the Youtube show BAR Presents: The Left Lens and can be reached at wakeupriseup1990@gmail.com
COMMENTS?
Please join the conversation on Black Agenda Report's Facebook page at http://facebook.com/blackagendareport
Or, you can comment by emailing us at comments@blackagendareport.com


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-07-22--Left Lens Eps. 2: Free Speech Against Black Lives

In the second episode of The Left Lens , Danny and Margaret discuss emerging developments relating to the debate about @ @ @ @ @ has surfaced amid the mass uprising against racist policing in the United States .
Like @ @ @ @ @ the channel , and please consider donating to Black Agenda Report .

NOW IN THE TOP 1% OF AMAZON’S ASIA TITLES. WITH A SPECIAL FOREWORD BY PEPE ESCOBAR. 568 PP, ILLUSTRATED.
The bestseller on China that everyone is talking about!
Available in eBook edition (Kindle or ePub). Fits all devices.
GET YOUR COPY TODAY. CLICK HERE OR ON THE IMAGE ABOVE JUST $9.99 USD


Killer Robots

So , killer robots are on the horizon , making it even easier for the U.S. military to wage war while risking as few troops as possible .
I ’ m sure once America invests billions and billions in high-tech semi-autonomous or fully autonomous killing machines , we ’ ll keep them in reserve and use them only as a last resort .
Just like we do with our big bombs .
Obviously , the Pentagon thinks that movies like “ The Terminator ” and “ The Matrix , ” among so many others that warn about humanity ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ machines themselves might become conscious and turn on their creators , are just that : movies .
Fantasies .
Because technology never has unpredictable results , right ?
You guessed it : the U.S. military is at it again .
Awash in cash , it ’ s investigating killer robots in earnest , striving for ever more “ autonomy ” for its robots , thereby reducing the need for humans in the loop .
Part of this drive for robotic warfare comes from the Covid-19 pandemic , notes Michael Klare at TomDispatch.com .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ puts lots of people in close proximity in confined spaces , whether on ships and submarines or in planes and tanks .
“ Social distancing ” really isn ’ t practical even on the largest ships , such as the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt , briefly put out of commission by the pandemic .
So why not build ships that need few or no people ?
Why not build autonomous killer robot ships ?
Tomgram : Michael Klare , A World of `` Killer Robots '' But Not `` National Security '' s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ April and the crew of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt was being consumed by the virus , I wrote a piece for TomDispatch in which I wondered : “ Will our troops , trainers , advisers , and military contractors soon find themselves in what may be little short of pandemic wars ?
” Three months later , the pandemic version of war is indeed sweeping through U.S. military bases at home and abroad .
In just 10 days in early July , for instance , more than 4,100 service members tested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a rise of about 33 % -- an even more precipitous one than in the society at large .
Meanwhile , the virus was beginning to hit U.S. bases on the Japanese island of Okinawa ( and freaking out our allies there ) , just as it was infecting the crews of Navy ships globally .
Three months ago , I wondered if there wasn ’ t one small bit of hope in all this , a glimmer of light at the end of that never-ending tunnel of American war .
“ Could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ be one on which the U.S. military and the national security state were no longer the sinkholes for endless trillions of taxpayer dollars that could have been spent so much more fruitfully elsewhere ?
” Hmmm .
It seems that the U.S. military was wondering the same thing and , as TomDispatch regular Michael Klare , author of All Hell Breaking Loose : The Pentagon ’ s Perspective on Climate Change , suggests today , the high command has recently been putting much energy and attention not into how to end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pentagon budgets that go with them , but how to continue to wage them in a Covid-19 world .
( Small hint : think “ killer robots.
” ) So tunnel , yes , light , no .
Let Klare explain .
—Tom The Pentagon Confronts the Pandemic Or How to Make War , American-Style , Possible Again By Michael T. Klare On March 26th , the coronavirus accomplished what no foreign adversary has been able to do since the end of World War II : it forced an American aircraft carrier , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patrol operations and shelter in port .
By the time that ship reached dock in Guam , hundreds of sailors had been infected with the disease and nearly the entire crew had to be evacuated .
As news of the crisis aboard the TR ( as the vessel is known ) became public , word came out that at least 40 other U.S. warships , including the carrier USS Ronald Reagan and the guided-missile destroyer USS Kidd , were suffering from Covid-19 outbreaks .
None of these approached the scale of the TR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was again able to deploy most of those ships on delayed schedules and/or with reduced crews .
By then , however , it had become abundantly clear that the long-established U.S. strategy of relying on large , heavily armed warships to project power and defeat foreign adversaries was no longer fully sustainable in a pandemic-stricken world .
Just as the Navy was learning that its preference for big ships with large crews -- typically packed into small spaces for extended periods of time -- was quite literally proving a dead-end strategy ( one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ died of complications from Covid-19 ) , the Army and Marine Corps were making a comparable discovery .
Their favored strategy of partnering with local forces in far-flung parts of the world like Iraq , Japan , Kuwait , and South Korea , where local safeguards against infectious disease couldn ’ t always be relied on ( or , as in Okinawa recently , Washington ’ s allies couldn ’ t count on the virus-free status of American forces ) , was similarly flawed .
With U.S. and allied troops increasingly forced to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is proving difficult to conduct the usual joint training-and-combat exercises and operations .
In the short term , American defense officials have responded to such setbacks with various stopgap measures , including sending nuclear-capable B-1 , B-2 , and B-52 bombers on long-range “ show-of-force ” missions over contested areas like the Baltic Sea ( think : Russia ) or the South China Sea ( think : China , of course ) .
“ We have the capability and capacity to provide long-range fires anywhere , anytime , and can bring overwhelming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” insisted General Timothy Ray , commander of the Air Force Global Strike Command , after several such operations .
In another sign of tactical desperation , however , the Navy ordered the shattered crew of the TR out of lockdown in May so that the ship could participate in long-scheduled , China-threatening multi-carrier exercises in the western Pacific .
A third of its crew , however , had to be left in hospitals or in quarantine on Guam .
“ We ’ re executing according to plan to return to sea and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , ” said the ship ’ s new captain , Carlos Sardiello , as the TR prepared to depart that Pacific island .
( He had been named captain on April 3rd after a letter the carrier ’ s previous skipper , Brett Crozier , wrote to superiors complaining of deteriorating shipboard health conditions was leaked to the media and the senior Navy leadership fired him . )
Such stopgap measures , and others like them now being undertaken by the Department of Defense , continue to provide the military with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in a time of Covid-related restrictions .
Were the current pandemic to fade away in the not-too-distant future and life return to what once passed for normal , they might prove adequate .
Scientists are warning , however , that the coronavirus is likely to persist for a long time and that a vaccine -- even if successfully developed -- may not prove effective forever .
Moreover , many virologists believe that further pandemics , potentially even more lethal than Covid-19 , could be lurking on the horizon , meaning that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pre-pandemic “ normal.
” That being the case , Pentagon officials have been forced to acknowledge that the military foundations of Washington ’ s global strategy -- particularly , the forward deployment of combat forces in close cooperation with allied forces -- may have become invalid .
In recognition of this harsh new reality , U.S. strategists are beginning to devise an entirely new blueprint for future war , American-style : one that would end , or at least greatly reduce , a dependence on hundreds of overseas garrisons and large manned warships @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a myriad of unmanned vessels , and offshore bases .
In fact , the Navy ’ s plans to replace large manned vessels with small , unmanned ones was only accelerated by the outbreak of the pandemic .
Several factors had already contributed to the trend : modern warships like nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and missile-armed cruisers had been growing ever more expensive to build .
The latest , the USS Gerald R. Ford , has cost a whopping $ 13.2 billion and still doesn ’ t work to specifications .
So even a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be constructing a few at a time .
They are also proving increasingly vulnerable to the sorts of anti-ship missiles and torpedoes being developed by powers like China , while , as events on the TR suggest , they ’ re natural breeding grounds for infectious diseases .
Until the disaster aboard the Theodore Roosevelt , most worrisome were those Chinese land-based , anti-ship weapons capable of striking American carriers and cruisers in distant parts of the Pacific Ocean .
This development had already forced naval planners to consider the possibility of keeping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s shores in any potential shooting war , lest they be instantly lost to enemy fire .
Rather than accept such a version of defeat before a battle even began , Navy officials had begun adopting a new strategy , sometimes called “ distributed maritime operations , ” in which smaller manned warships would , in the future , be accompanied into battle by large numbers of tiny , unmanned , missile-armed vessels , or maritime “ killer robots.
” In a reflection of the Navy ’ s new thinking , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rear Admiral Ronald Boxall , explained in 2019 that the future fleet , as designed , was to include “ 104 large surface combatants [ and ] 52 small surface combatants , ” adding , “ That ’ s a little upside down .
Should I push out here and have more small platforms ?
I think the future fleet architecture study has intimated ‘ yes , ’ and our war gaming shows there is value in that ... And when I look at the force , I think : Where can we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to a smaller platform ?
” Think of this as an early public sign of the rise of naval robotic warfare , which is finally leaving dystopian futuristic fantasies for actual future battlefields .
In the Navy ’ s version of this altered landscape , large numbers of unmanned vessels ( both surface ships and submarines ) will roam the world ’ s oceans , reporting periodically via electronic means to human operators ashore or on designated command ships .
They may , however , operate for long periods on their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Such a vision has now been embraced by the senior Pentagon leadership , which sees the rapid procurement and deployment of such robotic vessels as the surest way of achieving the Navy ’ s ( and President Trump ’ s ) goal of a fleet of 355 ships at a time of potentially static defense budgets , recurring pandemics , and mounting foreign threats .
“ I think one of the ways you get [ to the 355-ship level ] quickly is moving toward lightly manned [ vessels ] , which over time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense Mark Esper typically said in February .
“ We can go with lightly manned ships ... You can build them so they ’ re optionally manned and then , depending on the scenario or the technology , at some point in time they can go unmanned ... That would allow us to get our numbers up quickly , and I believe that we can get to 355 , if not higher , by 2030.
” To begin to implement such an audacious plan , that very month the Pentagon requested $ 938 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to procure three prototype large unmanned surface vessels ( LUSVs ) and another $ 56 million for the initial development of a medium-sized unmanned surface vessel ( MUSV ) .
If such efforts prove successful , the Navy wants another $ 2.1 billion from 2023 through 2025 to procure seven deployable LUSVs and one prototype MUSV .
Naval officials have , however , revealed little about the design or ultimate functioning of such robot warships .
All that service ’ s 2021 budget request says is that “ the unmanned surface vessel ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vessel designed to provide low cost , high endurance , reconfigurable ships able to accommodate various payloads for unmanned missions and augment the Navy ’ s manned surface force.
” Based on isolated reports in the military trade press , the most that can be known about such future ( and futuristic ) ships , is that they will resemble miniature destroyers , perhaps 200 feet long , with no crew quarters but a large array of guided missiles and anti-submarine weapons .
Such vessels will also be equipped with sophisticated computer systems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ periods of time and -- under circumstances yet to be clarified -- take offensive action on their own or in coordination with other unmanned vessels .
The future deployment of robot warships on the high seas raises troubling questions .
To what degree , for instance , will they be able to choose targets on their own for attack and annihilation ?
The Navy has yet to provide an adequate answer to this question , provoking disquiet among arms control and human rights advocates who fear that such ships could “ go rogue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their own .
And that ’ s obviously a potential problem in a world of recurring pandemics where killer robots could prove the only types of ships the Navy dares deploy in large numbers .
When it comes to the prospect of recurring pandemics , the ground combat forces of the Army and Marine Corps face a comparable dilemma .
Ever since the end of World War II , American military strategy has called for U.S. forces to “ fight forward ” -- that is , on or near enemy territory rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This , in turn , has meant maintaining military alliances with numerous countries around the world so that American forces can be based on their soil , resulting in hundreds of U.S. military bases globally .
In wartime , moreover , U.S. strategy assumes that many of these countries will provide troops for joint operations against a common enemy .
To fight the Soviets in Europe , the U.S. created NATO and acquired garrisons throughout Western Europe ; to fight communism in Asia , it established military ties with Japan , South Korea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other local powers , acquiring scores of bases there as well .
When Afghanistan , Iran , Iraq , and Islamic terrorism became major targets of its military operations , the Pentagon forged ties with and acquired bases in Afghanistan , Bahrain , Djibouti , Iraq , Kuwait , Oman , Saudi Arabia , and the United Arab Emirates , among other places .
In a pandemic-free world , such a strategy offers numerous advantages for an imperial power .
In time of war , for example , there ’ s no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all their heavy equipment ) into the combat zone from bases thousands of miles away .
However , in a world of recurring pandemics , such a vision is fast becoming a potentially unsustainable nightmare .
To begin with , it ’ s almost impossible to isolate thousands of U.S. soldiers and their families ( who often accompany them on long-term deployments ) from surrounding populations ( or those populations from them ) .
As a result , any viral outbreak outside base gates is likely to find its way inside and any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head in the opposite direction .
This , in fact , occurred at numerous overseas facilities this spring .
Camp Humphreys in South Korea , for example , was locked down after four military dependents , four American contractors , and four South Korean employees became infected with Covid-19 .
It was the same on several bases in Japan and on the island of Okinawa when Japanese employees tested positive for the virus ( and , more recently , when U.S. military personnel at five bases there were found to have Covid-19 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Ahmed al-Jaber Air Base in Kuwait , not to speak of the fact that , in Europe , some 2,600American soldiers have been placed in quarantine after suspected exposure to Covid-19 .
( And if the U.S. military is anxious about all this in other countries , think about how America ’ s allies feel at a moment when Donald Trump ’ s America has become the epicenter of the global coronavirus pandemic . )
A world of recurring pandemics will make it nearly impossible for U.S. forces to work side-by-side with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nations that lack adequate health and sanitation facilities .
This is already true in Iraq and Afghanistan , where the coronavirus is thought to have spread widely among friendly local forces and American soldiers have been ordered to suspend joint training missions with them .
A return to the pre-Covid world appears increasingly unlikely , so the search is now on big time for a new guiding strategy for Army and Marine combat operations in the years to come .
As with the Navy , this search actually began before the outbreak of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urgency in its wake .
To insulate ground operations from the dangers of a pandemic-stricken planet , the two services are exploring a similar operating model : instead of deploying large , heavily-armed troop contingents close to enemy borders , they hope to station small , highly mobile forces on U.S.-controlled islands or at other reasonably remote locations , where they can fire long-range ballistic missiles at vital enemy assets with relative impunity .
To further reduce the risk of illness or casualties , such forces will , over time , be augmented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ unmanned ” creations , including armed machines -- again those “ killer robots ” -- designed to perform the duties of ordinary soldiers .
The Marine Corps ’ version of this future combat model was first spelled out in Force Design 2030 , a document released by Corps commandant General David Berger in the pandemic month of March 2020 .
Asserting that the Marines ’ existing structure was unsuited to the world of tomorrow , he called for a radical restructuring of the force to eliminate heavy , human-operated weapons like tanks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a variety of missiles and what he assumes will be a proliferation of unmanned systems .
“ Operating under the assumption that we will not receive additional resources , ” he wrote , “ we must divest certain existing capabilities and capacities to free resources for essential new capabilities.
” Among those “ new capabilities ” that he considers crucial : additional unmanned aerial systems , or drones , that “ can operate from ship , from shore , and [ be ] able to employ both [ intelligence- ] collection and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ planning , the Army is placing an even greater relianceon creating a force of robots , or at least “ optionally manned ” systems .
Anticipating a future of heavily-armed adversaries engaging U.S. forces in high-intensity warfare , it ’ s seeking to reduce troop exposure to enemy fire by designing all future combat-assault systems , including tanks , troop-carriers , and helicopters , to be either human-occupied or robotically self-directed as circumstances dictate .
The Army ’ s next-generation infantry assault weapon , for instance , has been dubbed an optionally manned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its name suggests , it is intended to operate with or without onboard human operators .
The Army is also procuring a robotic utility vehicle , the squad multipurpose equipment transport ( SMET ) , intended to carry 1,000 pounds of supplies and ammunition .
Looking further into the future , that service has also begun development of a robotic combat vehicle ( RCV ) , or a self-driving tank .
The Army is also speeding the development of long-range artillery and missile systems that will make attacks on enemy positions from well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to any future battle with a major enemy .
These include the extended range cannon artillery , an upgraded Paladin-armored howitzer with an extra-long barrel and supercharged propellant that should be able to hit targets 40 miles away , and the even more advanced precision strike missile ( PrSM ) , a surface-to-surface ballistic missile with a range of at least 310 miles .
Many analysts , in fact , believe that the PrSM will be able to strike at far greater distances than that , putting critical enemy targets -- air bases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at risk from launch sites far to the rear of American forces .
In case of war with China , this could mean firing missiles from friendly partner-nations like Japan or U.S.-controlled Pacific islands like Guam .
Indeed , this possibility has alarmed Air Force supporters who fear that the Army is usurping the sorts of long-range strike missions traditionally assigned to combat aircraft .
All these plans and programs are being promoted to enable the U.S. military to continue performing its traditional missions of power projection and warfighting in a radically altered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measures like removing sailors from crowded warships , downsizing U.S. garrisons in distant lands , and replacing human combatants with robotic ones might seem sensible .
But looked at from what might be called the vantage point of comprehensive security -- or the advancement of all aspects of American safety and wellbeing -- they appear staggeringly myopic .
If the scientists are right and the coronavirus will linger for a long period and , in the decades to come , be followed by other pandemics of equal or greater magnitude , the true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ microbiological ( and economic ) , not military .
After all , the current pandemic has already killed more Americans than died in the Korean and Vietnam wars combined , while triggering the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression .
Imagine , then , what a more lethal pandemic might do .
The country ’ s armed forces may still have an important role to play in such an environment -- providing , for example , emergency medical assistance and protecting vital infrastructure -- but fighting never-ending wars in distant lands and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it comes to where taxpayer dollars go for “ security ” in such challenging times .
One thing is inescapable : as the disaster aboard the Theodore Rooseveltindicates , the U.S. military must reconsider how it arms and structures its forces and give serious thought to alternative models of organization .
But focusing enormous resources on the replacement of pre-Covid ships and tanks with post-Covid killer robots for endless rounds of foreign wars is hardly in America ’ s ultimate security interest .
There is , sadly , something highly robotic about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this changing world of ours .
Michael T. Klare , a TomDispatch regular , is the five-college professor emeritus of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and a senior visiting fellow at the Arms Control Association .
He is the author of 15 books , the latest of which is All Hell Breaking Loose : The Pentagon ’ s Perspective on Climate Change Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook .
Check out the newest Dispatch Books , John Feffer ’ s new dystopian novel ( the second in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gologorsky 's novel Every Body Has a Story , and Tom Engelhardt 's A Nation Unmade by War , as well as Alfred McCoy 's In the Shadows of the American Century : The Rise and Decline of U.S .
Global Power and John Dower 's The Violent American Century : War and Terror Since World War II .

So, killer robots are on the horizon, making it even easier for the U.S. military to wage war while risking as few troops as possible. I’m sure once America invests billions and billions in high-tech semi-autonomous or fully autonomous killing machines, we’ll keep them in reserve and use them only as a last resort. Just like we do with our big bombs .
Obviously, the Pentagon thinks that movies like “The Terminator” and “The Matrix,” among so many others that warn about humanity’s overreliance on machinery and the possibility the machines themselves might become conscious and turn on their creators, are just that: movies. Fantasies. Because technology never has unpredictable results, right?
You guessed it: the U.S. military is at it again. Awash in cash, it’s investigating killer robots in earnest, striving for ever more “autonomy” for its robots, thereby reducing the need for humans in the loop. Part of this drive for robotic warfare comes from the Covid-19 pandemic, notes Michael Klare at TomDispatch.com . America’s tech-heavy approach to warfare puts lots of people in close proximity in confined spaces, whether on ships and submarines or in planes and tanks. “Social distancing” really isn’t practical even on the largest ships, such as the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, briefly put out of commission by the pandemic. So why not build ships that need few or no people? Why not build autonomous killer robot ships?
Tomgram: Michael Klare, A World of "Killer Robots" But Not "National Security"
A
s Covid-19 was spreading across the planet in April and the crew of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt was being consumed by the virus, I wrote a piece for TomDispatch in which I wondered: “Will our troops, trainers, advisers, and military contractors soon find themselves in what may be little short of pandemic wars?” Three months later, the pandemic version of war is indeed sweeping through U.S. military bases at home and abroad. In just 10 days in early July, for instance, more than 4,100 service members tested positive for Covid-19 in the U.S., a rise of about 33% -- an even more precipitous one than in the society at large. Meanwhile, the virus was beginning to hit U.S. bases on the Japanese island of Okinawa (and freaking out our allies there), just as it was infecting the crews of Navy ships globally.
Three months ago, I wondered if there wasn’t one small bit of hope in all this, a glimmer of light at the end of that never-ending tunnel of American war. “Could a post-coronavirus planet,” I asked, “be one on which the U.S. military and the national security state were no longer the sinkholes for endless trillions of taxpayer dollars that could have been spent so much more fruitfully elsewhere?” Hmmm. It seems that the U.S. military was wondering the same thing and, as TomDispatch regular Michael Klare, author of All Hell Breaking Loose: The Pentagon’s Perspective on Climate Change, suggests today, the high command has recently been putting much energy and attention not into how to end America’s wars and the staggering Pentagon budgets that go with them, but how to continue to wage them in a Covid-19 world. (Small hint: think “killer robots.”) So tunnel, yes, light, no. Let Klare explain. —Tom
The Pentagon Confronts the Pandemic
Or How to Make War, American-Style, Possible Again
By Michael T. Klare
On March 26th, the coronavirus accomplished what no foreign adversary has been able to do since the end of World War II: it forced an American aircraft carrier, the USS Theodore Roosevelt, to suspend patrol operations and shelter in port. By the time that ship reached dock in Guam, hundreds of sailors had been infected with the disease and nearly the entire crew had to be evacuated. As news of the crisis aboard the TR (as the vessel is known) became public, word came out that at least 40 other U.S. warships, including the carrier USS Ronald Reagan and the guided-missile destroyer USS Kidd, were suffering from Covid-19 outbreaks. None of these approached the scale of the TR and, by June, the Navy was again able to deploy most of those ships on delayed schedules and/or with reduced crews. By then, however, it had become abundantly clear that the long-established U.S. strategy of relying on large, heavily armed warships to project power and defeat foreign adversaries was no longer fully sustainable in a pandemic-stricken world.
Just as the Navy was learning that its preference for big ships with large crews -- typically packed into small spaces for extended periods of time --was quite literally proving a dead-end strategy (one of the infected sailors on the TR died of complications from Covid-19), the Army and Marine Corps were making a comparable discovery. Their favored strategy of partnering with local forces in far-flung parts of the world like Iraq, Japan, Kuwait, and South Korea, where local safeguards against infectious disease couldn’t always be relied on (or, as in Okinawa recently, Washington’s allies couldn’t count on the virus-free status of American forces), was similarly flawed. With U.S. and allied troops increasingly forced to remain in isolation from each other, it is proving difficult to conduct the usual joint training-and-combat exercises and operations.
In the short term, American defense officials have responded to such setbacks with various stopgap measures, including sending nuclear-capable B-1, B-2, and B-52 bombers on long-range “show-of-force” missions over contested areas like the Baltic Sea (think: Russia) or the South China Sea (think: China, of course). “We have the capability and capacity to provide long-range fires anywhere, anytime, and can bring overwhelming firepower -- even during the pandemic,” insisted General Timothy Ray, commander of the Air Force Global Strike Command, after several such operations.
In another sign of tactical desperation, however, the Navy ordered the shattered crew of the TR out of lockdown in May so that the ship could participate in long-scheduled, China-threatening multi-carrier exercises in the western Pacific. A third of its crew, however, had to be left in hospitals or in quarantine on Guam. “We’re executing according to plan to return to sea and fighting through the virus is part of that,” said the ship’s new captain, Carlos Sardiello, as the TR prepared to depart that Pacific island. (He had been named captain on April 3rd after a letter the carrier’s previous skipper, Brett Crozier, wrote to superiors complaining of deteriorating shipboard health conditions was leaked to the media and the senior Navy leadership fired him.)
Such stopgap measures, and others like them now being undertaken by the Department of Defense, continue to provide the military with a sense of ongoing readiness, even aggressiveness, in a time of Covid-related restrictions. Were the current pandemic to fade away in the not-too-distant future and life return to what once passed for normal, they might prove adequate. Scientists are warning, however, that the coronavirus is likely to persist for a long time and that a vaccine -- even if successfully developed -- may not prove effective forever. Moreover, many virologists believe that further pandemics, potentially even more lethal than Covid-19, could be lurking on the horizon, meaning that there might never be a return to a pre-pandemic “normal.”
That being the case, Pentagon officials have been forced to acknowledge that the military foundations of Washington’s global strategy -- particularly, the forward deployment of combat forces in close cooperation with allied forces -- may have become invalid. In recognition of this harsh new reality, U.S. strategists are beginning to devise an entirely new blueprint for future war, American-style: one that would end, or at least greatly reduce, a dependence on hundreds of overseas garrisons and large manned warships, relying instead on killer robots, a myriad of unmanned vessels, and offshore bases.
Ships Without Sailors
In fact, the Navy’s plans to replace large manned vessels with small, unmanned ones was only accelerated by the outbreak of the pandemic. Several factors had already contributed to the trend: modern warships like nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and missile-armed cruisers had been growing ever more expensive to build. The latest, the USS Gerald R. Ford, has cost a whopping $13.2 billion and still doesn’t work to specifications. So even a profligately funded Pentagon can only afford to be constructing a few at a time. They are also proving increasingly vulnerable to the sorts of anti-ship missiles and torpedoes being developed by powers like China, while, as events on the TR suggest, they’re natural breeding grounds for infectious diseases.
Until the disaster aboard the Theodore Roosevelt, most worrisome were those Chinese land-based, anti-ship weapons capable of striking American carriers and cruisers in distant parts of the Pacific Ocean. This development had already forced naval planners to consider the possibility of keeping their most prized assets far from China’s shores in any potential shooting war, lest they be instantly lost to enemy fire. Rather than accept such a version of defeat before a battle even began, Navy officials had begun adopting a new strategy, sometimes called “distributed maritime operations,” in which smaller manned warships would, in the future, be accompanied into battle by large numbers of tiny, unmanned, missile-armed vessels, or maritime “killer robots.”
In a reflection of the Navy’s new thinking, the service’s surface warfare director, Rear Admiral Ronald Boxall, explained in 2019 that the future fleet, as designed, was to include “104 large surface combatants [and] 52 small surface combatants,” adding, “That’s a little upside down. Should I push out here and have more small platforms? I think the future fleet architecture study has intimated ‘yes,’ and our war gaming shows there is value in that... And when I look at the force, I think: Where can we use unmanned so that I can push it to a smaller platform?”
Think of this as an early public sign of the rise of naval robotic warfare, which is finally leaving dystopian futuristic fantasies for actual future battlefields. In the Navy’s version of this altered landscape, large numbers of unmanned vessels (both surface ships and submarines) will roam the world’s oceans, reporting periodically via electronic means to human operators ashore or on designated command ships. They may, however, operate for long periods on their own or in robotic “wolf packs.”
Such a vision has now been embraced by the senior Pentagon leadership, which sees the rapid procurement and deployment of such robotic vessels as the surest way of achieving the Navy’s (and President Trump’s) goal of a fleet of 355 ships at a time of potentially static defense budgets, recurring pandemics, and mounting foreign threats. “I think one of the ways you get [to the 355-ship level] quickly is moving toward lightly manned [vessels], which over time can be unmanned,” Secretary of Defense Mark Esper typically said in February. “We can go with lightly manned ships... You can build them so they’re optionally manned and then, depending on the scenario or the technology, at some point in time they can go unmanned... That would allow us to get our numbers up quickly, and I believe that we can get to 355, if not higher, by 2030.”
To begin to implement such an audacious plan, that very month the Pentagon requested $938 million for the next two fiscal years to procure three prototype large unmanned surface vessels (LUSVs) and another $56 million for the initial development of a medium-sized unmanned surface vessel (MUSV). If such efforts prove successful, the Navy wants another $2.1 billion from 2023 through 2025 to procure seven deployable LUSVs and one prototype MUSV.
Naval officials have, however, revealed little about the design or ultimate functioning of such robot warships. All that service’s 2021 budget request says is that “the unmanned surface vessel (USV) is a reconfigurable, multi-mission vessel designed to provide low cost, high endurance, reconfigurable ships able to accommodate various payloads for unmanned missions and augment the Navy’s manned surface force.”
Based on isolated reports in the military trade press, the most that can be known about such future (and futuristic) ships, is that they will resemble miniature destroyers, perhaps 200 feet long, with no crew quarters but a large array of guided missiles and anti-submarine weapons. Such vessels will also be equipped with sophisticated computer systems enabling them to operate autonomously for long periods of time and -- under circumstances yet to be clarified -- take offensive action on their own or in coordination with other unmanned vessels.
The future deployment of robot warships on the high seas raises troubling questions. To what degree, for instance, will they be able to choose targets on their own for attack and annihilation? The Navy has yet to provide an adequate answer to this question, provoking disquiet among arms control and human rights advocates who fear that such ships could “go rogue” and start or escalate a conflict on their own. And that’s obviously a potential problem in a world of recurring pandemics where killer robots could prove the only types of ships the Navy dares deploy in large numbers.
Fighting from Afar
When it comes to the prospect of recurring pandemics, the ground combat forces of the Army and Marine Corps face a comparable dilemma.
Ever since the end of World War II, American military strategy has called for U.S. forces to “fight forward” -- that is, on or near enemy territory rather than anywhere near the United States. This, in turn, has meant maintaining military alliances with numerous countries around the world so that American forces can be based on their soil, resulting in hundreds of U.S. military bases globally. In wartime, moreover, U.S. strategy assumes that many of these countries will provide troops for joint operations against a common enemy. To fight the Soviets in Europe, the U.S. created NATO and acquired garrisons throughout Western Europe; to fight communism in Asia, it established military ties with Japan, South Korea, South Vietnam, the Philippines, and other local powers, acquiring scores of bases there as well. When Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Islamic terrorism became major targets of its military operations, the Pentagon forged ties with and acquired bases in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Djibouti, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, among other places.
In a pandemic-free world, such a strategy offers numerous advantages for an imperial power. In time of war, for example, there’s no need to transport American troops (with all their heavy equipment) into the combat zone from bases thousands of miles away. However, in a world of recurring pandemics, such a vision is fast becoming a potentially unsustainable nightmare.
To begin with, it’s almost impossible to isolate thousands of U.S. soldiers and their families (who often accompany them on long-term deployments) from surrounding populations (or those populations from them). As a result, any viral outbreak outside base gates is likely to find its way inside and any outbreak on the base is likely to head in the opposite direction. This, in fact, occurred at numerous overseas facilities this spring. Camp Humphreys in South Korea, for example, was locked down after four military dependents, four American contractors, and four South Korean employees became infected with Covid-19. It was the same on several bases in Japan and on the island of Okinawa when Japanese employees tested positive for the virus (and, more recently, when U.S. military personnel at five bases there were found to have Covid-19). Add in Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti and Ahmed al-Jaber Air Base in Kuwait, not to speak of the fact that, in Europe, some 2,600American soldiers have been placed in quarantine after suspected exposure to Covid-19. (And if the U.S. military is anxious about all this in other countries, think about how America’s allies feel at a moment when Donald Trump’s America has become the epicenter of the global coronavirus pandemic.)
A world of recurring pandemics will make it nearly impossible for U.S. forces to work side-by-side with their foreign counterparts, especially in poorer nations that lack adequate health and sanitation facilities. This is already true in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the coronavirus is thought to have spread widely among friendly local forces and American soldiers have been ordered to suspend joint training missions with them.
A return to the pre-Covid world appears increasingly unlikely, so the search is now on big time for a new guiding strategy for Army and Marine combat operations in the years to come. As with the Navy, this search actually began before the outbreak of the coronavirus, but has gained fresh urgency in its wake.
To insulate ground operations from the dangers of a pandemic-stricken planet, the two services are exploring a similar operating model: instead of deploying large, heavily-armed troop contingents close to enemy borders, they hope to station small, highly mobile forces on U.S.-controlled islands or at other reasonably remote locations, where they can fire long-range ballistic missiles at vital enemy assets with relative impunity. To further reduce the risk of illness or casualties, such forces will, over time, be augmented on the front lines by ever more “unmanned” creations, including armed machines -- again those “killer robots” -- designed to perform the duties of ordinary soldiers.
The Marine Corps’ version of this future combat model was first spelled out in Force Design 2030, a document released by Corps commandant General David Berger in the pandemic month of March 2020. Asserting that the Marines’ existing structure was unsuited to the world of tomorrow, he called for a radical restructuring of the force to eliminate heavy, human-operated weapons like tanks and instead increase mobility and long-range firepower with a variety of missiles and what he assumes will be a proliferation of unmanned systems. “Operating under the assumption that we will not receive additional resources,” he wrote, “we must divest certain existing capabilities and capacities to free resources for essential new capabilities.” Among those “new capabilities” that he considers crucial: additional unmanned aerial systems, or drones, that “can operate from ship, from shore, and [be] able to employ both [intelligence-]collection and lethal payloads.”
In its own long-range planning, the Army is placing an even greater relianceon creating a force of robots, or at least “optionally manned” systems. Anticipating a future of heavily-armed adversaries engaging U.S. forces in high-intensity warfare, it’s seeking to reduce troop exposure to enemy fire by designing all future combat-assault systems, including tanks, troop-carriers, and helicopters, to be either human-occupied or robotically self-directed as circumstances dictate. The Army’s next-generation infantry assault weapon, for instance, has been dubbed an optionally manned fighting vehicle(OMFV). As its name suggests, it is intended to operate with or without onboard human operators. The Army is also procuring a robotic utility vehicle, the squad multipurpose equipment transport (SMET), intended to carry 1,000 pounds of supplies and ammunition. Looking further into the future, that service has also begun development of a robotic combat vehicle (RCV), or a self-driving tank.
The Army is also speeding the development of long-range artillery and missile systems that will make attacks on enemy positions from well behind the front lines ever more central to any future battle with a major enemy. These include the extended range cannon artillery, an upgraded Paladin-armored howitzer with an extra-long barrel and supercharged propellant that should be able to hit targets 40 miles away, and the even more advanced precision strike missile (PrSM), a surface-to-surface ballistic missile with a range of at least 310 miles.
Many analysts, in fact, believe that the PrSM will be able to strike at far greater distances than that, putting critical enemy targets -- air bases, radar sites, command centers -- at risk from launch sites far to the rear of American forces. In case of war with China, this could mean firing missiles from friendly partner-nations like Japan or U.S.-controlled Pacific islands like Guam. Indeed, this possibility has alarmed Air Force supporters who fear that the Army is usurping the sorts of long-range strike missions traditionally assigned to combat aircraft.
A Genuine Strategic Redesign
All these plans and programs are being promoted to enable the U.S. military to continue performing its traditional missions of power projection and warfighting in a radically altered world. Seen from that perspective, measures like removing sailors from crowded warships, downsizing U.S. garrisons in distant lands, and replacing human combatants with robotic ones might seem sensible. But looked at from what might be called the vantage point of comprehensive security -- or the advancement of all aspects of American safety and wellbeing -- they appear staggeringly myopic.
If the scientists are right and the coronavirus will linger for a long period and, in the decades to come, be followed by other pandemics of equal or greater magnitude, the true future threats to American security could be microbiological (and economic), not military. After all, the current pandemic has already killed more Americans than died in the Korean and Vietnam wars combined, while triggering the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Imagine, then, what a more lethal pandemic might do. The country’s armed forces may still have an important role to play in such an environment -- providing, for example, emergency medical assistance and protecting vital infrastructure -- but fighting never-ending wars in distant lands and projecting power globally should not rank high when it comes to where taxpayer dollars go for “security” in such challenging times.
One thing is inescapable: as the disaster aboard the Theodore Rooseveltindicates, the U.S. military must reconsider how it arms and structures its forces and give serious thought to alternative models of organization. But focusing enormous resources on the replacement of pre-Covid ships and tanks with post-Covid killer robots for endless rounds of foreign wars is hardly in America’s ultimate security interest. There is, sadly, something highly robotic about such military thinking when it comes to this changing world of ours.