|
Presented by Lockheed Martin: From the SitRoom to the E-Ring, the inside scoop on defense, national security and foreign policy. | | | | | |  | | By Alexander Ward and Quint Forgey | Presented by Lockheed Martin | With help from Daniel Lippman, Nahal Toosi, Andrew Desiderio, Bryan Bender and Phelim Kine. | 
Land mine detectors stand by as a U.S. Army soldier maneuvers a robot into a cave to detect for mines or traps in Afghanistan in 2002. | Wally Santana-Pool/Getty Images | Send tips | Subscribe here | Email Alex | Email Quint It’s Nov. 30: Do you know where your land mine policy reversal is? You may recall that back in Jan. 2020, then-President DONALD TRUMP expanded the U.S. military’s use of land mines, one of the most horrific and bluntest weapons of war. By reversing former President BARACK OBAMA’s restrictions — intended to reduce civilian harm — the Pentagon could once again employ land mines anywhere in the world. A week after that announcement, a Democratic presidential candidate by the name of JOE BIDEN told your host he would undo Trump’s policy once in the White House. “The Trump administration’s reversal of years of considered decisions by Democratic and Republican presidents to curtail the use of land mines is another reckless act by a president ill-suited to serve as commander in chief,” he said at the time. “It will put more civilians at risk of being injured by unexploded mines, and is unnecessary from a military perspective. As president, I will promptly roll back this deeply misguided decision.” Well, he’s been president for almost a year, and he hasn’t promptly rolled back that decision. Many Hill staffers and other administration officials are stunned he’s taking so long to do it, and no one NatSec Daily spoke to said they have a clue when he might. We’ve asked the administration repeatedly for weeks when Biden will make the announcement to overturn the current land mine policy. Some undefined date is the answer, with assurances that his 2020 promise will be kept after a thorough assessment. “President Biden has made his position with respect to the use of landmines clear, and the administration’s review of U.S. anti-personnel landmine policy remains ongoing,” a senior administration told NatSec Daily on Monday. “Please rest assured that we remain committed to minimizing the harm to civilians in armed conflict,” a Defense Department spokesperson told us in October. The Biden team’s commitment to a robust, transparent and inclusive process aside, the delay on this issue doesn’t send a great signal to the rest of the world. In an annual report released Nov. 10, the watchdog group Landmine Monitor found that the number of victims rose by 20 percent in 2020 compared to the previous year. “In total, more than 7,000 people were killed or injured in 54 countries and areas,” the United Nations, which backed the report, highlighted in a summary . “Civilians continue to be the weapons’ primary victims, accounting for eight in 10 casualties, with children making up at least half of those killed or maimed.” | 
This chart shows the mine and explosives remnants of war casualties in each year from 2001 to 2020. | Landmine Monitor | Of course, the administration has had other things to deal with, like curbing the Covid-19 pandemic and ending the war in Afghanistan. It’s still trying to pass the National Defense Authorization Act through Congress while completing higher-priority defense reviews. And there’s still the thorny issue of how to defend South Korea without land mines deterring North Korean forces from storming across the border. But that’s little comfort to those still in danger of losing life and limb because of the weapons that more than 160 countries — excluding the U.S. — have agreed to ban. “The White House says it will reverse the Trump policy on land mines. That needs to happen without delay,” Sen. PATRICK LEAHY (D-Vt.), a longtime advocate for a land mine ban and the Appropriations Committee chair, told NatSec Daily. He also said the administration should “put the United States on a path to join the international treaty banning these indiscriminate weapons.”
| | | FIRST IN NATSEC DAILY –– NGOS WANT HEARINGS ON ERRANT STRIKES: Over 20 human rights-focused organizations sent a letter to the leaders of the congressional armed services committees demanding hearings into two airstrikes that mistakenly killed civilians. “We request urgent and sustained congressional action to address and investigate these specific civilian harm incidents as well as the systemic shortcomings of U.S. protection of civilians policies more broadly,” they wrote, referencing a 2019 strike in Syria that killed dozens of innocents and a bombing this August in Afghanistan that killed 10 people, including seven children. Defense Secretary LLOYD AUSTIN has already requested a 90-day review into the Syria incident, prompted by a New York Times investigation, but it’s unclear if its full contents will be released to the public. The groups — including Amnesty International USA, Oxfam America and Human Rights Watch — in the letter demand public hearings featuring Austin, U.S. Central Command chief Gen. FRANK MCKENZIE and others. They also want Congress to lead a series of hearings on how to reduce harm to civilians during U.S. military operations partly to examine “the Department’s adherence to international humanitarian law, and its investigations of and accountability for suspected violations.” And they’d like to see the Pentagon delve into how it’s handled civilian casualties throughout the last 20 years of war. It’s unclear how Sens. JACK REED (D-R.I.) and JIM INHOFE (R-Okla) as well as Reps. ADAM SMITH (D-Wash.) and MIKE ROGERS (R-Ala.) will respond to the note. But it is clear that there’s a growing chorus of influential groups calling for the U.S. military to be more cognizant of harm to civilians and transparent if and when the worst happens. FIRST IN NATSEC DAILY –– DON'T FORGET ABOUT THE URANIUM: Democratic lawmakers are raising alarms that the decision to develop nuclear-powered submarines for Australia could make it harder to control the global spread of weapons-grade uranium unless a series of safeguards are built into the arrangement. The AUKUS deal struck by the U.S., U.K. and Australia in September will allow Canberra, for the first time, to buy and operate nuclear submarines. It would also mark the first time a nation that does not possess nuclear weapons would have highly enriched uranium (used to power said submarines, but suitable for bombs) and that is not subject to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. “We are concerned that other nations with weaker nonproliferation records may point to the Australian precedent to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a naval reactor program,” the leaders of the Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group wrote to Biden before Thanksgiving in a letter exclusively obtained by our own BRYAN BENDER. The letter, spearheaded by Sens. ED MARKEY (D-Mass.) and JEFF MERKLEY (D-Ore.) and Reps. JOHN GARAMENDI (D-Calif.) and DON BEYER (D-Va.), seeks assurances from the administration that it will take a series of steps over the next 18 months as it implements the deal to uphold the international nonproliferation regime. For example, they want to know if the administration plans other similar deals with U.S. allies and if the AUKUS partners will “commit to allowing full IAEA safeguards” on reactor fuel. They also point out that the current pact between the U.S. and Australia on civilian nuclear cooperation, known as a 123 Agreement, does not allow the transfer of materials for “military nuclear propulsion,” or transfers of HEU above 20 percent. “When will the Administration submit a revised 123 Agreement with Australia for Congressional review?” they ask. “We believe it is of the utmost importance that this deal is implemented carefully and with the ramifications on the nuclear non-proliferation regime in mind,” the lawmakers wrote. Relatedly, the Senate today confirmed COREY HINDERSTEIN as the deputy administrator for defense nuclear nonproliferation at the National Nuclear Security Administration. 35 PERCENT: Our own NAHAL TOOSI has the latest numbers on the Biden administration’s confirmation rate for State, DoD, DHS and U.S. Agency for International Development nominees. As of Tuesday, the president has tapped 181 people for spots but has had only 63 confirmed — a 35 percent success rate. At this same point in their administrations, Trump had 88 of 133 confirmed (66 percent), Obama had 143 of 182 confirmed (79 percent) and GEORGE W. BUSH got 181 of 201 confirmed (90 percent). The historically low number of confirmations are due to Republican senators — namely Texas’ TED CRUZ and Missouri’s JOSH HAWLEY — and their holds on Biden’s nominees for key national security positions. Senate Majority Leader CHUCK SCHUMER could blow through those holds, but doing so would require him to use precious floor time to confirm the nominees instead of passing the annual defense policy bill, among other priorities. SAUDI ARMS SALES VOTE POSSIBLY NEXT WEEK: If the Senate didn’t already have a full calendar for December, lawmakers will soon have to go on the record about the Biden administration’s $650 million weapons sale to Saudi Arabia. Sens. RAND PAUL (R-Ky.) and BERNIE SANDERS (I-Vt.) plan to force a vote on their joint resolution of disapproval “within the next week,” Paul told our own ANDREW DESIDERIO at the Capitol on Monday. Given the Senate’s work on the National Defense Authorization Act this week, a vote on the Paul-Sanders resolution is likely to occur the week of Dec. 6, Paul added. The measure needs a simple majority to clear the upper chamber. But it’ll need support from two-thirds of senators in order to override an expected veto from the president. #WERUNNATSEC 5K: Reminder that NatSec Daily’s first-ever 5k will happen on Saturday, Dec. 4. When most convenient for you, go out and run (at least) 3.11 miles, then share your photos using #WeRunNatSec on Twitter. We’ll “see” you out there! IT'S TUESDAY: Thanks for tuning in to NatSec Daily. This space is reserved for the top U.S. and foreign officials, the lawmakers, the lobbyists, the experts and the people like you who care about how the natsec sausage gets made. Aim your tips and comments at award@politico.com and qforgey@politico.com, and follow us on Twitter at @alexbward and @QuintForgey. While you’re at it, follow the rest of POLITICO’s national security team: @nahaltoosi, @woodruffbets, @politicoryan, @PhelimKine, @BryanDBender, @laraseligman, @connorobrienNH, @paulmccleary, @leehudson, and @AndrewDesiderio. | | A message from Lockheed Martin: Who builds the unrivaled F-35? The unrivaled, high-tech American workforce.
The F-35 provides unrivaled air combat superiority to the warfighter and supports high-paying, high-quality jobs for American workers in the innovation economy. More than half of U.S. based F-35 suppliers are small businesses. Learn more | | | | | | RESPONSE TO RUSSIAN AGGRESSION? The foreign ministers of NATO nations are in Riga, Latvia, to discuss a potential coordinated retaliation to Moscow’s amassing of nearly 100,000 troops on Ukraine’s border. “The U.S. and allies have warned that an invasion would spark a sharp response, pointing to earlier financial, political and other sanctions, arms deliveries to Ukraine and the positioning of new North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces in the alliance’s east,” the Wall Street Journal’s JAMES MARSON reports. “But allies have also said they have no obligation to defend Ukraine, which as a partner of NATO, but not a member, isn’t covered by the alliance’s mutual defense pact.” Secretary of State ANTONY BLINKEN, alongside his Latvian counterpart, underscored that “[a]ny escalatory actions by Russia would be a great concern to the United States,” adding “[a]ny renewed aggression would trigger serious consequences.” On Monday, the Washington Post reported that the White House is reviewing options to punish Russia such as “providing more military aid to Kyiv and threatening sanctions.” Russia denies that it’s planning an imminent invasion of Ukraine, which it has struggled over the last decade to bring back into its orbit. But Ukraine’s defense intelligence chief warns that Moscow’s forces could launch their incursion in early 2022.
| | | MIDEAST INFRASTRUCTURE HACKING WAR: Wired’s MATT BURGESS has an eye-opening piece on how Israel and Iran’s ongoing feud has manifested in cyberspace, harming infrastructure and imperiling people’s lives. “Fuel supply systems, railway controls, and an airline in Iran have all faced attacks. At the same time, hackers have posted the personal information of a million Israeli LGBTQ dating app users, and exposed certain details about the Israeli army. The skirmishes—which have included physical sabotage and the destruction of facilities—are the latest moves in the decades-long hostilities between Iran and Israel. They’re now spilling further into shadowy acts of digital espionage and disruption,” Burgess wrote. “The high-profile hacks on Iranian infrastructure have been wide-ranging in their targets and attributed to both state-sponsored actors and independent hacking groups. But they have one thing in common: They’ve caused chaos and confusion for ordinary people and businesses in the country.” For example, Iranian drivers struggled to put gas in their cars for over a week. Data from an Israel insurance firm was released to the public. This is of course a far cry from fears of an open war between the two countries. But it’s clear consistent hacks and counterhacks aren’t victimless. | | | | BECOME A GLOBAL INSIDER: The world is more connected than ever. It has never been more essential to identify, unpack and analyze important news, trends and decisions shaping our future — and we’ve got you covered! Every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, Global Insider author Ryan Heath navigates the global news maze and connects you to power players and events changing our world. Don’t miss out on this influential global community. Subscribe now. | | | | | | | | SHOCKER: NAVY DOESN’T WANT SPENDING CUTS: Our friends over at Morning Defense (for Pros!) report that the Navy is urging House and Senate appropriators to reconsider proposed cuts in the fiscal 2022 budget for hypersonic weapons, F-35 fighter upgrades and aircraft carrier maintenance, according to a 56-page appeal that our own LEE HUDSON snagged. Hypersonic weapons: So far, Congress has fallen short of the request to expand the hypersonic industrial base. Without it, the Navy says the number of rounds delivered to Zumwalt-class destroyers, Virginia-class attack submarines and Army batteries will have to be reduced. F-35 upgrades: Proposed cuts to the F-35 would cause a one-year delay in delivering electronic warfare hardware and integration of AARGM-ER and AGM-158 weapons and also increase retrofit costs by $700 million. Carrier maintenance: Budget cuts would delay maintenance for USS John C. Stennis and force the Navy to renegotiate the contract with Newport News Shipbuilding.
| | | AMENDMENT SKIRMISH STALLS SENATE NDAA: The Senate version of the annual National Defense Authorization Act hit a new snag Monday after Republican lawmakers tanked a procedural vote to advance the must-pass defense policy bill amid an ongoing debate over amendments, per our own CONNOR O’BRIEN . The latest legislative hang-up comes after the Senate’s NDAA hit an impasse before Thanksgiving, when several Republican senators objected to amendment votes in protest of their proposals being left out. Ahead of Monday’s vote, Senate Minority Leader MITCH MCCONNELL said he’d oppose advancing the bill further without progress on amendments — citing Republican calls for votes on measures such as sanctions over Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline to Germany. “The failed vote means senators will need to work out their dispute to advance the defense bill, though it’s not immediately clear what that compromise might be,” O’Brien writes. “It will also consume floor time during a week in which Congress also needs to clear another government funding patch to avoid a shutdown at midnight on Friday.” SENATE DEMOCRATS NAILED DOWN ON NORD STREAM: In a separate story on the NDAA fracas, Desiderio and O’Brien explain the sweeping repercussions that Biden’s Nord Stream 2 stance is having on the administration’s broader national security agenda in Congress — from the Republican blockage of key foreign policy nominees to, now, the imperiled passage of the Senate’s NDAA. As a result, Democratic lawmakers are under new pressure to buck Biden by backing a proposal to impose sanctions on Nord Stream 2 AG — the company heading the Russia-to-Germany natural gas line — and to allow Congress to override presidential waiver authority. Sen. TIM KAINE (D-Va.) accused Republicans of trying to make things more difficult for Democratic leaders tasked with shepherding the defense bill, Biden’s social spending package, a debt ceiling increase and other critical measures through the Senate before year’s end: “They want to kill [the social spending bill], so if they can slow everything else down, that’s probably what they’re trying to do. I wouldn’t have thought they’d try to do that with the defense bill.” And other Democrats, including Sen. BRIAN SCHATZ (D-Hawaii), insist they’re not afraid to vote on Nord Stream 2-related provisions. “I’ve never been one to whisper in the leader’s ear asking that I not have to vote on something,” Schatz said. “That’s the job.” | | | |   | | | | | | DEM SEN: GET AFGHANS OUT FASTER: Sen. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-Conn.), an Armed Services Committee member, wrote to Biden today demanding he expedite the evacuation of Afghans who served alongside the U.S. during the war and remain within the Taliban’s reach. “I write with serious concerns about ongoing obstacles to evacuate at-risk Afghan allies — military translators, civil servants, humanitarian workers, and others who supported the US mission in Afghanistan,” he wrote. “I strongly support your admirable work to secure the safe departure of Americans who are still in Afghanistan. I urge the Administration to expand on these efforts and articulate a clear, effective strategy to expedite the evacuation of these remaining Americans and at-risk Afghan allies.” Blumenthal once again called for the appointment of president-directed “evacuation czar” to “implement such a strategy and coordinate the numerous federal agencies with responsibilities for evacuating and resettling our at-risk Afghan allies.” Criticism of the administration’s post-withdrawal evacuation plans continue. While the U.S. pulled off one of history’s greatest airlifts, Americans and Afghans still remain behind with little clarity about how they will escape. Veteran-led volunteer groups have openly panned the administration’s efforts, as have USAID contractors with locally employed staff. CHINA RESPONDS TO NEW U.S. DEFENSE POSTURE: During a news conference, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson ZHAO LIJIAN reacted to the Pentagon’s global posture review in which it announced expansions of U.S. military installations in Guam and Australia. “The relevant Pentagon report fully exposes the true intention of the U.S. to militarize the Indo-Pacific and go all out to encircle and contain China,” he said. “We firmly oppose the U.S. side’s attempt to justify its moves to increase military expenditure, expand military build-up and maintain military hegemony with the ‘China threat theory.’ The U.S. side should abandon the Cold War mentality of creating imaginary enemies and stop words and deeds that threaten international peace and security.” It's both an expected and strange comment. Expected because China always grouses about American moves in its neighborhood, especially military ones. But it’s strange because the review itself was extremely tame. Nowhere, for example, did it say the U.S. was going to surge a bunch of troops into the Indo-Pacific. Instead, the document effectively said America would maintain its status quo posture — which is great news for China.
| | | — WILLIAM LAPLANTE is the president’s nominee to serve as undersecretary of Defense for acquisition and sustainment. Currently president and CEO of Draper Laboratory, he served in the Obama administration as the Air Force’s acquisition chief. POLITICO was the first to report (for Pros!) that he'd be the nominee. — OSASU DORSEY is now a White House Leadership Development Program fellow in the Office of the National Cyber Director. She is a former ethics counsel at the White House. — BRADLEY BOYD and PAUL PARDEW have joined the Roosevelt Group as senior advisers. Boyd, a retired Army colonel, has served as defense and foreign policy adviser to Sen. ANGUS KING (I-Maine), as director of then-chief of staff of the Army Gen. MARK MILLEY’s Coordination Group, and as the lead for AI-enabled warfighting development at the Defense Department Joint Artificial Intelligence Center. Pardew, a retired Army major general, has served as commander of Army Contracting Command. | | | | DON’T MISS CONGRESS MINUTES: Need to follow the action on Capitol Hill blow-by-blow? Check out Minutes, POLITICO’s new platform that delivers the latest exclusives, twists and much more in real time. Get it on your desktop or download the POLITICO mobile app for iOS or Android. CHECK OUT CONGRESS MINUTES HERE. | | | | | | | | — Human Rights Watch: “‘No Forgiveness for People Like You’: Executions and Enforced Disappearances in Afghanistan under the Taliban” — SUE HALPERN, The New Yorker: “ Biden’s Global Democracy Summit Raises an Awkward Question: Can Ours Endure?” — SEBASTIAN ROTELLA, ProPublica: “Even on U.S. Campuses, China Cracks Down on Students Who Speak Out”
| | | — The Stimson Center, 9:30 a.m.: “Tracking U.S. Arms: Implications for Security and Stability — with JUSTINE FLEISCHNER, HOSNA JALIL, RACHEL STOHL and ELIAS YOUSIF” — The United States Institute of Peace and the RESOLVE Network, 9:30 a.m.: “Security Dilemmas in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Role of Community-Based Armed Groups — with RIDA LYAMMOURI, LAUREN VAN METRE, ALASTAIR REED and JAKANA THOMAS” — Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, 10:15 a.m.: “Executive Session and Nominations Hearing — with VIQUAR AHMAD, ALAN DAVIDSON, JED DAVID KOLKO and GIGI B. SOHN” — The Heritage Foundation, 11 a.m.: “ The Iran Nuclear Negotiations: Why the Humpty Dumpty JCPOA Should Not Be Renewed — with PETER BROOKES, FRED FLEITZ and JAMES PHILLIPS” — Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, 11 a.m.: “ Full Committee Hearing: Business Meeting” — Senate Intelligence Committee, 2 p.m.: “Closed Briefing: Intelligence Matters” — The National Endowment for Democracy, 6 p.m.: “ Eighteenth Annual Seymour Martin Lipset Lecture: RONALD DEIBERT on ‘Digital Subversion: The Threat to Democracy’” Have a natsec-centric event coming up? Transitioning to a new defense-adjacent or foreign policy-focused gig? Shoot us an email at award@politico.com or qforgey@politico.com to be featured in the next edition of the newsletter. | | A message from Lockheed Martin: Who builds the unrivaled F-35? The unrivaled, high-tech American workforce.
The F-35 program invests in American workers, creates the jobs of the future, and advances the digital enterprise. Learn More | | | And thanks to our editor, Ben Pauker, who — much like JAKE SULLIVAN — is also a figure of fascination and schadenfreude. | | | | Follow us on Twitter | | | | Follow us | | | | |  |
