MISCELLANEOUS WRITINGS | 2016 EDITION | VOLUME 60
○ ○ ○
If hacking is the new espionage, diplomacy is the new Trojan horse sent to destroy an already imploding America. And it has enablers in high academic places. For example, did President Obama tread the bipartisan line too cautiously in not ordering a full review much earlier?
I have vociferously argued precisely that. However, that leadership lesson belongs to another article; A CIA Assessment confirming Russian meddling to help Donald Trump win the 45th Presidency, isn't.
There is a dangerous man presiding over the most elaborate web of deception, Russian and international crime and Crimes Against Humanity in Russia. And American diplomacy, James Comey's now discredited FBI, as well as the naive American electorate, apathetic cybersecurity experts, an intelligence community that need fresh new thinking led by a timid academia (more focused on reciting doomsday enemy reactions and thesis than solutions or adjustments America cold make), has been frustratingly too slow to recognize the gravity of this threat. A threat only few, like the hawkish albeit pragmatic Hillary Clinton apparently realize(d). Hence, the 2016 Presidential Election results.
No matter what he tells journalists and the Russian people, Vladimir Putin seeks no 'friendship' with the United States. And hurtful though it is for my Russian friends to concede, Lithuania's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Linas Linkevičius described Putin's Russia best: “Russia is not a superpower. It is a super problem.” Intelligence Chief Dr. Hans-Georg Maaßen meanwhile has piled on in a press release accusing Russia of trying to “destabilize” his country, Germany.
In U.S. Cyber Deterrence 1.0 PREVIEW — the absolute prerequisite of this article — I predicted that IF a U.S. cyber retaliation to unprecedented aggressive Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election came, one could expect it shortly after Election Day.
The much anticipated “cyber strike” — at least at the time of writing — never came. But this update (hyperlinked image above) illuminates my Demystifying Digital Forensics blog (another essential strategic security read) as well as the initial installment, U.S. Cyber Deterrence 1.0 PREVIEW.
We've already established who America's arch adversaries are, saying competent career intelligence or strategic security officers, scholars and experts easily put China, the DPRK (North Korea), Iran, Russia, and radicalized Terror groups such as Al Qaeda & ISIS atop any list. And I have conceded that despite much Cyber Pearl Harbor fluff out there with fatalistic views about the state of security, Cyber Deterrence, for career intelligence officers and Presidents alike, remains a conundrum.
It can also stymie fresh, bold solutions and necessary realignments as policymakers are held hostage by the same fears held by academics and think tanks. As expatiated in the next two iterations. Which is why I continue to invoke Jimmy Bertrand's wisdom (in explanatory hyperlinked image) below:Disproportionately influenced by academia, diplomacy has become the Trojan horse now leveraged by Russia, China, Iran, the DPRK, and terrorists alike as Social Media is aggressively weaponized, via slick Fake News to misinform an already dumb electorate.
So while Americans dangerously wallow(ed) in rancorous fake news scandals and innuendos — which I consider both a national security threat and within a U.S. election context, treasonous — as well as toxic, stupid, self-destructive partisan sabotage and obstruction of the kind that stymied execution of the Obama Administration's broader vision for “making America” greater (a feat easier in nations like China where national unity is the de facto law of the land), American adversaries have pulled ahead, hacking away at will as they exploit multi-layered landmines, and American's own self-manufactured U.S. distractions.
Moreoever, with Russia aggressively migrating malicious, Influence Operations and Cyber Warfare tactics previously used with impunity against weaker nations, toward the U.S, America's left with no choice but to overtly send Russia and persistent adversaries, such as China, a cogent and credible message.
And yet disturbingly, American strategic intensity has been steadily losing ground to a cacophony of academic arguments that justify the careers of China and Russia apologists like Johns Hopkins' David Lampton and NYU's Stephen Cohen, more than they constructively and creatively address America's increasingly outfoxed foreign policy.
And in that sense both China and Russia had good reasons to fear Hillary Clinton's more hawkish albeit measured approach, having experienced some of the key arguments I make next. Next, I tackle a clued-in Russian legend's frustration with American naïveté. Proceed below.
○ ○ ○