More Industry Regulations Are Needed to Improve US Cybersecurity, Congressional Report Says | Defense One


The U.S. government should require private companies to better monitor their networks and more quickly respond to cyber attacks from Russia, China, and elsewhere, a new congressional report on the nation’s cybersecurity preparedness says.

The report, released Wednesday by the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, says the United States is underprepared for tomorrow’s network attacks from sophisticated actors. It offers 80 recommendations.

One big one for government: expand the role of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA; and establish a National Cyber Director to advise the U.S. president and coordinate national strategy on cyber issues.

Source: More Industry Regulations Are Needed to Improve US Cybersecurity, Congressional Report Says – Defense One

The Trump administration misplayed the International Criminal Court and Americans may now face justice for crimes in Afghanistan


At the start of the long war in Afghanistan, acts of torture and related war crimes were committed by the U.S. military and the CIA at the Bagram Internment Facility and in so-called “black sites” in eastern Europe. Such actions, even though they were not a standard U.S. practice and were stopped by an Executive Order from President Obama in 2009, nonetheless violate basic principles of international humanitarian law.

To date, only a few of the direct perpetrators of these abuses have been brought to justice through U.S. military court martials.

Significantly, U.S. investigations have not worked their way up the chain of command to hold accountable more senior officials who may have ordered or authorized torture and the targeting of civilians in Afghanistan. That will now change as the International Criminal Court opens an investigation into war crimes in Afghanistan committed by both the Taliban and the U.S. military.

Source: The Trump administration misplayed the International Criminal Court and Americans may now face justice for crimes in Afghanistan

Seeking to avoid EU tariffs, Washington state House passes bill to drop Boeing tax break | Reuters


Washington state’s House of Representatives passed a measure on Wednesday night that removes a key tax break for Boeing Co (BA.N) and other aerospace firms, in a bid to head off possible European tariffs on U.S. goods and ease a transatlantic trade dispute over aircraft subsidies.

“This measure is important to protect our state’s economy,” House Democratic Majority Leader Pat Sullivan said by phone. “We don’t want tariffs levied by the European Union on the aerospace industry but also on other key industries in the state like wine and agricultural products.”

Source: Seeking to avoid EU tariffs, Washington state House passes bill to drop Boeing tax break – Reuters

Argentina needs ‘substantial’ relief in $70 billion debt talks, economy minister says | Reuters


Argentina will need “substantial relief” as it restructures nearly $70 billion in debt with international bondholders, the country’s economy minister Martin Guzman told Reuters, signaling a tough tonic ahead for the country’s creditors.

Source: Exclusive: Argentina needs ‘substantial’ relief in $70 billion debt talks, economy minister says – Reuters

For richer or poorer: coronavirus, cheap oil test climate vows | Reuters


Climate change commitments by banks, pension funds and asset managers face their first major test as markets reel from the twin shocks of coronavirus and a sliding oil price.

The challenge looks formidable. When the 2008 financial crisis tipped the world into recession, carbon emissions fell. But as economies grew again, governments proved unable to halt an emissions rebound.

Source: For richer or poorer: coronavirus, cheap oil test climate vows – Reuters

Corporate credit risk heightens as coronavirus impact spreads | Reuters


Investors are growing increasingly concerned that the coronavirus outbreak will hit U.S. corporate cash flow if it keeps workers at home or prevents companies from paying employees.

“The problem for this cycle in corporate credit risk is that’s where you had the greatest excess – where you had the biggest build-up in leverage, the biggest deterioration in underwriting standards,” said Troy Gayeski, co-chief investment officer of SkyBridge, an alternative investments firm.

“When you have a growth shock like we are clearly having, then the more vulnerable areas of the economy have less ability to manage their balance sheets.”

Source: Corporate credit risk heightens as coronavirus impact spreads – Reuters

Italian daily coronavirus deaths jump 31% to 827 | Reuters


The death toll from an outbreak of coronavirus in Italy has jumped in the last 24 hours by 196 to 827, a rise of 31%, the Civil Protection Agency said on Wednesday, the largest rise in absolute numbers since the contagion came to light on Feb. 21.

The total number of cases in Italy, the European country hardest hit by the virus, rose to 12,462 from a previous 10,149, an increase of 22.8%. However, the agency said some 600 new cases were confirmed on Tuesday but only reported on Wednesday.

Source: Italian daily coronavirus deaths jump 31% to 827 – Reuters

Related>

UK scientists not recommending U.S.-style travel ban: PM’s spokesman | Reuters


British scientists are not recommending the government introduce a U.S.-style travel ban to stop the spread of coronavirus, a spokesman for Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Thursday, after President Donald Trump restricted travel from Europe.

Source: UK scientists not recommending U.S.-style travel ban: PM’s spokesman – Reuters

Related>

Democratic Values No Longer Define U.S.-Indian Relations


U.S. President Donald Trump traveled to India last month looking for big crowds, a long-awaited trade deal, and a chance to put his stamp on U.S.-Indian ties. He got the crowds—and delivered a surprisingly restrained speech alongside Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi before a large audience at a “Namaste Trump” rally in Modi’s home state of Gujarat. But Trump left India without a trade deal; both sides have yet to agree on issues such as tariffs and the opening of India’s dairy sector to U.S. producers.

Worse, Trump’s visit coincided with the most brutal communal riots in Delhi since 1950, clashes that killed dozens of people—both Hindus and Muslims—and led to the burning and vandalization of Muslim homes, mosques, and businesses. Without weighing in on sensitive Indian domestic politics, the U.S. president could have offered compassionate words for those killed and their families. He chose not to.

Trump’s muted response to the riots underscored the extent to which realist considerations now govern the U.S.-Indian relationship. A bipartisan U.S. foreign policy consensus has elevated the rise of China to an organizing principle of U.S. grand strategy. And realists on both sides of the political aisle argue that Washington’s and New Delhi’s interests align in seeking a balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region, with India’s heft and capabilities necessary for reaching that goal.

But realist concerns haven’t always been the only concerns driving U.S.-Indian ties. In the last 20 years, successive U.S. presidents and Indian prime ministers have emphasized shared democratic values. For Washington, the power of India’s democracy—despite all its foibles and failings—stems from what it demonstrates: that a chaotic but free society can deliver prosperity to its citizens.

But this relationship of shared values between India and the United States is now under stress, thanks to developments in both countries and to Trump’s disinterest in affirming the ideals that bind the world’s two largest democracies.

When U.S. President Barack Obama visited India in January 2015, Modi had been in power a little less than a year and had focused on economic growth, good governance, job creation, and sanitation. But Modi’s Hindu nationalist government had still sparked concerns about growing intolerance in India (at that point, over public controversies about religious conversion and religious freedom). Obama used part of his public address in New Delhi to caution that India “will succeed as long as it is not splintered along the lines of religious faith . . . and is unified as one nation.”

The India that Trump visited last month is substantially different from the one that Obama visited five years earlier. Today, India faces its lowest rate of economic growth in 11 years, coupled with a 45-year high in unemployment. Economic constraints have squeezed defense spending. Modi, who once embraced globalization and warned against protectionism, now champions higher tariffs and recently exited an important regional trade deal. And since his reelection in 2019, Modi and his government have pivoted sharply toward cultural issues.

Since last summer, Modi has made good on some of his Bharatiya Janata Party’s most ideological promises made to its Hindu nationalist base.

The law sparked sustained—and mostly peaceful—nationwide protests that in turn provoked a backlash from the law’s supporters. In Delhi, tensions culminated in the recent riots.

China has increased its maritime territorial claims in the South China Sea, had a military standoff with India in 2017 over disputed Himalayan territory, and launched the expansive Belt and Road Initiative that has made serious inroads in virtually all of India’s neighbors. In South Asia, the initiative has produced some undesirable outcomes, with Chinese infrastructure loans creating “debt traps” for vulnerable countries, such as the Maldives and Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka’s obligations to China for the Hambantota port led to a land-use swap for debt relief, raising the prospect of China using the initiative to erode the territorial sovereignty of other nations.

New Delhi and Washington view China’s expanding influence in much the same way. Although India doesn’t seek conflict with China—and at times cooperates closely with Beijing in multilateral contexts such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) grouping and its New Development Bank—New Delhi remains concerned about its own territorial integrity following unresolved border disputes with China going back to 1962 (when the two countries fought a brief war). Beijing continues to claim the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh as its own.

India was the only major country not to attend the Belt and Road Forum in Beijing in 2017, expressing objections that track closely with Washington’s many concerns about the initiative, including its governance structures, lack of transparency, debt traps, and environmental ramifications. In public remarks at the 2018 Shangri-La Dialogue, Modi offered his vision for the region, speaking of India’s commitment to a free, open, and inclusive Asia; of norms “based on the consent of all”; and of faith in dialogue, not force.

India’s robust and increasingly reliable military capabilities back up that talk.

With the world’s second-largest military in terms of personnel and fourth-highest defense budget, India is a hefty power in its own right. Countries in Asia and around the Indian Ocean now look to New Delhi as a provider of security; in February alone, India evacuated foreign nationals as well as its own citizens from Wuhan, China, and offered first-responder assistance to Madagascar after a cyclone.

Recent naval cooperation between India and the United States underlines both countries’ commitment to maintaining freedom of navigation in the vast expanse of the Indian Ocean.

But as competition with China yokes Washington and New Delhi closer together, the two countries’ shared emphasis on democratic values is waning. A turn away from upholding those values will make it harder to position India as an alternative to Beijing’s authoritarian model.

Today, in addition to a much tighter security relationship, U.S. policy toward the region emphasizes cooperation among democracies, including the revival of “Quadrilateral consultations” comprising Australia, India, Japan, and the United States.

The United States must remain committed to reinforcing Indian democracy. For all its domestic challenges—including economic inequality, caste and gender discrimination, and persistent religious tensions—India has continued to demonstrate the power of the vote. Unlike many other democracies, Indian voters regularly kick out incumbents. And India’s constitution, with its ambitious guarantees of fundamental rights and its insistence on equality before the law for all citizens, recalls the United States’ own experiment with democracy.

The communal riots that burned during Trump’s visit exposed the failure of the Indian state to provide even the most basic protections to its citizens.

Neither leader expressed a word of grief or called for calm from their powerful platforms.

The actions of the U.S. president signal U.S. priorities. While Trump stuck to his prepared remarks at the rally in Gujarat—including an appreciation of India’s emergence as a peaceful, tolerant, and free country with “respect for the dignity of every person”—his unscripted remarks on the tarmac prior to leaving India and at a rally in South Carolina days after returning home revealed a fixation with crowd numbers at the expense of any larger vision. Such a foreign policy approach risks turning the United States’ relationship with India into one similar to the United States’ relationship with Saudi Arabia: a partnership of narrow interests rather than broader principles.

India is a significant power, with a major economy and the most capable military in South Asia. It was on that basis that the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations advanced ties with the world’s largest democracy. But over the long term, these ties will prove much more durable if they rest not just on interests but on values, as well.

Source: Democratic Values No Longer Define U.S.-Indian Relations

For MBS, Saudi Arabia Must Maintain Its Oil Dominance at All Costs


On Sunday night, MBS announced that Saudi Arabia would sharply increase its oil output despite a steep decline in global demand. It was precisely the opposite of what oil producers normally do, and it worsened an existing slump and immediately triggered a wave of panic selling across already-anxious markets around the world. Oil prices fell by an incredible 30 percent as markets opened Monday, and by the time the markets closed on Wall Street, major indexes had experienced their deepest losses since the global financial crisis a dozen years ago.

MBS was flexing his economic muscle, hoping to send a message to oil producers—particularly to Russia—that Saudi Arabia under his leadership will call the shots, regardless of the cost.

Source: For MBS, Saudi Arabia Must Maintain Its Oil Dominance at All Costs