Sponsored by Exensor
www.exensor.com
————————————————————————-
09 Feb 23. Supply chain resilience a major concern, warns Biden adviser.
Despite attempts to bolster national and supply chain resilience throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns about the growing economic and strategic power of an increasingly multipolar world has revealed just how vulnerable the supply chains of the United States and its partner nations are, with a presidential adviser warning they are “absolutely behind”.
It is an indisputable fact that much of the peace, prosperity and stability of the post-Second World War paradigm came as a direct result of the US-led global order providing the opportunity for the unprecedented economic transformation of the last half of the 20th century — which is responsible for propelling once developing nations onto the world stage.
For Australia and comparable Western nations, like the US, the UK, and increasingly across the European Union, the outbreak of COVID-19 has only served to further hasten the economic decline, stagnation, and political malaise experienced throughout the developed world, with many once-powerful, world-leading nations beginning to feel the pressure.
Across the Indo-Pacific, competing economic, political and strategic interests, designs and ambitions are beginning to clash, flying in contrast to the projections of many historians at the end of the Cold War — further compounding these issues is the continued instability caused by COVID-19, economic disruption through the advent of automation and artificial intelligence and, of course, concerns about ecological collapse.
Meanwhile, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, increasing tensions over Taiwan off the back off increasing animosity and antagonism by Beijing, coupled with the mounting power and influence of the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) economic, political and increasingly quasi-strategic bloc are adding further pressure to the globalised, post-war economic, political, and strategic order.
This confluence of circumstances and events is applying increasing pressure to the globalised supply chains and model of “just in time” delivery that the developed world, especially Australia as a relatively isolated, island continent has become dependent upon, raising concerns among many politicians, strategic policy thinkers, and the general public.
The Biden administration has also become increasingly concerned about the growing vulnerability of the United States economy and the broader, interconnected global trading network to supply chain shortages, blockages and state or non-state actor interference, with President Joe Biden’s Special Presidential Coordinator, Amos Hochstein, warning, “Look, this is a major concern for the US and I think for the rest of the world. As we are going into a cleaner, greener, an entirely new energy system, we have to make sure we have a diversified supply chain.
“We can’t have a supply chain that is concentrated in any country, doesn’t matter which country that is. We have to make sure from the mining and refining process to the building of the batteries and wind turbines that we have a diversified system that we can be well supplied for. That is the only way this will work from an economy perspective,” Hochstein added.
Absolutely we’re behind
Building on these points, Hochstein, when pushed on the status of the United States when compared to peer and near-peer competitor states, like China for exampled, stated, “Absolutely we’re behind.”
This concerning statement was reinforced by a White House briefing document for the Biden administration’s “Securing a Made in America Supply Chain” policy from February of 2022, which details, “The US is increasingly dependent on foreign sources for many of the processed versions of these minerals. Globally, China controls most of the market for processing and refining for cobalt, lithium, rare earths, and other critical minerals.”
Hochstein reinforces this point, with a startling admission by the United States, “We have to recognise that we have not invested, and that’s what the United States is trying to do now, is not only say the same old talk of we want to have partnerships. We’re going to come to this table together with our G7 allies, we’re going to pool our resources, we’re going to make sure that the money is there.”
Of particular interest is the global scramble for rare earth elements (REEs), a collection of 17 elements and are broken up into two unique groups: light rare earth elements (LREE) and heavy rare earth elements (HREE), each with unique and highly specialised uses in contemporary technologies — with key defence and aerospace technologies heavily dependent on extensive use of REE.
The intensifying trade war between the US and China in particular has shed new light on the growing importance of REE, particularly in the national security context — with China responsible for producing 97 per cent of rare earth ore, 97 per cent of rare earth oxides, 89 per cent of rare earth alloys, 75 per cent of neodymium iron boron magnets, and 60 per cent of samarium cobalt magnets, all critical for contemporary weapons systems, sensors, and more broadly, civilian technologies.
Despite their name, REEs are relatively plentiful in the planet’s crust — however, the complexity of the refining process, namely the prevalence of low levels of radioactivity and the potential for radiation contamination as a result of the refining process, has prompted many Western nations, including the US and Australia, to outsource refining.
Something Hochstein highlights as part of a broader recognition of the supply chain challenges facing both Australia and the United States, “We’re giving the incentives, through the IRA, to tell companies ‘look, if you make sure you’re mining in the US or in other countries and bring it to the US for refining, processing and battery manufacturing, there’s going to be the kind of financial incentives there.”
Time for a Strategic Industries Act?
Contributing an essay to the London-based Henry Jackson Society’s Breaking the China Supply Chain: How the Five Eyes can Decouple from Strategic Dependency report, now-shadow defence minister Andrew Hastie revealed Australia’s startling dependency upon Beijing, thus exposing itself unnecessarily to economic coercion and further compromise, despite the recent period of trade tension between the two nations.
Hastie detailed Australia’s overwhelming dependence on Beijing, highlighting startling figures that impact the overall competitiveness, security, and long term prosperity of the Australian economy, particularly when compared to allied nations, namely:
- Australia is strategically dependent on China for 595 categories of goods — 167 of these have applications in critical national infrastructure.
- New Zealand is strategically dependent on China for 513 categories of goods — 144 of these have applications in critical national infrastructure.
- The US is strategically dependent on China for 424 categories of goods — 114 of these have applications in critical national infrastructure.
- Canada is strategically dependent on China for 367 categories of goods — 83 of these have applications in critical national infrastructure.
- The UK is strategically dependent on China for 229 categories of goods — 57 of these have applications in critical national infrastructure.
Despite attempts by the former government and now seemingly a shifting emphasis away from “sovereign” manufacturing industries by the Albanese government to focus upon more “manageable” sustainment, maintenance, upgrading, and final assembly for key technologies and capabilities, it is clear that Australia, like the United States, needs to identify certain industries, including heavy manufacturing like steel production, shipbuilding, auto-manufacturing, aerospace and chemical engineering, resource and energy exploitation and agricultural output, serve core components of a strategic industrial base.
Identifying these industries is the first step in building a cohesive, long-term plan as part of a broader National Strategic Industries Act — using the legislative power of government to counter-balance industry development policies of allied, yet still competitor nations like South Korea — which leverages the industrial development policies of export oriented industrialisation (EOI) to develop its economy into a major economic and modern, advanced manufacturing powerhouse.
Lessons for Australia’s future strategic planning
There is no doubt that Australia’s position and responsibilities in the Indo-Pacific region will depend on the nation’s ability to sustain itself economically, strategically and politically in the face of rising regional and global competition. Despite the nation’s virtually unrivalled wealth of natural resources, agricultural and industrial potential, there is a lack of a cohesive national security strategy integrating the development of individual, yet complementary public policy strategies to support a more robust Australian role in the region.
While contemporary Australia has been far removed from the harsh realities of conflict, with many generations never enduring the reality of rationing for food, energy, medical supplies or luxury goods, and even fewer within modern Australia understanding the socio-political and economic impact such rationing would have on the now world-leading Australian standard of living.
Enhancing Australia’s capacity to act as an independent power, incorporating great power-style strategic economic, diplomatic and military capability serves as a powerful symbol of Australia’s sovereignty and evolving responsibilities in supporting and enhancing the security and prosperity of Indo-Pacific Asia, this is particularly well explained by Peter Zeihan, who explains: “A deglobalised world doesn’t simply have a different economic geography, it has thousands of different and separate geographies. Economically speaking, the whole was stronger for the inclusion of all its parts. It is where we have gotten our wealth and pace of improvement and speed. Now the parts will be weaker for their separation.”
Accordingly, shifting the public discussion and debate away from the default Australian position of “it is all a little too difficult, so let’s not bother” will provide unprecedented economic, diplomatic, political and strategic opportunities for the nation.
As events continue to unfold throughout the region and China continues to throw its economic, political and strategic weight around, can Australia afford to remain a secondary power, or does it need to embrace a larger, more independent role in an era of increasing great power competition? (Source: Defence Connect)
08 Feb 23. Biden Tells Congress ‘It’s Never a Good Bet to Bet Against America.’ Those who wish the United States ill should know “it’s never ever a good bet to bet against America,” President Joe Biden said during his State of the Union speech at the Capitol tonight.
The president highlighted U.S. economic progress, but also touched on the challenges posed by Russia’s war on Ukraine and China’s attempts to bend the world to its will.
Biden noted that when he gave his first State of the Union speech last year, it was just days after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his troops into the sovereign nation of Ukraine. Then, it was unknown what would happen as Russia tried to erase the neighboring country.
The “brutal war” against Ukraine began with a murderous assault, “evoking images of the death and destruction Europe suffered in World War II,” the president said.
He said the invasion has been “a test for the ages. A test for America. A test for the world.”
Biden said that test was whether the nations of the world would stand by basic principles. “Would we stand for sovereignty? Would we stand for the right of people to live free from tyranny? Would we stand for the defense of democracy?” he asked.
This matters because “it keeps the peace and prevents open season for would-be aggressors to threaten our security and prosperity,” Biden said. “One year later, we know the answer. Yes, we would. And, yes, we did.”
America led, the president said. “We united NATO and built a global coalition,” he said. “We stood against Putin’s aggression. We stood with the Ukrainian people.”
The United States has sent billions of dollars in equipment and is training Ukrainian service members to defend their country.
During his address, the president acknowledged Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States Oksana Markarova, who was seated with First Lady Dr. Jill Biden. Markarova also observed last year’s State of the Union address. “She represents not just her nation, but the courage of her people,” the president said. “Ambassador, America is united in our support for your country. We will stand with you as long as it takes.”
Europe is not the only place where the international rules-based order is challenged. “Our nation is working for more freedom, more dignity, and more peace — not just in Europe, but everywhere,” Biden said. “Before I came to office, the story was about how the People’s Republic of China was increasing its power, and America was falling in the world. Not anymore.”
Biden said that he has stressed to Chinese President Xi Jinping that the United States seeks competition with China, not conflict. “I will make no apologies that we are investing to make America strong,” he said. “Investing in American innovation, in industries that will define the future, and that China’s government is intent on dominating.”
That also means investing in alliances and working with allies and partners to protect advanced technologies.
The president spoke of modernizing the U.S. military to safeguard stability and deter aggression.
“Today, we’re in the strongest position in decades to compete with China or anyone else in the world,” he said. “I am committed to work with China where it can advance American interests and benefit the world. But make no mistake: As we made clear last week, if China’s threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country. And we did.”
Biden said that unity is needed to ensure democracies can meet the serious challenges that confront all nations. “In the past two years, democracies have become stronger, not weaker. Autocracies have grown weaker, not stronger,” he said. “America is rallying the world again to meet those challenges — from climate and global health to food insecurity to terrorism and territorial aggression. Allies are stepping up, spending more and doing more. And bridges are forming between partners in the Pacific and those in the Atlantic. And those who bet against America are learning just how wrong they are.”
The president also called for internal unity, asking for bipartisan cooperation to “do more to keep our nation’s one truly sacred obligation: to equip those we send into harm’s way and care for them and their families when they come home.”
Congress and the administration can unite to provide job training and job placement for veterans and their spouses as they return to civilian life. He also called for programs that help veterans afford their rent “because no one should be homeless in this country, especially not those who served the country,” he said.
Spotlight: Suicide Prevention
He also asked for funding for programs to combat the scourge of veteran suicides. He called for money to fund expanding mental health screenings and a proven program that recruits veterans to help other veterans get the help they need.(Source: US DoD)
06 Feb 23. Pentagon, EU ready pact to spur defense cooperation — with exceptions. The European Council has approved a signature-ready agreement with the U.S. Defense Department that is meant to facilitate defense cooperation, though the area of joint capability development is explicitly outside the pact’s scope.
The draft arrangement between the European Defence Agency and the Pentagon comes after years of both sides dancing around the subject of allowing the U.S. government and its vast defense-industrial complex into the growing circle of European Union defense projects.
The Brussels-based agency is a key player in facilitating such cooperation because its administrative arrangements with non-EU countries essentially impose the bloc’s regulatory regime for everything from export controls to intellectual property on any work product.
The draft, announced Monday, aims to “enable a substantial defense dialogue on all topics within EDA’s remit, and invitations for U.S. DoD to attend relevant meetings of EDA’s Steering Board and vice versa,” according to an EDA statement.
The document envisages as “specific activities” the areas of military mobility, supply chain problems and the impact of climate change on defense. The term “military mobility” describes efforts to streamline the transportation of defense equipment across European borders — a bureaucratic and technological hurdle.
Notably, the draft excludes any cooperative work that entails research and technology, noted Marie Jourdain, a Europe analyst at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.
She told Defense News the new language reflects the fact that EU officials were always wary of American export-control rules of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations policy seeping into trans-Atlantic cooperative projects.
While questions over export controls are inconsequential when the work product is procedural in nature — like in the case of military mobility, where the DoD is already involved — any work aimed at developing new hardware would be subject to conflicting rules, she said.
“We’ll have to see what the new agreement means for PESCO,” said Jourdain, referring to the collection of 60 distinct EU defense projects that aim to resolve capability shortfalls across all military domains.
According to a fact sheet provided by the European Parliament, an administrative arrangement between EDA and a non-EU country is a “prerequisite” for PESCO participation.
With the new arrangement now excluding any cooperative activities aimed at capability development or involving research and technology, many projects will likely remain closed for U.S. participation, Jourdain said.
Similar language, she noted, was already in effect in the PESCO rules themselves, which fence off EU funding from non-bloc participants.
(Source: C4ISR & Networks)
————————————————————————-
Founded in 1987, Exensor Technology is a world leading supplier of Networked Unattended Ground Sensor (UGS) Systems providing tailored sensor solutions to customers all over the world. From our Headquarters in Lund Sweden, our centre of expertise in Network Communications at Communications Research Lab in Kalmar Sweden and our Production site outside of Basingstoke UK, we design, develop and produce latest state of the art rugged UGS solutions at the highest quality to meet the most stringent demands of our customers. Our systems are in operation and used in a wide number of Military as well as Homeland Security applications worldwide. The modular nature of the system ensures any external sensor can be integrated, providing the user with a fully meshed “silent” network capable of self-healing. Exensor Technology will continue to lead the field in UGS technology, provide our customers with excellent customer service and a bespoke package able to meet every need. A CNIM Group Company
————————————————————————-