So, the new US President has redecorated his home office, and the bust of Winston Churchill that Trump and George W. Bush retained there is now gone. Cue the usual fury from the right-wing tabloids and outrage-merchants.
For what it is worth I have never understood why some British people get so animated by this. Biden is an American President. Naturally he draws inspiration from great Americans. As far as I am aware, Biden hasn’t put up busts of Garibaldi, Gandhi, Clemenceau or Michael Collins, all of whom are inspirational in their own way. So why this is conceived of as a ‘snub’ to Britain and/or Churchill I will never understand. I think these episodes reveal more about the people complaining than they do about the President.
It is too early to discuss President Biden’s thinking, but this does provide an opportunity to revisit the controversy during Obama’s Presidency.
In 2001 George W. Bush requested the British Embassy loan him the Jacob Epstein sculptured bust of Churchill that was located in the British Embassy in Washington DC. Ironically, in light of all that has happened since, at the time some people complained about Bush being given the bust. After the presidential election in 2008 the British embassy offered to extend the loan. The White House declined, and it wasreported they retained a bust of Abraham Lincoln instead. Later on the story was that Obama had replaced a bust of Churchill with one of Martin Luther King Jr, although as far as I can tell Obama had busts of both men in the Oval Office.
The offer by the British Embassy to extend the loan was just a formality. It doesn’t seem like there was any expectation that the bust would remain in the Oval Office. To quote the British Ambassador at the time:

"So, to be honest, we always expected that [the Churchill bust] to leave the Oval Office just like everything else that a president has tends to be changed,” he explained in a valedictory interview with the Guardian. “Even the carpet is usually changed when the president changes.”

According to White House curator William Allman, the decision not to keep the bust was made before Obama became President.
Part of the reasoning for not retaining the Churchill bust was practical – you can only put so many busts on the tables of the Oval Office before they look cluttered. Another part had nothing to with Winston Churchill at all. As an African American, Obama (rightly, in my view) thought it would be appropriate to honour Martin Luther King. After all, had it not been for the effort, determination and bravery of Martin Luther King then arguably Obama could never have become President of the United States.
In fact, Obama retained an identical bust of Churchill - by the same sculptor - in the White House throughout his Presidency. This was originally donated to the White House in 1965 by American admirers of Winston Churchill. It was placed in the Treaty Room and there it stayed until 2017. Obama saw it ‘every day’. Here’s a pic of Obama admiring it with then British Prime Minister David Cameron. Incidentally it was this bust that Trump had moved into the Oval Office in 2017, until he could be loaned another one.
There has been speculation, which frankly borders on racism, that Obama had the bust removed because of a dislike of the British Empire. This in turn fuelled a myth that Obama had the statue removed because of a personal dislike of Churchill. Apparently, Churchill had his grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama, tortured. This was reported by the Daily Telegraph in 2009, repeated by journalist plagiarist, sock puppeteer and liar Johann Hari in 2010, and you get people repeating it online constantly.
The claim that Hussein Onyango Obama was tortured in colonial Kenya originated with Sarah Onyango Obama. She was Obama’s grandfather’s wife. However, Obama’s biographers take her claims with a pinch of salt. Pulitzer Prize winning journalist David Maraniss writes in his book Barack Obama: The Story:

In its specifics the story seems unlikely. There are no remaining records of any detention, imprisonment or trial of Hussein Onyango Obama. Sarah did not witness any of it, and she is the only person to offer details. While there would be no obvious reason for her to contrive such a tale, her accuracy on other matters that can be documented is uneven. She speaks only in Luo, knowing some Swahili and no English, so her quotes are dependent upon the inclinations of the interpreter. And five people who had close connections to Hussein Onyango said they doubted the story or were certain that it did not happen.
John Ndalo Aguk, who worked with him before the alleged incident and kept in touch with him on a weekly basis in Nairobi thereafter, when he was placed in the homes of several employers at Hussein Onyango’s recommendation, said he knew nothing about a detention or imprisonment and would have noticed if his mentor had gone missing for several months. Zablon Okatch, a Luo who worked with Onyango after the supposed incarceration, when they were servants in the house of American embassy personnel, said, “Hussein was never jailed. I know that for a fact. It would have been difficult for him to get a job with a white family, let alone a diplomat, if he once served in jail… All prospective workers had to have details about themselves scrutinized at the Labour Office”. Chales Oluoch, whose father, Peter, had been adopted by Hussein Onyango when he was a young boy, said he doubted the story: “He did not take part in politics, nor did he have any trouble with the government in any way.” Auma Magak, Hussein Onyango’s daughter, disputed the story but offered a different version: “He was not detained. There was an incident where some thugs kidnapped him. He mysteriously disappeared. He was taken to a river where he was tied and left there. Some leopards were around him but left him alone. But the detainment never happened. He was working in Nairobi during those years. He never disappeared [for six months].” Perhaps the most authoritative account disputing Sarah’s story came from Dick Opar, who went on to become a senior police official in Kenya. “At that time, I would have known”, Opar said. “It may have been a day or two. People make up stories. If you get arrested for another thing. No. No. I would have known. I would have known. If he was in Kamiti prison for only a day, even if for a day, I would have known.

Maraniss goes on to add:

Several pieces of logic contradict the story. First if Huessein Onyango had been imprisoned, even if one were to further accept that he was eventually cleared of whatever charges were against him, he likely would have had difficulty, as Zablon Okatch noted, securing employment in the homes of security-conscious white officials in the following years, when the country was in turmoil and there were increasing concerns about the motives and loyalties of Kenyan workers. Yet he continued to be hired throughout the next decade…. Second it is also unlikely that his son would have been accepted into the most prestigious boarding school in western Kenya within a year of his father’s imprisonment, or that after many months without a salary the family would have been able to afford the tuition

Let’s assume though that Hussein Onyango was in fact tortured. Could this explain why Obama dislikes Churchill? Well, there are two holes in this theory. Firstly, Obama is on the record as saying:
​

“I love Winston Churchill, I love the guy,”

​
Obama has also quoted Churchill in his speeches, producing much reeing from the usual suspects.
The second problem is that Sarah Onyango never claimed that Churchill had Obama’s grandfather imprisoned and tortured. As reported in 2009, Hussein Onyango Obama was imprisoned in 1949. He was allegedly held for two years, meaning he was likely released some time in 1951. Churchill didn’t return to office until 26th October 1951 so the odds are that Hussein Onyango Obama had already been released from jail by then. If not, it was under Churchill’s premiership that he was set free. It is hard to see why Churchill should be blamed for the atrocities inflicted on Obama’s grandfather when he was not Prime Minister when he was arrested. If any blame should fall on a British PM for the mistreatement of Hussein Onyango, it should fall on Clement Attlee, not Winston Churchill.
In sum the Washington Post was correct in their assessment that:
​

The Churchill bust story has been a constant source of poor reporting.

​

Well, I hate that so many of have been right about the trajectories our governments are taking with this mess.
I will start by saying like I did in my last post - I believe COVID-19 is as real as the common cold or influenza, but I don’t subscribe to any of the means our governments are using to “combat” this “pandemic.”
We made it folks! We finally made it! The vaccine is here! Can I travel? No. Will I finally be able to stop wearing a mask? No, you can still spread the virus. What if I get sick? Can my family sue Phizer or Moderna? No, pshhh, can you sue God himself, idiot? So this protects ME from getting ill, right? Wellllll, that’s the idea. Come now. Roll. Up. Your. Sleeve.
So far, it seems to me that I can do a better job as a contractor selling a renovation to the owner of a brand new custom home. They don’t need a renovation in a brand new home, just like the public doesn’t need a vaccine for a coronavirus that doesn’t kill 99.97% of carriers/recipients. Yet somehow, governments are successfully selling this vaccine to (surprisingly) many of their citizens.
Having been keeping loose tabs on what the Mainstream Media (MSM) is reporting about public vaccine reaction/perception. I see some polling figures (at least in Canada) that a little over half of the population is “happy to get the vaccine,” while the other half of the population is “sceptical, but will get the vaccine,” or “sceptical, and will NOT get the vaccine.” Current reporting from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) suggests that “anyone who wants the vaccine, will receive it.”
Given the huge list of caveats in actually RECEIVING the vaccine, and the piss poor job governments have done rolling out their sales pitches for rushed vaccines that don’t do anything anyways, it stands to reason that lockdowns MUST continue, and that people’s current wavering compliance with COVID-19 is nowhere near as close to the LOCKSTEP our governments require of us.
Enter COVID-21. It’s really fun to watch how easily the wool is being pulled over everyone’s eyes. Watching the first days of vaccinations on television, it’s clear to me that too much of the public is questioning the narrative for the vaccine to work in whatever way the government wants it to. I feel G20 nations are quickly waking up to the fact that they don’t want to and cannot force inoculate their citizens, simply because this would spark a revolution more quickly than governments are ready for right now. This flies against the narrative and timeline we are living through currently.
I suggest that forcing vaccinations on western nations’ citizens (as much as this would be ideal for the government) is not going to work. The principles in our laws and doctrines collectively dictates individuals’ rights and freedoms. While governments and media in most nations have successfully stripped away most people’s businesses, daily routines, and their connection to family, friends and religions, I feel the choice between “vaccinations or jail time” will be a hard line that will wake up many of those that have crossed over to the herd that is LOCKSTEP.
Our governments have taken many lessons from a docu/drama titled Temple Grandin. By forcing the herd to slaughter, you stress the animal and taint the meat. The idea that even cattle ranches and their accompanying slaughterhouses are designed with the individual cow’s stress in mind illustrates to me that soft curves and squeeze chutes are needed to bring us all in line before our eventual slaughter and demise. Back in the day, cattle were whipped and corralled into their transports or slaughterhouses. Modern cattle production leads the herd gently through a series of soft, curved pathways and squeeze chutes where they walk willingly themselves. These pathways are designed to become narrower and narrower until the cow is in a position it cannot turn around to escape - it must move forward in LOCKSTEP with the rest of the herd. But the soft, curved pathways it follows, and seeing the rest of his friends and family in tow, calms and reassures the beast into submission. Forcing our human populations into a corner is a hard line and a hard corner that we won’t be able to overcome. The government needs another mode to keep us all locked at home. We must all comply. But how?
At the time of writing, I am observing reports of a “new coronavirus strain” in the UK. More and more governments are currently imposing measures restricting travel to and from the UK every few hours. This seems to be the “soft curving path” governments will use to get those currently on the fence with this mess in LOCKSTEP with the rest of the herd.
I mention the term LOCKSTEP many times above. I am referring to a Rockefeller Foundation Articlewritten in 2010 discussing exactly the lockdowns, mask wearing and erosion of public rights and freedoms we see today. * I link to a Rockefeller Foundation blog post in which they suspiciously “debunk” conspiracy theories relating to the very article I am discussing.
What does all of this madness lead to?
As I see things:

• the herd openly complied with every lockdown and measure imposed on us and shame those who don’t or dare not comply. This is already beginning to result in violence
• churches, family gatherings, public gatherings, pubs, restaurants, all deemed non-essential and to be minimized or avoided at all costs. All of this to curb any form of congregating, discussion, discourse, all banned.
• pro BLM protests are okay. “Racism leads to systemic healthcare disparities” Church is cancelled, but large gatherings of people are allowed to protest? Surely both lead to further spread in the virus? Of course they do. The difference is that religion, family and friends inspire community and healthy discussions. Protests have largely inspired conflict, burning of neighbourhoods and have inspired further division in society. The literal burning of small businesses broadcast all over MSM to perhaps lessen the blow to the public of the “financial burning” and erosion of those businesses that managed to survive the first wave and the public rioting.
• vaccine proven “95% effective” all while lockdowns, increased mask wearing mandates, and restrictions in personal gatherings have INCREASED the positive case numbers? At least in Canada, a “case” is listed in both official Government of Canada statistics and unofficial Google COVID-19 statistics as “confirmed OR PROBABLE” ?!?! What does “probable” even mean in the cases where people show same symptoms as common cold or influenza?
• influenza - another respiratory virus - cases are down significantly around the world, yet coronavirus cases are spiking during lockdowns and increased restrictions against individuals’ rights and freedoms?
• 24 hour news cycle continues to repeat doom and gloom every day.
• public division encouraged - violence against those who don’t comply with the MSM narrative seemingly encouraged
• not enough people questioning rather “grey” legality of lockdowns and business closures in name of public health?
• police in some jurisdictions beginning to uphold unlawful lockdown orders. Knocking on doors like the Gestapo, checking on numbers at family gatherings. Imposing fines to those who may already be crippled financially.
• long lines and huge occupancies allowed at big box retailers while small occupancies allowed at the few mom and pop retailers that are actually allowed to open. Seems rather contradictory when the public message is to avoid large gatherings - especially between large groups of strangers...
• World Economic Forum (WEF) discussions with Klaus Schwab (crazy German guy running this shitshow) include lines like “the Great Reset” and how in the new world - after COVID-19, you will “own nothing, and you’ll be happy.”
• there seems to be a pretty quick path the world is already on that leads to widespread unequivocal adoption of a new Universal Basic Income. I see this happening inside the next 6-9 months. Trajectory as follows - stricter lockdown measures continue to whittle away at middle class self-employed households. The few remaining corporations that have been blessed by the governments to remain open will need to somehow begin to pick up the slack. After all, we can’t have everyone sitting at home while the world’s billionaires have collectively added hundreds of billions of NET dollars to their coffers since the “pandemic” began. So we have a conundrum. Governments everywhere are bankrupting themselves to add emergency spending to cover off increased medical and social expenditures. They will need a means to pay for this. The only remaining potential tax incomes the government will be those of huge corporations that were allowed to keep their businesses open. Those that were forced to close were subject to waves of changing the goalposts - indoor - outdoor - outdoor with restrictions...all of these changes cost money to implement. All of these measures for naught. They spent money on measures to keep everyone “safe” and were then told even that wasn’t enough - close your doors. Businesses that can operate (tech, other office) can operate from home. Many of these businesses will begin to see little need for commercial real estate in their portfolio. Leases will expire. Fewer will be renewed. Why pay for an office and its maintenance when no one is filling seats at desks? With far more supply for commercial real estate than demand, we will see building owners lower their lease rates in order to stimulate occupancies. Some people will be paying mortgages on properties that sit vacant. Property owners will foreclose on vacant buildings. No one leasing = no income. Banks will need to make their money elsewhere - the low interest we are seeing on personal property cannot last forever. The banks will need to swallow these commercial losses somewhere to avoid losing stockholder confidence in the banks themselves. Variable rate home mortgages will begin to skyrocket. Many people will be forced to foreclose themselves. No one will open a retail business with ever changing uncertainty in today’s markets. Travel/tourism has been dead since March 2020. This will only continue. Large airline companies and manufacturers will begin to fold. Their staff have been largely on leave since the “pandemic” began - all either living on savings, or social assistance. These major corporations will either go bankrupt or receive stimulus from governments around the world. Lose - lose. Either tens or hundreds of thousands of people lose their jobs in the airline/tourism/travel sectors, or the government pays for it all with OUR tax dollars - putting further strain on economies and GDP everywhere. Automotive sector will see diminishing sales. No one needs to drive as much - no office to work at. No family to visit. Vehicles won’t wear out as quickly. There is nothing new about the automotive sector of our economies receiving MASSIVE global bailouts. It has happened before and is sure to happen again due to decreased demand. Construction has been doing well until now, but I don’t see that lasting forever in the New World. As commercial real estate demand falls, and fewer people have the money to purchase a new home, used will have to do. Those on social assistance will need to continue renting as they will not qualify for any loans for their own property. Governments will see quick, and growing demand for social housing projects everywhere. Another expense to the government. How will we pay for all of this? I’m talking top down in a lot of my points above. But each of these sectors has millions of employees around the world, many of whom are going to be out of work if they aren’t already. The Amazon’s, Google’s and Facebooks of the world seem to be the few businesses that are blessed to operate under the current regime. Governments will be exposed to increased stimulus and spending requirements with exponentially less money coming in by the day. In a global effort to avoid bankrupting every sovereign state, more and more public/private partnerships will emerge. Corporations will benefit as they will be some of the few remaining businesses allowed to operate. Their sales volumes and revenues will only increase. Their tax dollars will go directly to stimulus aid and social assistance programs, and our politicians will become even more beholden to the corporations than we see today. Sounding a lot like China, doesn’t it? Authoritarian leadership that blesses corporations with state sponsored partnerships, all while imposing restrictions on citizens’ individual freedoms, suppressing individuals’ right to the “pursuit of happiness,” restricting individuals’ ability to provide for themselves and their families, all while offering us lies, false hopes and broken promises every time we see the goal posts move. I see us headed somewhere rather dark - a place where you can get the “freedoms the government tells us you can have,” all for the simple price of inoculation! Since all these auto manufacturers will face the choice of bankruptcy or merging with the government, many will merge in an effort to “save jobs.” Our friend Klaus Schwab (WEF) sees a highly advanced technological future. This is obvious, but I see the intersectionality of these topics as a means to force the government’s will on its people. Sure - you can get free access to an electric, self driving, state owned car, any time you want. It will come to pick you up, track you wherever you go, all for the price of inoculation.

I go off on a few tangents above, but the difficulty in what we are facing is that all of this is intrinsically connected. We cannot, like the unelected health officials we must obey en masse, look at one issue and ignore the others. All of these measures, as far as this dumb homebuilder can reason, are designed in such a way as to break every global financial system in their totality. Those that are blessed by the state and allowed to survive will be paying for us all soon enough. This IS state owned and interrupted capitalism. This IS on its way to full global social-authoritarian technocracy. We have already been surveilled* since the dawn of the internet. We are now being told to shelter in place for “everyone’s safety.” We cannot commune with our friends, family, loved ones or strangers to “prevent community transmission.” Where I feel this is all to curb any form of open dialogue, discussion or ability for people to form agreement with one another dissenting the government. Our Facebook’s, Twitter’s and YouTubes are openly censoring that which the state tells them. The MSM is propagating crazy Statistics about a virus that doesn’t kill you unless you have preexisting co-morbidities or are already past the average life expectancy. I find it odd, they’ve openly continued this same censorship now on other more political topics such as, perhaps, the son of the US President Elect... Open censorship to get “their president” elected seems awfully like the “Russian collusion” everyone has been yammering on about for 4 years. Either way, no matter what side you are on politically, it is pretty apparent that there is always a game being played. It is being played on YOU, on ME, on the WHOLE WORLD right now.
We are being lied to about the “pandemic.” That which isn’t a lie, is censored by the media.
We are all headed toward global economic meltdown. Most major sectors have been heavily affected by this mess. Those that haven’t seen the hit yet, soon will.
The government did a bad sales job on the vaccine. They need to scare the herd into conformity with “COVID 2.0” - the “new UK strain”
A friendly reminder, Kary Mullis, inventor of PCR testing and Nobel laureate would not agree with how his test is being used today. Interesting coincidence - this eccentric genius died summer 2019 - a few months before he would have had a loud discussion with Fauci over - wait for it - bad sales pitches. Mullis tears Fauci Apart
I have to really start breaking this out into a thought web with strings on a wall and post it notes like a crazy person. I feel sound in my judgement every day. I will not take any new MRNA vaccine. I can NOT believe what the MSM is telling us. I see with my own eyes that every link in every economic chain is strained, and it only takes one link to break to cause a growing ripple effect. We are seeing the beginning of this. Sit down, buckle up. At least a seat belt might save your life in an accident. We don’t know what the fabric of this vaccine seatbelt they are trying to sell is made of.
TLDR - you are locked down. Sit down, shut up, be open to some new ideas, and read. If we can’t explore new ideas together, than YOU are part of the problem! The herd is being led to slaughter. Every aspect of this global mess is connected through our personal connections and economies. It is intentionally too complex for any ONE person to solve. I do not know if the snowball has yet rolled too far down the mountain, or if there is still time to stop it? The bigger the snowball, the bigger the collateral damage, and the bigger the impending avalanche, but the momentum we are on is only increasing in pace and mass. It’s getting harder to solve by the day if we can’t physically get together to discuss. (Remember - they are watching us all commune online - and arrests in some countries such as Australia over government dissent on Facebook have already become reality). The tap is being opened up more every day. The slow drip that we have been experiencing from our elected officials is going to become a quick torrent pretty soon, ready to swallow us all. The path* we are on is dangerous. Time to discuss. Love you all. Let’s get back to a real normal together!

https://policyexchange.org.uk/pxevents/on-chinas-relationship-with-the-rest-of-the-world/?fbclid=IwAR2W2jM0CQXW-b5AmRCY9uTq6kPiwLrn7Ygy43Nl7_HnBaRkgUqOsUZEB6k
​
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCM8szICMpc&feature=emb_title&ab_channel=PolicyExchangeUK
The Colin Cramphorn Memorial Lecture (I)
The Importance of Being Candid: On China’s Relationship with the Rest of the World
by
Matthew Pottinger
Deputy National Security Advisor to the President of the United States
Matthew Pottinger is Assistant to the President and US Deputy National Security Advisor. Mr. Pottinger served as the Senior Director for Asia since the start of the Trump Administration in January 2017. In that role, Mr. Pottinger advised the President on Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, and Oceania, and coordinated U.S. policy for the region.
Before joining the National Security Council staff, Mr. Pottinger ran Asia research at a New York-based investment firm and, prior to that, was the founder of a consultancy serving American investors in East Asia. Mr. Pottinger served as a U.S. Marine, with active duty in Japan and three combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, followed by reserve duty at the Pentagon and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Prior to military service, Mr. Pottinger lived and worked in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and China from 1997-2005, reporting for Reuters and The Wall Street Journal. He is fluent in Mandarin.
INTRODUCTION
DEAN GODSON: Good afternoon, my name is Dean Godson, I’m Director of Policy Exchange, I have the privilege, pleasure of being your host for this 9th Colin Cramphorn Memorial Lecture. As many of you will know and remember, Colin was the much-loved Chief Constable of West Yorkshire at the time of the 7/7 bombings, the last Deputy Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and first Acting Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland. He was taken from us tragically early by cancer, still remembered with much fondness. We’re delighted that his widow, Lynn, is here with us today online and with other members of the family. I know you will all wish to, on behalf of everyone here, to wish them all the very best and to thank them for continuing to be patrons of this lecture which would have, I know, meant so much to Colin.
As I say, this is the 9th such lecture and our guest of honour today, our keynoter, Matt Pottinger is Deputy National Security Advisor to the President of the United States. He was previously a distinguished journalist with the Wall Street Journal and then joined the US Marine Corps and won combat decorations for his service in Iraq and Afghanistan. He’s one of the leading authorities in the US government on China and that is why uniquely today we are innovating today here at Policy Exchange because as a more than fluent Mandarin speaker, Matt’s address today will be delivered in Mandarin for the sake of audiences across the world and indicating his belief that China is not defined solely by the People’s Republic of China and its representatives, that there is a wider engagement to be had with audiences across the world, Mandarin speaking and others, so good evening to anyone coming in from the Indo Pacific region and China in particular, good morning to all of you in Washington.
Matt, as I say, will make his remarks first in Mandarin and we’ll then open the floor to questions for 35 minutes or so of questions. As I say, we are delighted to be doing this here at Policy Exchange with the importance of this subject of the wider Indo Pacific region and China in particular. We have our own Indo Pacific Commission, chaired by former Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper, which will be publishing in the near future its findings and it work. Also, because of the particular importance of this subject and because of the proximity to the US Presidential election, we are having actually two Cramphorn Memorial Lectures in close succession, one obviously the one today by Matt Pottinger and the other next week by Dr Kurt Campbell of the Asia Group, one of the leading authorities on Asia from the last Democratic administration of Barack Obama, of particular significance because people are increasingly aware in this country that in an era of polarisation in America, the area of the Indo Pacific and China is one subject where discussion and even a measure of consensus is still possible in the United States. So, thank you to Matt Pottinger for honouring us in this way, we look forward to hearing your unique address and insights and then open to wider discussion, thank you Matt.
SPEECH TRANSCRIPTION
I’d like to thank Dean Godson and Policy Exchange for inviting me to deliver the ninth annual Colin Cramphorn lecture. We all look forward to a time when we can gather again in person for events like this. With new vaccines and therapeutics on the near horizon, I’m optimistic that day will soon arrive. In the meantime, let’s pretend we’re at the Red Lion pub and enjoy this convivial, trans-Atlantic video conference between Westminster and the White House. I’m betting on a lively discussion following my set remarks.
As most of you know, England and America are two countries separated by a common language. In order to bridge that divide, I’ve decided to give my remarks in Mandarin.
Truth be told, Dean Godson asked me to bust out my Chinese for the sake of higher ratings. Dean knew that a video of an earlier speech I delivered in Mandarin, about China’s May Fourth movement, was viewed more than one million times. Dean may have also known that a subsequent video I recorded in English for the Ronald Reagan Institute was, by contrast, barely noticed by even my own staff.
Naturally, Dean calculated that a white guy speaking in stilted Mandarin would be a bigger box-office draw than whatever message the white guy might be trying to convey.
So be it. As a character on The Simpsons once put it: “Come for the freak, stay for the food.”
Delivering these remarks in Mandarin has another benefit: It allows friends in China to join a conversation that is taking place with increasing regularity around the globe: A conversation about China’s relationship with the rest of the world.
FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN HISTORY
But first, a smidgen of history to underscore what’s at stake.
Near the end of the 18th century, across the water and many miles from England, a group of visionary men drew up a constitution. The document they framed was designed to limit the powers of government, assert the rights of the people, and chart a path toward what they hoped would be a lasting democracy.
I’m talking, of course, about… Poland.
“Poland?” you ask. Don’t be embarrassed if 1790s Poland didn’t turn up in your high-school textbooks. Unlike the more famous U.S. Constitution, which was adopted just a few years earlier and still serves as the supreme law of the American republic, the Polish experiment with constitutional government was strangled in its infancy.
The problem was foreign interference. A faction of the Polish nobility felt threatened by the influence they would lose under the new constitution. So they sought Russian help in reestablishing the old order. Catherine the Great seized the opportunity to invade and then partition Poland—she took the east and Prussia took the west.
Then, after defeating a revolt led by Tadeusz Kosciuszko, a Polish military hero of the American Revolution, Russia—along with Prussia and Austria—carried out a final partition of Poland-Lithuania in 1795. The young Commonwealth was erased from the map altogether.
I mention Poland’s failed experiment for two reasons: First, it’s a reminder that democracy, while unrivaled in terms of legitimacy and results, is neither invincible nor inevitable. Second, interference in the affairs of free societies by autocratic regimes is a phenomenon that is waxing, not waning.
To stave off meddling, it never hurts to have favorable geography—a luxury Poland didn’t enjoy. Poland’s 18th Century neighbors were powerful European monarchies. America’s neighbors, by contrast, were the two best friends a fledgling democracy could ever ask for—the Atlantic and the Pacific.
FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN THE CYBER AGE
But in the cyber age, autocratic governments can concoct disinformation, inject it into the public discourse of nations, and amplify it through self-improving algorithms from the other side of the earth. Are the blessings of oceans and channels sufficient barriers against this sort of meddling?
Not if the citizens of free and sovereign nations yield to complacency. Nations, including democracies, are undergoing the first stage of a real-life “stress test” of their ability to withstand covert, coercive, and corrupt influence by high-tech autocracies.
This may seem odd, because the autocracies are so vastly outnumbered. But they compensate by marshalling the full resources of their states, by learning from one another’s successes and failures, and sometimes by coordinating with one another.
Economic strength isn’t a prerequisite for waging cyber warfare. Thus, we see hackers tasked by Moscow and Tehran attempting to undermine confidence in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. But no regime has more riding on its ability to influence the perceptions, policies and priorities of foreign populations than the Chinese Communist Party.
THE PARTY’S “MAGIC WEAPON”
In truth, we should’ve expected this. The Communist Party’s victory in the Chinese civil war owed less to its combat prowess against superior Nationalist forces than to its ability to infiltrate and manipulate the language, thinking, and actions of its adversaries. This is why the current Party leadership is redoubling its emphasis on “United Front” work.
The defining feature of United Front work is that it’s not transparent. The clue is in the name.
China’s United Front Work system is a gigantic government function with no analogue in democracies. China’s leaders call it a “magic weapon,” and the Party’s 90 million members are required to support its activities. While the system has many branches, the United Front Work Department alone has four times as many cadres as the U.S. State Department has foreign-service officers. But instead of practicing diplomacy with foreign governments—the Chinese foreign ministry handles that—the United Front gathers intelligence about, and works to influence, private citizens overseas. The focus is on foreign elites and the organizations they run. Think of a United Front worker as a cross between an intelligence collector, a propagandist, and a psychologist.
I know that sounds like the opening line to a joke. But United Front work is serious business, and it affects you and me. After all, the raw material for psychologists is data about their patients. The Party is compiling digital dossiers on millions of foreign citizens around the world. The exposure last month of a Chinese database on at least 2.4 million people around the world—including many of us on this call—speaks to the Party’s sheer ambition to wed traditional Leninist techniques with powerful new tools of digital surveillance.
The company building these dossiers, Shenzhen Zhenhua Data Information Technology Co, supports what its CEO reportedly calls “psychological warfare.” Zhenhua harvests and organizes public and private data about us for exploitation by its clients, which are organs of the Chinese security apparatus, according to its website.
The dossiers Zhenhua is compiling include people in virtually every country on earth, no matter how small. They include members of royal families and members of parliament, judges and clerks, tech mavens and budding entrepreneurs, four-star admirals and the crewmembers of warships, professors and think-tankers, and national and local officials. They also include children, who are fair game under Beijing’s rules of political warfare. No one is too prominent or too obscure.
Zhenhua isn’t a particularly large or sophisticated actor in the United Front world. It may even be acting opportunistically, because it thinks the Party will reward it. Far more powerful tech firms, including famous Chinese app developers, play a much bigger role in this kind of work.
Assembling dossiers has always been a feature of Leninist regimes. The material is used now, as before, to influence and intimidate, reward and blackmail, flatter and humiliate, divide and conquer. What’s new is how easy we’ve made it for autocrats to accumulate so much intimate data about ourselves—even people who’ve never set foot in China. We leave our intellectual property, our official documents, and our private lives on the table like open books. The smart phones we use all day to chat, search, buy, view, bank, navigate, network, worship and confide make our thoughts and actions as plain to cyber spooks as the plumes of exhaust from a vintage double-decker bus.
The Chinese Communist Party has reorganized its national strategy around harnessing that digital exhaust to expand the Party’s power and reach.
THE PARTY’S GOALS
But what’s the ultimate point of all the data collection and exploitation? What is Beijing trying to influence us to do? The Party’s goal, in short, is to co-opt or bully people—and even nations—into a particular frame of mind that’s conducive to Beijing’s grand ambitions. It’s a paradoxical mindset—a state of cognitive dissonance that is at once credulous and fearful, complacent and defeatist. It’s a mindset that on Monday says “It’s too early to say whether Beijing poses a threat,” and by Friday says “They’re a threat, all right, but it’s too late to do anything about it now.” To be coaxed into such a mindset is to be seduced into submission—like taking the “blue pill” in The Matrix.
How does Beijing do it? This is where United Front propaganda and psychology come into play. The Party’s overseas propaganda has two consistent themes: “We own the future, so make your adjustments now.” And: “We’re just like you, so try not to worry.” Together, these assertions form the elaborate con at the heart of all Leninist movements.
The Kiwi scholar Anne-Marie Brady, a pioneer in sussing out United Front ploys, points to the Party’s global campaigns—“One Belt, One Road” and the “Community of Common Destiny for Mankind”—as classic specimens of the genre.
Brady calls United Front work a “tool to corrode and corrupt our political system, to weaken and divide us against each other, to erode the critical voice of our media, and turn our elites into clients of the Chinese Communist Party, their mouths stuffed with cash.”
The con doesn’t always work, of course. Facts sometimes get in the way. The profound waste and corruption of many One Belt, One Road projects is an example. When the con doesn’t induce acquiescence, the Party often resorts to intimidation and repression.
Take Hong Kong, where demonstrators took to the streets by the millions last year to protest Beijing’s efforts to undermine Hong Kong’s rule of law. If “socialism with Chinese characteristics” was the future, the demonstrators seemed to prefer staying firmly in the present.
So Beijing resorted to Plan B. It demolished Deng Xiaoping’s “One Country, Two Systems” framework and deprived Hong Kong of the autonomy that made it the most spectacular city in Asia.
HOW WE DEFEND OURSELVES
None of this is reason for panic, mind you. It’s true the West is going through one of its periodic spells of self-doubt, when extreme political creeds surface on the left and the right, and some ideas are so foolish that, to paraphrase George Orwell, only an intellectual could believe them. So let’s pull up our socks and get back to common sense.
On the foreign policy front, President Trump has ingrained two principles worth sharing here, because they’re designed to preserve our sovereignty, promote stability, and reduce miscalculation. They are reciprocity and candor.
Reciprocity is the straightforward idea that when a country injures your interests, you return the favor. It is eminently reasonable and readily understood, including by would-be aggressors. It’s an inherently defensive approach, rooted in notions of fair play and deterrence.
Candor is the idea that democracies are safest when we speak honestly and publicly about and to our friends, our adversaries, and ourselves. This can take some getting used to. When President Reagan was preparing to give a speech in Berlin, several of his staff tried desperately to get him to remove a phrase they found embarrassing and needlessly provocative. Luckily, President Reagan went with his gut, and delivered the most famous line of his presidency: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”
Some will argue that confrontational rhetoric turns countries into enemies. This old chestnut of the U.S. diplomatic corps masquerades as humble policy, but is in fact quite arrogant because it presumes nations act primarily in reaction to whatever the United States says or does.
Clever adversaries use such thinking against us. By portraying truth-telling as an act of belligerence, autocrats try to badger democracies into silence—and often succeed. “This is the first and most important defeat free nations can ever suffer,” President Reagan said at Guildhall. “When free peoples cease telling the truth about and to their adversaries, they cease telling the truth to themselves.” Public candor actually promotes peace by reducing the space for strategic blunders.
Public candor applies to our internal affairs, too. There can be no double standard.
When Louis Armstrong performed in the Soviet Union as a cultural ambassador of the State Department, he spoke frankly about racial bigotry in the United States. When Reagan famously referred to the Soviet Union as an “Evil Empire,” he explored America’s own “legacy of evil”—including anti-Semitism and slavery—in the very same speech.
XINJIANG
So it is in a spirit of friendship, reflection, and, yes, candor, that I ask friends in China to research the truth about your government’s policies toward the Uyghur people and other religious minorities. Ask yourselves why the editors of The Economist, in a cover article this week, called those policies “a crime against humanity” and “the most extensive violation in the world today of the principle that individuals have a right to liberty and dignity simply because they are people.”
As a Marine who spent three combat deployments fighting terrorists, I can tell you that what is taking place in Xinjiang bears no resemblance whatsoever to an ethical counter-terrorism strategy. Such abuses are what the Chinese diplomat P.C. Chang was trying to prevent when he helped draft the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is no credible justification I can find in Chinese philosophy, religion, or moral law for the concentration camps inside your borders.
WHAT EVIL FEARS MOST
Colin Cramphorn, for whom this lecture is named, was Chief Constable of West Yorkshire before his death from cancer in 2006. Colin worked the most notorious terrorism cases in British history, from the Omagh car-bombing to the London suicide attacks of 2005. When your day job is to confront evil, it’s hard to avoid dwelling at night on big questions about the human heart. Colin, a voracious and varied reader, sometimes consulted the writings of C.S. Lewis.
I’m told he found particular solace in The Screwtape Letters—Lewis’s brilliantly imagined monologue of a demon toiling in Satan’s bureaucracy. (John Cleese recorded a pitch-perfect rendition of the book a few decades ago, by the way. It’s on YouTube. I’m told Andy Serkis has recorded a version that gives Cleese a run for his money.)
“The safest road to Hell,” old Screwtape advises his nephew, “is the gradual one—the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.”
I suspect Colin drew hope and courage from the knowledge that evil, properly identified and exposed, is frail—even farcical. And that calling it out in public—giving it “signposts”—inoculates us against temptation and liberates us from fear. As my friend Tony Dolan told me: “The great paradox of institutionalized evil is that it can be enormously powerful but also enormously fragile. Thus, it is compulsively aggressive and ultimately self-destructive. It senses its own moral absurdity. It knows it is a raft on a sea of ontological good.”
“What evil fears most is the publicly spoken truth.”
So speak up, everyone. And raise a glass tonight to the good constable Colin Cramphorn and to like-minded public servants the world over. They have our love and our thanks.
QUESTION AND ANSWER
DEAN GODSON: Matt, thank you for a truly brilliant and memorable address. You have now very kindly agreed to answer questions. Just two items of protocol here, please put your virtual hands up and please also look into the camera when you’re speaking because of the exigencies of the virtual event. The final house rule that all of you will be aware of, no question too outrageous, you just have to state your name and organisation before pronouncing. David Brunston, if you can just restate for the record your name and organisation, you wanted to ask a question. David, we can’t hear you. A number of people have been texting in to me, some of them wanted to be asked anonymously, Matt, so if I can use Chairman’s privilege to ask on their behalf. A little more detail, is the strategy, the CCP strategy of wolf diplomacy, is it too far gone now? Could you say more in a bit more detail, they ask, what in your view, the US administration’s perspective, the counter measures should be?
MATT POTTINGER: Dean, thanks so much. You know, I think in a way the wolf warrior diplomacy is an expression of a moment of a kind of desperate opportunism. In a sense, I think as many countries have caught on to the scope of Beijing’s ambitions and have started to push back where they think or the community of nations think they go too far or are damaging to countries sovereignty or interests. I think the process of pushing back has led to a bit of a dropping of the fig leaf, if you will, and this more combative approach to diplomacy, it’s a more coercive approach to diplomacy so I think that what all countries need to do – and this is for the sake of stability by the way, this is in the interest of re-establishing a kind of equilibrium and more constructive, results-oriented relationship between China and the community of nations. I think the two ideas that I talked about in the speech and that are central to President Trump’s approach, the reciprocity but also the candour, will help go quite some way in restoring that balance.
DEAN GODSON: Brilliant, thank you and I’ve been asked to ask the question on behalf of David Brunston of Reuters and the question he wants to ask is how would you expect US policy under a second Trump administration to evolve and how it would differ from a policy that the Biden administration might pursue?
MATT POTTINGER: Yes, so people advising Vice President Biden talk about what he thinks a good policy would be but in terms of President Trump’s approach, I think first you have to take stock of the fact that there is a new consensus and the forging of that new consensus about China is something that has happened under President Trump’s watch, it is in no small part because of the policies that he’s taken and the result has been that it has actually, as you alluded to in the introductory remarks, Dean, it’s a bipartisan, it’s a whole of society consensus and as you read polls popping up all over the world, you see that it’s not just an American consensus anymore either. We’ve led that consensus, that’s been President Trump’s hallmark, probably the most key legacy and shift in American foreign policy in quite some time but there are a lot of other countries that are now starting to, at a minimum, share a very similar consensus on the diagnosis of what the problem is and increasingly, a lot of countries, our European allies, allies across the Indo Pacific region and beyond, who are exploring and in some cases taking similar steps to those that President Trump has advocated for.
DEAN GODSON: Thank you. The next question is from the Right Honourable Lord Mandelson, former Deputy Prime Minister and European Commissioner. Peter, your question if you can come in.
PETER MANDELSON: Dean, thank you very much indeed and I hope you can hear me.
DEAN GODSON: Loud and clear.
RT HON LORD MANDELSON: I have been rather impressed by Matt Pottinger’s lecture and I find myself actually a supporter of both reciprocity and candour and as somebody who, when I was Trade Commissioner, was equally accused of using confrontational rhetoric towards China when I described them as a trade juggernaut out of control, I can see its usefulness. Can I ask though this question to Mr Pottinger? For China in a sense to lose, the West has to win and the West has not been winning during the last four years. With humility and self-criticism, could Mr Pottinger explain to us why he thinks the West has not been strengthened in its coherence and its unity during the last four years and why we have been less able to act in a joined-up way towards China and other international questions than we have during other periods since the Second World War?
DEAN GODSON: Thank you. Matt.
MATT POTTINGER: Thank you, that’s a great question and a great thoughtful prelude to the question as well, thank you. Look, President Trump came in following what I believe and certainly the people who elected him believed was a lengthy period of failure in American foreign policy and really more of a failure of broader foreign policy in the West. We got in lengthy wars under sort of a I think a misimpression that we would be able to inject democracy into far corners of the earth by the barrel of a gun, those have been enormously costly. Those are things that really have done damage, I think, to the West.
China’s entry into the WTO and all of the policies, really the assumptions that led to that and I shared those assumptions 20 years ago so I don’t blame or cast aspersions for what was actually very optimistic bold policy taken by the United States and the West to try to help China become more liberal, first economically and then we hoped politically as well but I think we’ve now taken stock of the fact that some of those assumptions were generous but misplaced. In fact, really the high watermark of China’s opening and liberalisation was December 11th 2001, which I think was the date China entered the WTO. After that, all of those reforms that we so eagerly anticipated by bringing China into the WTO, actually flatlined, things started to plateau for about a decade and over the course of the decade that we’ve just concluded, we saw those reforms go into reverse.
We’ve seen a far greater concentration of power in the hands of the state over the economy, over people’s lives and what we’ve learned is that optimistic period, the reform and opening period if you like, was unfortunately an interregnum, it was an interregnum between the totalitarianism of Mao’s rule and a new technologically enhanced totalitarianism under the current leadership and I’ve heard some refer to it as an attempt at so-called exquisite totalitarianism. I think that that’s a good encapsulation of what has now being attempted, this experiment that Beijing is running to see whether or not it can improve on the failed approach of all the other Leninist states of the 20th century by compensating for the failures of those systems through advanced technology and totalitarian surveillance. So, in short, I think this period that you’re referring to that you characterise as a sort of insufficient pulling together of the West, you’ve got to have a little bit of historical perspective that we’re going through a massive change from the post-Cold War era of the last few decades to a new one that takes stock of some of the failures of the last 30 years. Thanks.
DEAN GODSON: Brilliant, thank you. Next, Deborah Haynes, Foreign Editor, Sky News. Deborah, are you coming in?
DEBORAH HAYNES: Hopefully. Hi, thank you very much, thank you for letting me ask a question and thank you for that fascinating presentation. In terms of how you were describing how the United Front is implementing China’s policies, is what we’re seeing now, given that China is this rising power, a kind of a global battle over ideologies? I mean there’s no rule book that says that China has to adopt the rules based system and carry on using it if it’s the predominant power and if that’s the case, could you just spell out what the danger is if liberal democracies, who are far more fractured now than they have been, if they don’t stand together and stand up for the ideologies of free speech and human rights and all the things that we believe in, that we will see this big global division between those who side with China technologically and ideologically, and those who side with the West, much more than we’ve ever seen before?
MATT POTTINGER: That’s also a great question. So, American foreign policy has had this element, this tradition of realpolitik which, you know, there are nations that calculate on the basis of their own cold self-interest and also running in our veins is this tradition of our own revolutionary liberal democratic world view. They run in our veins like iced water and hot water and hopefully they remain in good enough balance that your blood stays at a good temperature. But you’ve hit on something, the truth is that you cannot ignore the ideological dimensions and ideology is just a fancy word for world view, right. We do have a markedly different world view from the Chinese Communist Party, a different approach to the world, different ideas about quite a lot and that’s not true of China as a whole. The Chinese Communist Party is firmly in command of China, obviously, but China is a lot of things. It is a pretty remarkable civilisation that I have devoted a huge part of my adult life to living in and studying and enjoying and I still do; the history, the culture and the unbelievable drive and energy and entrepreneurialism of the Chinese people. But that ideological dimension is unavoidable and if we try to ignore it, if we try to pretend that it’s only a matter of cold self-interest on both sides, that it’s a Thucydides trap as some like to frame it, I think we’d actually put ourselves on a path towards a more destabilised future than if we were to talk quite frankly to ourselves, our allies and yes, to our adversaries about those differences so that we can avoid miscalculation.
DEAN GODSON: Thank you, Matt. Next question from Alexander Downer, our Chairman of Trustees here at Policy Exchange and, of course, the longest serving Australian Foreign Minister in the country’s history and High Commissioner in London. Alexander.
HON ALEXANDER DOWNER AC: Thanks Dean, I hope you can hear me. I think, speaking as an Australian, it has to be said that we Australians had a fairly solid although not tension-free relationship with China for many years under Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao and Australians have been really taken aback by the aggression in recent years of the Xi Jinping administration so my question is a little bit like Peter Mandelson’s, if there’s a second Trump administration what specific steps will the United States be taking to help countries like Australia which have been targeted by China, particularly Australian trade has been targeted by China, to help build a sense of collective security amongst liberal democracies in the Indo-Pacific region.
MATT POTTINGER: Yes, that’s a great remark that you made and Australia has been in some sense the canary in the coal mine. Australia – by the way, when people claim that provocative and frank, candid language is what causes China to act out in this sort of wolf warrior way, I always point to Australia as well as India as the counter examples there because India and Australia are two countries that had, really went out of their way to extend warmth to China in their people to people and commercial ties. These were countries that did seek to integrate their economies certainly, especially in the case of Australia and yet, when the Australian government just earlier this year had the temerity to ask the World Health Organisation whether there could be a general investigation into the origins of the coronavirus, China retaliated for that wholly reasonable request that Australia made. By the way, the World Health Organisation members voted in the largest majority in the organisation’s history in favour of the motion that Australia raised to investigate the origins, how is it that millions of us now have been infected with this disease? China retaliated by putting tariffs on Australian barley, cancelling beef exports and describing … their arch-propagandist said that Australia is chewing gum stuck to the bottom of China’s shoe and it is time to scrape it off. So, there you have a pretty good counter-argument to the notion that by being extra-friendly to China and hiding some of our candour, that that would lead to a happier bilateral relationship doesn’t stand up.

https://mg.co.za/africa/2020-12-08-a-glimpse-into-the-future-of-government-propaganda/
Ethiopia is the latest government to hijack the business of fact checking, imitating the work of independent media and repurposing it for government propaganda while in the middle of a conflict.
One example: On 20 November, more than two weeks after the conflict in Ethiopia began, the African Union chair announced a three-person special envoy who would travel to Ethiopia to mediate, and thanked Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed for accepting the initiative.
The following morning, government social media accounts and state-owned broadcasters came out swinging, calling the mediation “fake news”. The first account to deny the mediation plans was the newly created government account, the Ethiopia State of Emergency (SOE) Fact Check, which has more than 14 000 followers on Twitter and some 160 000 “likes” and “follows” on Facebook.
The government’s “fact-checking” claims, particularly pertaining to the military operation in Tigray, are troubling because the internet shutdown in the region makes it difficult to independently verify information about the conflict.
“It’s good for them to have something on record but they are also hijacking something that becomes a function of the press to keep them [the government] in check,” said Eric Mugendi, Africa programme manager at Meedan. Mugendi previously worked at Pesa Check, an independent fact-checking site. “What these governments, or bad actors as I like to call them, are trying to do is put the media in a fix; what ends up happening is no one really knows where to look for credible information.”
It is not just the government that’s using social media to claim and spread “facts” about the conflict, directing messages towards international audiences, government critics are too. But they are using two very different strategies.

Quantity versus quality

While the government has sought to position itself as the sole provider of reliable information, as funnelled through their SOEFactCheck account, anti-government groups have adopted the opposite approach. Until recently, anti-government accounts and messages on Twitter were having a wider reach than pro-government accounts.
The anti-government strategy appears to be one of quantity over quality — leaders, particularly in the diaspora, have encouraged followers to create new Twitter accounts, spread hashtags, respond to content and tweet at influential accounts. The result has been a significant increase in the number of single-issue accounts tweeting about Ethiopia, and a high volume of anti-government tweets.
A sample of 90 000 tweets about Tigray and Abiy between 3 and 10 November showed that accounts created in 2020 were responsible for 30% of the discourse. More than a quarter of these tweets were from accounts created in October and November, and were overwhelmingly anti-government. We subsequently analysed more than 38 000 tweets from 13 to 19 November that included the hashtag #NationalDialogueNow, and found that nearly half (46%) of these tweets were from accounts created in July (after Ethiopian activist and singer Hachalu Hundessa was killed), October and November of this year.

Going viral

But the SOEFactCheck account recently saw a significant increase in the reach and spread of one particular tweet. The content of this tweet has the potential to undermine one of the last reliable sources of information about the conflict — the eyewitness accounts of refugees.
The tweet, which was sent out by the SOEFactCheck account on 24 November, reads: “We have received credible intelligence that TPLF [Tigray People’s LIberation Front] operatives have infiltrated refugees fleeing into Sudan to carry out missions of disinformation. We caution media entities & international organisations to thoroughly investigate & verify information they receive.”
It was subsequently retweeted by Abiy, his press secretary, Billene Aster Seyoum, and other prominent government accounts. It was then retweeted by an independent “influencer” account, with more than half a million followers.
Analysis conducted by Alexi Drew, a research associate at the King’s College London’s Policy Institute, found that unlike previous tweets by the SOEFactCheck account, this particular tweet gained significant traction. The reach and spread of it reflects a turning point in the government’s disinformation strategy, and suggests that a “quality over quantity” strategy might be working.
Drew described this tweet as a “lynchpin” message in that it pulls together multiple strands of the narrative the government has been seeding about the conflict, in a way that connects to an existing discourse about the unreliability of information. The effect is a muddied information environment, and a general sense of suspicion of all information coming out of the conflict.
“What they’ve managed to do is lay the groundwork to potentially undermine all accounts coming from refugees fleeing the region, by suggesting that they have ‘evidence’ or ‘credible evidence’ that the TPLF has seeded refugees with disinformation actors,” she said. Though this is in the realm of possibilités, the government has provided no evidence that this taking place.
Hours after this tweet was sent out by SOEFactCheck, it’s immediate reach was about 57 000. The reach of subsequent retweets and other mentions was well over a million and continues to grow. “This is a significant amplification ratio — higher than anything else I’ve seen during this conflict,” said Drew.

A country in conflict

This information war takes place against the backdrop of a real conflict. Fighting in Ethiopia erupted on 4 November after months of escalating tensions between the federal and Tigray regional government. Abiy sent military troops into the region in response to a TPLF attack on a federal military base. The government also issued a six-month state of emergency in the northern region, characterising the military incursion as a “law enforcement” operation, designed to uphold “justice and the rule of law”. Ethiopia rejected all calls for mediation and on 28 November, the Abiy announced “full control” of the Tigray capital, Mekele, and an end to the military offensive, yet fighting is still reported in Tigray by the time of writing.
The conflict in Ethiopia now risks deteriorating into a full-blown civil war that could draw in neighbouring states including Eritrea, whose president has long been at odds with Tigrayan leaders. Ethiopia dismisses such claims.
The overall casualties of the conflict are not clear because of the communications blackout; in one incident, reported by Amnesty International, hundreds of civilians were killed in the town of Maikadra by Tigrians militia. This is not the only case of mass violence in Ethiopia. Incidences have been reported recently in other areas including Benishangul-Gumuz, West Wollega, the Afar and the border between the Oromo and Somali regions.
Fears have also been raised about discrimination against Tigrayans. The Ethiopian Human Rights Commission has called on the government to not overstep their limits, saying that it has noted “complaints of ethnic profiling of [people of] Tigrayan origin”. Redwan Hussein, a government spokesperson, admitted that the conflict has affected the wider Tigryan population. One resident said she is afraid of speaking Tigrinya, the predominant language spoken in Tigray. “It has become a crime. I have never felt such hate my entire life”, said Genet, who agreed to speak under a pseudonym. Reports say that thousands of Tigrayans have been arrested.
Both sides of the conflict use derogatory terms to refer to each other, language that makes negotiation or future rebuilding of trust difficult. These terms include the “greedy junta”, “criminal clique”, “conflict entrepreneurs”, “fugitive”, “traitor”, “the enemy”, “fascist”, “terrorist and dictatorial junta”, “aggressors”, “dictator” and “sadist”.

Hate speech and disinformation

“Hate speech” and fake news have served as justifications for shutting down the internet in Ethiopia before, and were used to justify a controversial law criminalising some social media activity, which was passed in Ethiopia in February. Hate speech and disinformation by the different actors do pose a significant problem to the country, and may play some role in the increasing incidences of ethnonationalist violence in regions beyond Tigray.
Pre-existing fears, which can be deeped by unverifiable rumours and uncertainty, may precipitate violence as it did in Rwanda. Independent checking might have been a protective factor — but the government’s co-opting of this practice, in combination with the communications blackout in Tigray, will only worsen the climate of fear and mistrust.
Ethiopia is not the first government to recognise the political power of fact checking claims. In November last year, the press office for the United Kingdom’s Conservative Party changed its Twitter handle to “factcheckUK” during the debate between its party leader, Boris Johnson, and Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, a move that sparked widespread condemnation. The Conservative Party remained unapologetic and revived the fact checking brand a month later to celebrate Johnson’s victory.
Also in 2019, the Mexican government hijacked the Verificado Notimex, a brand used by independent fact checking organisations designed to “debunk false news on social media as well as to fact-check dubious content published by traditional media outlets”. In the Czech Republic, a prime ministerial candidate created his own fact-checking site in 2017. Other examples abound, from Turkey’s FactCheckingTr Twitter account to India’s government-run fact checking unit.
“These actions are going to be more coordinated and more organised, especially as more and more governments are engaging with PR companies for image management,” Mugendi said. It is difficult to know who runs PR campaigns on the behalf of governments without the work of independent journalism, which has helped to expose the infamous disinformation campaigns run by Cambridge Analytica and Bell Pottinger.
“The reason they do this is because there is a narrative to control and the first thing you do is discredit anyone who has a dissenting opinion or message, [and] that seems like what this Ethiopian initiative is trying to do,” Mugendi said. “If it was truly interested in fact checking it would work with the journalists working in Ethiopia who are working to fact check information. It feels very disingenuous, very hypocritical.”
The conflict has seen its fair share of crackdown on journalism, including the international media. Several local journalists have been arrested and international journalists summoned and reprimanded. The Foreign Correspondents Association of East Africa raised its concerns in a statement issued on 30 November: “The FCAEA is also alarmed by criticism of international and Ethiopian media organisations, just for doing their jobs, on social media by Ethiopian authorities.”
This is not to say the international media has not made factual mistakes while reporting; for example, the BBC had to delete and apologise for a tweet that misquoted Abiy. These kinds of mistakes, which SOEFactCheck has accurately called out on Twitter, has issued a blanket dismissal of the international media and analysts, helping the government position themselves as the sole provider of reliable information. This is also a reminder for independent fact checkers to keep the media accountable.

Should Twitter step in?

While it is clear that governments cannot independently fact check themselves, what’s less clear is who ought to be responsible for fact checking, particularly on social media and in complex conflict situations.
Twitter has recently taken on a more active role in terms of evaluating the credibility of information shared on its platform. Its updated policy on misleading information states that warning and context labels will be applied to tweets in three broad categories: misleading information, which include statements that have been confirmed false; disputed claims, where the truthfulness or accuracy of a claim is contested or unknown; and unverified claims, which include information that could be true or false, but which is unconfirmed at the time of sharing.
At the very least, SOEFactCheck’s tweet undermining the credibility of refugees fits the definition of an “unverified claim”, if not a “disputed” or outright “misleading” one.
The government has provided no evidence to support this claim, and no evidence has surfaced from other sources. Twitter has not applied any label to this tweet. On 30 November, Abiy claimed that the Ethiopian refugees going to Sudan are mostly young men, and asked where the women and children were, insisting investigations needed to be done. This claim was made despite the fact that the United Nations Human Rights Council data of registered 44 682 refugees shows 45% were children and 43% were women, as of 30 November.
Similarly, when the army accused the World Health Organisation director general of supporting the TPLF, the SOEFactCheck account did not step up to provide evidence.
When we asked Twitter if they were monitoring and evaluating claims being made about Ethiopia’s conflict, a spokesperson said only that “our goal is to give people the context and tools necessary to find credible information on our service — no matter the topic or where they are seeing the tweet”. She added that Twitter’s policies are “uniform across the globe” and that they are “prioritising the removal of content where it has a clear call to action that could potentially cause real-world harm”.
While the absence of information labels confirms Twitter’s focus on disinformation in the West, it is not necessarily the case that these labels would be a good source of fact checking in the Ethiopian context. During this year’s United States presidential election, Twitter began to attach labels to some of President Donald Trump’s unfounded claims of electoral fraud. Twitter has since said its efforts slowed the spread of false information. But researchers are divided as to whether this kind of fact checking is helping to build a more reliable information environment, one where fact claims are subject to evidence-based debate and independent scrutiny.

Undermining the power of fact-checking

Independent fact checking is a crucial (if imperfect) tool in the fight against disinformation and political manipulation. But its power is being eroded by governments bent on repurposing the practice as propaganda.
While some governments and political groups continue to rely on the spreading of mass disinformation on social media (often in the form of automated “bots”), evidence from Ethiopia suggests a new, and deeply troubling strategy. Abiy’s government appears to be trying to dramatically limit the number of actors able to claim access to the truth, as well as limiting potential sources of truthful information, with the intention of spreading their messages to as large an audience as possible while maintaining control of the narrative.
“This will be the future of government propaganda, because at some level the government is trying to play a seed of doubt in any information that they don’t like”, Mugendi said. “It’s becoming less viable to shut down the internet. This is the next best thing”.

Below is a rundown of the letter ‘S’ under Epstein's contacts. Last year, I wrote about letters A-C. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/cpis3n/a_brief_rundown_of_the_first_ten_pages_of_jeffrey/).
I also wrote about letters D-F on July 5, 2020. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/hlrba8/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_letters_df_in_jeffrey/).
I posted letters G-I on July 13, 2020. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/hqko0y/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_letters_gi_in_jeffrey/).
I posted letters J-L on July 15, 2020. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/hrq9bg/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_letters_jl_of_jeffrey/).
I posted letter M on July 20, 2020. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/huw0yt/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_the_letter_m_in_jeffrey/).
I posted letters N-Q on July 27, 2020. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/hyudbz/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_the_letters_nq_in_jeffrey/). There are some misspelled names. Epstein entered their names like this.
I posted letter R on July 29, 2020. You can check that out here (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/i0aqxd/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_the_letter_r_in_jeffrey/)
I have bolded some of the more interesting connections and information, but there could be much more that I overlooked. I hope something here strikes an interest in someone and maybe we can get more investigations out of this. Please, if you know anything more about any of these people than what is presented here, post below. I am working off of the unredacted black book found here: https://www.coreysdigs.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Jeffrey-Epsteins-Little-Black-Book-unredacted.pdf
S
Sacco, Amy: Nightclub mastermind behind Bungalow 8 and many other clubs. Listing her list of connections would take too long because her clubs are always hot spots for celebrities and the elite. The NY Times wrote a decent article (https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/fashion/the-empress-is-in-amy-sacco-holds-court-at-another-new-york-nightspot.html) about Sacco’s clubs and clientele. Sacco has been photographed with Ghislaine, India Hicks, and Sophie Dahl, all of whom appear in Epstein’s black book (https://www.patrickmcmullan.com/photo/1563479).
Sachs, Jeffrey: Naming all of his titles would be an endeavor in itself. Sachs is a very influential figure who is best known for being an economist, an adviser to the United Nations, and a University Professor at Columbia University. Sachs serves on the Council on Foreign Relations, where Epstein served from 1995-2009. It is unclear whether he was there at the same time as Epstein, although given his popularity and influence, especially in the early 2000s, I would be surprised if he wasn’t around then.
Saffra, Edmund: Billionaire banker and alleged money launderer with tons of enemies who died under very mysterious circumstances in 1999. The official story was that one of his nurses - in an attempt to gain favor with Safra by saving him from danger - intentionally started a small fire in Safra’s home, which soon spiraled out of control, causing Safra to lock himself in the bathroom and suffocate to death. This article (https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2000/12/dunne200012) does a good job of pointing out that Safra had many enemies, was a shady character, and was absolutely obsessed with security for himself and his family. It seems odd that Safra would allow his security detail (Mossad vets) to leave his home that night. This article (https://www.theguardian.com/theobserve2000/oct/29/features.magazine47) from The Guardian includes a statement from Ted Maher’s (the nurse who was convicted of starting the fire) wife, stating that he was coerced into signing a confession. Elie Wiesel, the author of Night who is also listed in Epstein’s contacts, was a good friend of Safra’s.
Safro, Wayne: Financial advisor.
Said, Wafic: Financier and businessman. Said is the Chairman of a children’s charity called the Said Foundation, where Prince Charles’s former private secretary, Sir Michael Peat GVCO, serves on the board of trustees (https://www.saidfoundation.org/pages/33-trustees-and-staff). The charity helps underprivileged children from the Middle East. Said has also contributed a lot of money to Prince Charles’s The Prince of Wales’s Charitable Fund, which, among other things, is dedicated to helping children.
Sainsbury, Mr Jamie: Descendant of the founder of the Sainsbury grocery chain. Old friend of Ghislaine Maxwell (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8466853/What-girls-frolicked-Bullingdon-boys-Oxfords-brightest-young-women-rose-top.html). James’s sister, Camilla, was married to British MP, Shaun Woodward, for 28 years. Camilla and Shaun are Trustees of The Woodward Charitable Trust, which helps disadvantaged children, women, and families (http://woodwardcharitabletrust.org.uk/portfolio/about_us/).
Salama, Eric: Former CEO of Kantar consulting firm. Also served as a Trustee for the British Museum (2000-2008). Survived a carjacking after getting stabbed last year (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6618395/Government-adviser-stabbed-carjacking-reveals-fine-punctured-lung.html).
Saltzman, Elizabeth: Contributing editor to Vanity Fair and Vogue, two of the three publications (along with Tatler) that continuously show up among Epstein’s contacts. Saltzman is also a celebrity fashion stylist with clients such as Gwyneth Paltrow, Saoirse Ronan, Stella McCartney, and Uma Thurman, the ex-wife of Arpad Busson, who is possibly one of the key players in this pedophile ring (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/cl34ju/arpad_busson_billionaire_businessman_or_possible/). Andre Balazs, the hotelier who also seems to be embroiled in this whole fiasco held a party in 1995. Those in attendance included Ghislaine Maxwell, Katie Ford, and Elizabeth Saltzman (https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/gossip/taming-liz-fortensky-rumors-article-1.686445), all of whom appear in Epstein’s black book. In fact, Saltzman is a long-time friend of Ghislaine (https://www.mintpressnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Mysterious-business-of-the-queen-of-NY-Lon-1.pdf). This article also reveals that Ghislaine was introduced to Prince Andrew by the Duchess of York (Sarah Ferguson), and, even more telling, that Epstein was suspected of having Mossad ties when the article was written in 2000. In addition to all this, Saltzman is the ex-wife of hedge fund billionaire Glenn Dubin (https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/14/style/miss-saltzman-editor-is-wed-to-glenn-dubin.html), one of the most heavily implicated people in Epstein’s pedophilia and child trafficking ring. I implore you to read more about Dubin (and his wife) in my D-F black book thread (https://www.reddit.com/conspiracy/comments/hlrba8/a_notsobrief_rundown_of_letters_df_in_jeffrey/). Saltzman can also be seen here, sitting next to Prince Andrew in 2010 (https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/world/4780114-Britains-Prince-Andrew-is-stepping-back-from-public-duties-after-Epstein-controversy). The lists of celebrities and well-known figures that Saltzman has been photographed with is unending.
Samuels, Mia: Actually Maia Samuel, former Producer of ABC Primetime (1989-1994). Went on to work for NBC, Bloomberg, and CNBC in various producer roles over the years. Now works as Director, Content Studios for Reuters (https://www.linkedin.com/in/maia-samuel-92172a10). Epstein has quite a few television ties, most notably to ABC news programs.
Sandelman, Jon & Corrie: Jonathan is a hedge fund manager and former Managing Director of Bank of America Securities. Corrie is his wife.
Sangster, Guy & Fi: Son of racing tycoon Robert Sangster, Guy is Managing Director at Sangster Group, which is involved in the Horse Racing industry. He also works as an investment adviser with Hambro Perks, a venture capitalist company. Prince Andrew is a close friend of Guy and his wife, Fiona. Prince Andrew even attended Sangster’s 40th birthday party (https://www.the-sun.com/news/136709/prince-andrews-pals-claims-witness-who-saw-him-with-sex-slave-is-confused-as-he-was-in-club-3-days-late).
Sangster, Mr Ben: Guy Sangster’s brother and fellow racing heir. Long-time acquaintance/friend(?) of the Royal Family. According to this article, the Sangsters are “one of the most high profile society families in London and often hang out with the royals (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5008073/Robert-Sangster-s-son-marries-Princess-Eugenie-s-friend.html).
Santo Domingo, Julio Mario: Unsure if this is the father or the son. Either way, this is a billionaire Colombian businessman whose company has controlling stock in Bavaria Brewery and is the 2nd highest stockholder of Anheuser Busch (15%). The senior Julio Mario Santo Domingo died in 2011. His son died from cancer in 2009.
Santo, Mr & Mrs M Espirito: Likely the former owners (or high-ranking family) of the Espirito Santo banking dynasty., which was forced to shutter due to charges of fraud, money laundering, and falsifying documents (https://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/30/how-a-portuguese-banking-mess-took-down-a-dynasty.html). Banco Espirito Santo was Portugal’s second-largest bank.
Saud Prince Solman: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was a close friend of Epstein’s and met with him many times. Epstein even had a photograph of bin Salman hanging on his wall. The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia has been linked to the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident who was lured to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and subsequently killed. The Crown Prince, said to have ordered the murder, and those who were physically involved with the murder, ultimately went unpunished. According to this article (https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/jeffrey-epstein-what-we-know-about-paedophile-businessmans-ties-middle-east), the numbers listed likely belong to the Crown Prince’s father, King Salman bin Abdulaziz, Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia. Epstein’s Austrian passport had a fake name and Saudi address. This passport was to have been given to him by “a friend.” In November 2016, one day before the election, Epstein flew to Riyadh. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Amazon owner Jeff Bezos were in Riyadh at the same time, leading some to believe that the three may have met up (https://www.insider.com/epstein-riyadh-saudi-arabia-private-jet-2019-9).
Scerbo, Randall: A female (despite the name) fashion stylist and costume designer who eventually went into consulting. Randall also has credits as a producer and content creator for the Miss USA and Miss Universe beauty pageants.
Schiatti, Gianmarco: Creative director who helped several fashion companies (Gucci, Chanel, Coach, Ralph Lauren, Prada, etc.) with rebranding.
Schifter, Helen & Tim: Helen is a former arbitrage trader on Wall Street, as well as a socialite and a former editor at Hearst and Conde Nast (publisher of Tatler and Vogue), making this the 9000th Epstein-Conde Nast connection. Helen’s father is a businessman and has served as a consultant for the Du Pont Company. She runs in the same circles as Ghislaine Maxwell and has been at several of the same parties (https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/helen-lee-schifter-ghislaine-maxwell-teddy-wong-and-news-photo/1169681659). Tim is CEO of LeSportsac, the luggage and tote bag manufacturer. Tim can be seen attending a Private Screening with Ghislaine Maxwell here (https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/tim-schifter-and-ghislaine-maxwell-attend-private-screening-news-photo/590659962).
Sebag Montefiore Simon & Santa: Simon Montefiore is a British historian, television presenter, and author of history books and novels. Ghislaine attended the launch of Montefiore’s book, “The Court of the Red Tsar” (https://deepclips.com/clip/3225/exclusive-i-fear-i-saw-virginia-roberts-inside-jeffrey-epstein-s-creepy-new-mexico-ranch-contractor-claims). Santa is his wife and sister of Tara Palmer-Tomkinson, who died of an ulcer in 2017. The Palmer-Tomkinson family is so close with the Royal Family that Prince Charles was named Tara’s godfather. As such, Simon and Santa are good friends of Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/4721868/The-lit-girl.html). Simon’s great-great-uncle was an international financier who worked for the Rothschilds in the 1800s. Siimon and his family are still close to the Rothschilds to this day (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/01/montefiore200801).
Seitern, Christine: Architect.
Sejournet, Isabel de: Belgian arts consultant and wife of French Count Eric d’Hauteville. Isabelle was photographed at an annual charity dinner hosted by The AEM Association Children of the World for Rwanda (https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/isabelle-de-sejournet-and-caroline-sarkozy-attend-the-news-photo/157832558).
Shabtai, Benny: Israeli businessman who specializes in watches and telecommunications. Served as Chair for Friends of the Israel Defense Forces (FIDF) and has helped raise millions for the charity (https://electronicintifada.net/content/manhattans-friends-israel-defense-forces/5526). Epstein toured Israeli military bases with Shabtai in 2008 after being convicted of procuring an underage girl for prostitution (https://pagesix.com/2008/04/24/just-visiting/). Shabtai also served three years in the Israeli army and is a former bodyguard for the Israeli ambassador in Paris, France.
Shad, Brenda: Lingerie model who has known Epstein since the ‘90s (https://www.reddit.com/EpsteinAndFriends/comments/hbiwye/epstein_with_lingerie_model_brenda_schad_in_1997/). Almost married Robert Hanson (listed in my Epstein G-H thread) in 1996, the billionaire financier who was accused of raping Anouska de Georgiou when she was a teenager. She first met him when he was dating Naomi Campbell. Pictured with Maxwell here in 2005 (https://www.the-sun.com/news/103520/is-jeffrey-epsteins-unholy-alliance-with-the-victorias-secret-boss-the-real-reason-the-show-was-scrapped/).
Shearer Andre & Angie: Andre is a South African wine importer through his business, Cape Classics. Angie is his wife.
Shore Chris and Maura: Chris is a bankruptcy litigator. Mara is his wife, a licensed lawyer.
Shriver, Bobby: Nephew of JFK, RFK, and Ted Kennedy. His mother, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, founded the Special Olympics. Bobby now serves on the Board of Directors for the Special Olympics (https://www.specialolympics.org/about/board-of-directors/bobby-shriver). Epstein has several phone numbers listed for Shriver’s Special Olympics office in California.
Shriver, Maria: Bobby Shriver’s sister and niece of JFK, RFK, and Ted Kennedy. TV journalist and former ex-wife of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Shuster, Susie: Suzy is a sportscaster who is married to long-time ESPN and NFL Network anchor, Rich Eisen.
Siegal, Peggy: Famous NYC publicist and close friend of Epstein who helped him out by continuously getting him into elite parties even after he was convicted of procuring an underage girl for prostitution in 2008 (https://nymag.com/intelligence2019/07/jeffrey-epstein-high-society-contacts.html). Her career in Hollywood has been obliterated, although many still secretly think she has been a scapegoat (https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-powea29643007/peggy-siegal-jeffrey-epstein-connection/), which once again proves the depravity of Hollywood.
Siegel, William (Bill): President of Chris-Craft Industries (1996-2001), a broadcasting company that owned several television channels across the U.S. Chris-Craft was eventually purchased by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation for $5.3 billion.
Sieghart, William: British entrepreneur and publisher. In 1986, he co-founded Forward Publishing with partner Neil Mendoza, who serves on the board of several children’s charities and is the current Provost of Oriel College. Mendoza appeared earlier in Epstein’s black book. Check out the letter ‘M’ thread for more information.
Silver, Ron: Silver (1946-2009), was a famous actor who also served on the Council on Foreign Relations. Co-founder of pro-Israeli organization, One Jerusalem, which organized a rally in 2001 to protest Palestinian sovereignty. Flipped political affiliations to vote for George W. Bush post-9/11. As a result, Bush appointed him to several posts, including one in which he worked under Scooter Libby, adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney.
Silverman, Nancy & Henry: Henry is an entrepreneur and private equity investor. Henry helped build Cendant Corporation, which specializes in car rentals, travel reservations, and real estate brokerage services. Nancy and Henry divorced in 2012 after 30 years of marriage. They literally lived around the block from Jeffrey Epstein.
Simon, Bren: Bren was the President of MBS Associates, a property management company. She and her husband (now deceased), support many children’s charities. Bren directs the Mel and Bren Simon Charitable Trust, which works closely with the Clinton Foundation (Haiti), the Clinton Global Initiative, and the Clinton School of Public Service (https://brensimon.com/our-work/). Bren is co-founder of The Family Support Center, a 24-hour child abuse care center. She also serves on the board of advisers for the Indiana Children’s Wish Fund. In 1998, Bren began working with the Mission International Rescue Foundation (MIR), which serves the children and young women of La Romana, Dominican Republic. Bren also created the Centro de Promocion Rural Max Simon, an orphanage that provides a safe environment for boys who have been abandoned, abused, or are living in extreme poverty. She also created the Bren Simon MIR Foundation Girls’ Vocational School (https://cancer.iu.edu/giving/simon/bren-bio.php). Bren Simon used to be a member of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Bill Clinton read a eulogy at her husband’s funeral (https://www.ibj.com/articles/67913-simon-sisters-among-top-political-donors-nationwide).
Simpson (Caruth), Sophie: Former literary agent at William Morris Agency. Serves as a Trustee for Rambert School of Ballet and Contemporary Dance.
Sindi, Rena & Sami: Rena is a socialite and daughter of Nemar A. Kirdar, who founded Investcorp bank in the ‘80s with Arab oil money (https://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/27/style/put-on-your-toga-bring-castanets-rena-sindi-is-giving-a-party.html). In 2007, Rena attended a party for Allegra Hicks at Ghislaine Maxwell’s house (https://medium.com/@the_war_economy/investigation-jeffrey-epstein-d2ad68e2e845). Her husband, Sami, is a venture capitalist.
Slayton, Bobby: Actocomedian who admits to seeing Epstein in West Palm Beach a few times over the years. Slayton says that “they weren’t friends,” although he once went to Epstein’s Manhattan mansion for coffee (https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article234312632.html).
Smith Osborne: Not enough info.
Smith Peterson, Noona: Public relations officer and consultant who has worked for Tom Ford, Armani, Valentino, Calvin Klein, Michael Kors, and Tod’s. She now has her own PR agency. In 2015, Forbes named her one of the 12 women who have changed Italian fashion (https://www.forbes.com/sites/declaneytan/2015/02/06/the-12-women-whove-changed-italian-fashion/#553827046f86). Noona is married to Enrico Erba, who is a client manager for Giorgio Armani.
Smith, James: Co-founder and CEO of Aegis Trust, an organization focused at stopping genocide in Rwanda. Aegis “enables students, professionals, decision-makers and a wider public to meet survivors and learn from their experiences” (https://www.aegistrust.org/what-we-do/).
Snyder, Maria: Model, designer, artist, and entrepreneur who has worked for the likes of Armani, Versace, Valentino, Calvin Klein, and Karl Lagerfield. Snyder attended a ‘Free the Slaves’ benefit in 2010 where she was photographed with hotelier Andre Balazs, who is mired in Epstein/Maxwell stink, and Brenda Schad, who appears just above (last name incorrectly spelled ‘Shad’).
Soames, Rupert & Milly: Rupert is a British businessman and CEO of Serco, a government contractor that provides health, transport, justice, immigration, defense, and citizen services. Soames and his company is heavily involved in many aspects of government (he is very close with former British Prime Minister David Cameron), and as such, has a huge impact on the public. For example, Serco has been contracted to work on a Coronavirus track-and-trace system for the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jun/04/nhs-track-and-trace-system-not-expected-to-be-operating-fully-until-september-coronavirus). Soames’s family is very close with the Royal Family (https://www.popsugar.com/celebrity/photo-gallery/44913948/image/44914915/Camilla-Dunne-Honorable-Rupert-Soames-1988). Prince William served as a pageboy at Rupert and Camilla’s wedding in 1988. Soames is the grandson of Winston Churchill and his brother, Nicholas Soames, served as a British MP from 1983-2019. Nicholas has been accused of being sexist and making inappropriate remarks by several female MPs. Nicholas is also a very close friend of Prince Charles (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/profile-charless-biggest-buddy-nicholas-soames-royalist-minister-for-food-1466703.html). Milly (Camilla) is Rupert’s wife and High Sheriff of Buckinghamshire. Milly is a Patron/Trustee for Pace Centre, a children’s charity dedicated to providing education for children with sensory motor disorders (https://thepacecentre.org/about-pace/mission-values-vision/), Heart of Bucks (https://heartofbucks.org/committees-patrons/), an all-purpose charity that divvies up money to many causes, several of which involve children (https://heartofbucks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/hob-annual-report-2018-2019-web.pdf), Action4Youth (https://www.action4youth.org/trustees/), which “partners with government, schools, youth clubs, businesses, trusts and foundations, and others (https://www.action4youth.org/about-action4youth/vision-mission-values/). Camilla is also the daughter of Sir Thomas Raymond Dunne, who served as a Lord Lieutenant of Hereford and Worcester, Worcestershire, and Herefordshire. Her brother, Phillip, has been a British Conservative MP since 2005.
Sobrino, Esperanza: Director of Acquavella art gallery.
Solomon, Andrew: Writer for The New York Times, The New Yorker, and other publications. Member of Council on Foreign Relations where Epstein once served.
Soros Peter: Nephew of George Soros. Works as an investment banker. Soros’s name is circled in Epstein’s black book. It turns out that Epstein’s former house manager circled the names of all material witnesses before he died in 2014 (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/07/jeffrey-epstein-black-book-nick-bryant).
Soros, Peter: Same as above.
Soto, Fernando de: Real estate consultant.
Soto, Jaime & Marina de: No info found.
South, Hamilton: Founder of HL Group, a large marketing firm. Former Chief Marketing Officer for Ralph Lauren. South was a good friend of Carolyn Besette Kennedy (wife of JFK Jr) before she died. He was also a good friend of Lee Radziwill, mother-in-law of Carole Radziwill, listed earlier in Epstein’s book (check out the letter ‘R’ thread), before Lee’s passing.
Souza, Carlos: Works in public relations for Valentino.
Spacey, Kevin: Famous actor who has been accused of sexual assault by actor Anthony Rapp and 14 others (https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2017/11/07/kevin-spacey-scandal-complete-list-13-accusers/835739001/). He was on the infamous Epstein Africa flight with Clinton and Chris Tucker. Spacey also made this chilling video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZveA-NAIDI), which many think was a direct threat to the Royal Family. As a lot of you know, Spacey was close with the Royal Family and Ghislaine Maxwell. Just last month, a picture surfaced of Spacey and Ghislaine sitting on the British throne (https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/04/uk/maxwell-spacey-throne-gbr-intl/index.html).
Squire, Hugo: See Hugo Swire below.
St. Bris, Edward: International license manager at Pierre Cardin.
Stanburry, Caroline: Reality TV star from the show Ladies of London. Stanbury has also worked in public relations and as a stylist. Ex-girlfriend of Prince Andrew (after his divorce from the Duchess of York) and actor Hugh Grant.
Stark, Koo: Famous photographer who dated Prince Andrew for nearly two years in the early ‘80s. Stark eventually married (and divorced) Tim Jefferies, who was listed earlier in Epstein’s book (check the J-L thread). Stark went on to have a daughter with someone else. Prince Andrew is the godfather.
Starzewski Thomas: Famous British fashion designer whose clothes have been worn by the Royal Family.
Steenkamp, Chris: Not enough info. Possibly the artist responsible for these lovely drawings (https://www.instagram.com/christophersteenkamp.art/?hl=en), but I cannot confirm.
Steiner, Jeffrey: Not enough info. Probably the co-managing partner of MWE real estate group. I could be wrong, though.
Steinkampf, Chris & Nina: No info found.
Stengel, Andrew: Former director of acquisitions for Miramax. Former aide to Governor Mario Cuomo (father of Andrew and Chris).
Stengel, Rick & Mary: Richard is an editor, author, and government official (Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs) under Barack Obama. Richard is now a Senior Advisor at Snapchat and serves on the board of CARE, a charity that caters to women and children (https://care.org/about-us/leadership/richard-stengel/). Mary is his South African wife. Nelson Mandela was the godfather to their son, Gabriel.
Stern, Allison & Leonard: Allison (nee Maher) is a former model and TV producer. Her husband, Leonard, is a billionaire businessman involved in real estate. Leonard founded Homes for the Homeless, a charity that aims to help the financially disadvantaged. A large focus of the charity is children and youth (https://www.hfhnyc.org/). Leonard is also quite the heartless bastard. He announced that he was selling a Homes for the Homeless apartment building in midtown Manhattan, forcing its inhabitants to move out (https://thejewishvoice.com/2019/12/billionaires-nyc-homeless-facility-boots-out-elderly-tenants-before-holidays/). Just to show an example of how all these wealthy people truly do know each other, here is a link with pictures of Malcolm Forbes’s 70th birthday party in Morocco in 1989. Forbes flew out 800 guests (https://www.newyorksocialdiary.com/this-was-then-malcolm-forbes-70th-birthday-part-i/), including Leonard and Allison Stern, Robert Maxwell (Ghislaine’s father), Rupert Murdoch, Ronald Perelman, Barbara Walters, Robert and Blaine Trump, Diane von Furstenberg, King Constantine, Henry Kissinger, James Goldsmith, Hamish Bowles, Gianni Agnelli, Kay Graham, Elizabeth Taylor, Calvin Klein, Oscar de la Renta, Walter Cronkite, Ann Getty, Fran Lebowitz, and more. Not only are these people rich, famous, and powerful, but many of them also appear in Epstein’s black book.
Stevens Michael: Not enough info.
Stopford-Sackville, Charlie &: Charles works in finance and securities. Owner of Drayton House (https://www.northamptonshiresurprise.com/organisation/drayton/) in Northamptonshire, England. Married to Shona McKinney, who I am guessing is the name that got cut off in Epstein’s black book. Shona is a good friend of Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-317052/Marks-married-maiden.html, who is a key figure in this whole Jeffrey Epstein saga.
Stracher Kate: Kate is an artist who went to Oxford with Ghislaine, but claims that she hasn’t seen her since then. (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365733/How-Prince-Andrew-shared-room-Epsteins-Caribbean-hideaway-busty-blonde-claimed-brain-surgeon.html).
Sundlun, Stuart: Managing director of BMB Advisors, a private equity firm. Son of Governor Bruce Sundlun of Rhode Island (1991-1995). Stuart’s father also served as director of the National Security Education Board (NSEB) for four years under Clinton. Bruce is a great friend of Clinton right hand man (and multiple-time passenger on Epstein’s flight log), Ira Magaziner. Magaziner also appeared in Epstein’s black book (check out the ‘M’ thread for more info).
Sunley, Mr James & Amanda: James is CEO of Sunley Holdings, an investment company.
Sutherland, Harry: Likely refers to the investment banker who is Chairman of CrossInvest, an offshore corporate service company.
Svenlinson, Peter: Venture capitalist and founder of The Column Group. Served as Chairman for several pharmaceutical companies (Aragon, which was sold to Johnson & Johnson and Seragon, until it was solid to Genentech/Roche).
Swire, Sophie: English fashion entrepreneur who established a school for jewelers and gem-cutters in Afghanistan at Prince Charles’s request (https://adventurersclub.org/archives/calendanov2015.php). Co-founder of Learning for Life, an educational charity. She was a Trustee and Chairperson from 1995-2000. Learning for Life has established over 250 schools for girls in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.
Swire, Hugo: Swire is a British Conservative Party politician who served as a Member of Parliament (MP) from 2001-2019. Son of Roger, director of Sotheby’s.
Swire, Jenny: Former Miss South Africa. Fashion director for Wedding Magazine and TV personality. Contributing editor for Tatler, a publication which has appeared more than ten times amongst Epstein’s contacts.
Swire, Mark: Involved in real estate.
Sykes, Lucy Ewen: Entrepreneur, fashion executive, and socialite. Fashion director of Marie Claire magazine. Former consultant for Ralph Lauren, T. J. Maxx, and Tommy Hilfiger. Good friend of nightclub guru Amy Sacco, who is one of the contacts listed earlier in this thread. Lucy and her husband attended a dinner for Prince Andrew at Epstein’s house in the early 2000s (https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/ghislaine-maxwell-the-socialite-on-jeffrey-epsteins-arm.html). Lucy’s husband, Euan Rellie, has been a friend of Ghislaine Maxwell’s for years.

Overview

The Canadian Military's clear goals, outlined in 2017's defence review Strong, Secure, Engaged show Canada's trajectory in the use and supply for our military into the mid 21st Century. The goals in internation interventions are to engage forces hostile to freedom and democracy, and use our restrained withdrawl to challenge those powers which - whilst they may be strategically useful cooperators - aggressively dehumanise and debilitate people. In this, Canada stands squarely shoulder-to-shoulder with other Global Powers, most notably the EU, Japan, and others, and our goal is simply the advance of peace and freedom. This review will examine the key deployments and acquisitions that are currently being undertaken by the Canadian State and its military, to assess their usefulnees, efficiency, and effectiveness, in delivering our stated goals.
Also to be examined are the direct benefits to the Canadian people, of military acquisitions and deployments. Whilst sometimes it is necessary for Canada to help share the cost of intervening in the national lives of those not our own, these should be seen as the exception rather than the rule. The rule being that Canada should feel its military adds to the overall positive experience of Canadians, and that, as per the 2017 review, focuses on jobs, economic growth, and market benefits for Canadians, but it also emphasises where Canada's sense of the military as "other" to the life of an ordinary Canadian. The Review will attempt to highlight where there is extensive disconnect between the goals of the military, and the goals of ordinary Canadians, and attempt to reduce or bridge that gap where possible.
 

Cyberspace

The future security environment presents a vast array of complex defence and security challenges that transcend national borders. In order to keep pace with our allies and ensure the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) commitments are met, as well as outpace our potential adversaries, it is imperative that the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) prioritizes efforts to design our future force. The Innovation for Defence Excellence and Security (IDEaS) program has built DND/CAF capacity to do experimentation in a new and different way. The IDEaS program was designed to be complementary to DND internal research programs expertise towards solving defence and security challenges and will provide $1.6 billion of financial resources and human resources over a 20 year period.
In FY 2020-21, DND/CAF will be leveraging defence analytics to align efforts and expenditures to deliver an initial operational capability for enterprise-wide reporting and analytics to inform ST&I decisions. Advance research in the future of cyber warfare to improve and strengthen both defensive and offensive capabilities will be rolled out faster, and additional budget growth to accommodate the need to have sharper and more cohesive eyes in Cyberspace will be commensurate. Maritime Monitoring and Messaging Micro-satellite (M3MSat) will demonstrate the collection of capabilities of a space-based Automatic Identification System (AIS), receiving and locating signals transmitted by vessels, which can be combined with RADARSAT-2 Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images, to provide improved management of marine traffic in Canadian waters.
Though most Army projects contain a C4ISR component – even improving operations in remote regions has a communications requirement – the Land C4ISR program has been narrowed to six core projects, often referred to as SSE 42 for their number in the defence policy:

• Joint Deployable Headquarters and Signals Regiment Modernization (JDHQSRM) will upgrade the communications systems, including most of the secret level comms, that the signals regiment employs when setting up a division or joint task force headquarters or when elements of 1st Canadian Division, such as the Disaster Assistance Response Team, deploy. This will be rolled out to all three operational Divisions.
• Combined Joint Intelligence Modernization (CJIM) has a similar mission, but is focused on the deployable top-secret intelligence networks. The project will also modernize the physical shelters and could include a training house for intelligence operators. An additional layer will integrate this more closely with Canadian SoF and Five Eyes.
• With Tactical Command & Control Information Systems Modernization (TacC2IS Mod), the focus shifts to the hardware and software that comprise the systems and networks in brigade and battle group headquarters, and the software in radios and other systems in vehicles. Work should be complete in 2024.
• Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Modernization (ISR Mod) will acquire or upgrade a range of sensors, many introduced under all the interconnected Land Force Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, Reconnaissance (ISTAR) projects, and ensure they connect into the larger Land Command Support System (LCSS) network. We will upgrade software no later than 2024, and ensure that a cohesion exists between Central Commands and operational units on the ground or in the sky.
• Canadian Land Forces Electronic Warfare Modernization (CFLEWM) has two objectives, to modernize the Army’s ability to counter improvised explosive devices and to improve its electronic warfare systems. Previously distinct capabilities, the two share a common interest in electronic countermeasures to sense and jam or exploit threats from electronic signals, so CFLEWM will attempt to integrate the two capabilities.
• Finally, Tactical Communications Modernization (TacComms Mod) will ensure the operational and tactical bandwidth and acquire the radios and other communication tools for headquarters, vehicles and other platforms.

Beyond the core six projects – which are all in the options analysis phase of the procurement process – the C4ISR program is also coordinating with several related projects, including joint fires modernization, ground-based air defence (GBAD), Light Forces enhancement, and the LAV reconnaissance and surveillance system upgrade. GBAD, for instance, will require a high-speed network to connect a sensor, such as the medium range radar, to a shooter. Unless that network can relay that information and engage the incoming threat within a few seconds, the system will have limited effect. In total, the Army is preparing to spend between $3 billion and $7 billion on C4ISR-related projects over the next decade. But without a more agile approach to procurement, there is a danger that the Army could be pricing capability in the options analysis phase that will be obsolete by the time it is eventually fielded.
With that in mind, future procurement options across the rest of the Armed Forces must have an especially sharp focus on C4ISR and battlefield management in digital space, and include AI and AI development in all systems.

Land

The Canadian Land Forces are coming to the end of a large-scale advancement of wheeled infantry and cavalry vehicles, with the LAV fleet due to be fully upgraded to LAV-VI standard by 2021, with upgraded vehicles ready to serve in our formations until 2035. These will be augmented by new purchases of 360 of these vehicles, which will replace aged Bison) and M113 fleets in the Combat Support role. The review finds that amongst these vehicles, notable weaknesses in the actual combat capability of the Infantry and Cavalry regiments who use them. Canada's three Mechanised Brigades, our primary formations, must have access to sufficient firepower, and many core systems - such as Mortars, ATGMs, and larger calibre direct fire cannons, are notably old or lacking. We must seek to improve our firing systems to make our formations more efficient in the delivery of fires. These examples serve as both an illustration, and as direct action items for procurement committees into the 2020s:

• Mortars.
  • Canada accepts the necessity proposed in which Mortar Platoons should become an integral componant of all Infantry Battalions. As of yet, they are not, and Infantry Battalions must depend solely on RC Artillery, Air Support, or Cavalry, for these fires. This must change.
  • The 81mm Mortar in service with RC Armed forces is sufficient, but The ~5km range it offers means that not only does Mortar divestment from Infantry Battalions make no sense in Operations, but that the Army should consider other options, especially 120mm for replacement.
  • Mechanised Infantry should have a Platoon of four vehicles with Heavy Mortars, and a special enquiry as to the suitability of the AMOS system, as that would allow four vehicles to control eight heavy mortars, with massive reductions in personnel than the current use of 81mm mortars by dismounted infantry in the current role.
• Assault Pioneers. These units being divested to the Engineers has not been as unsuccessful, and their work is less integral to both an Infantry-Battalion-based Battlegroup and a Battalion operating within a Brigade. These units will stay as they are.
• Direct Fires. The lack of expertise, in Infantry Battalions to employ Direct Fires was highlighted during the 1 st Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment’s recent deployment on Op UNIFIER to the Ukraine. As part of their mentoring role they were expected to be able to train the Ukrainian forces on the proper employment of anti-armour weapons against modern tanks. While successful, they were only able to do this because of residual capability from soldiers who served in Anti-Armour Platoons in the past, because they have been deleted from infantry battalions. Newer soldiers had no experience at all, from which to draw. Anti-Armour platoons will be restored to Canadian Infantry Battalions, as part of the Weapons Company, and the 33,000 Javelin missiles we currently have will need to be replaced by 2025, and the search for a replacement, preferably one which offers an Anti-Air componant capability should be explored. Our limited experience with Spike is so far positive, and the open tender will need to evaluate other systems able to deliver similar capability or better.
  • Mechanised Infantry Battalions should have a platoon of four vehicles with ATGM launchers as their principle weapon, as part of a Weapons Company.
• Fire Support. Canadian Infantry Battalions have never had a direct fire cannon as part of their integral setup, with that capability always being deferred to the RCAC. With the reduction of that componant to just three Battalions, with those mixed between heavy armour and light recon, the third platoon of a Canadian Weapons Company for our Mechanised Brigades, should include a high velocity cannon of not less than 105mm.
  • Allowing a platoon of four such vehicles per Weapons Company will give Infantry Battalions a substantial additional capability that need not be outsourced, and adds capability without having to bloat the forces to accommodate it.
• Tanks. Canada has long been delaying the upgrade or replacement of our Leopard 2 tanks, and the delay includes many questions about whether or not Canada should maintain Main Battle Tanks as a combat capability at all, and other challenges to the size of that capability. Aside from that, whilst 62 of the vehicles are 2A4, 20 bought from Holland are of 2A6M standard, and all are in substantial need of upgrading. As it stands, each Mechanised Brigade has either two Company-sized Squadrons of MBTs, or half of one. The Rest of the RCAC Regiment in each of those three cases is made up of Company Sized Squadrons of other forms of armed reconnaissance. In the main, Canada tends to deploy Battlegroups consisting of an Infantry Battalion, supplemented by an RCAC Cavalry Squadron which will be a light, medium, or heavy role, depending on the deployment. This is a structure which has worked for us, and the three Mechanised Brigades as "triple battlegroups" is a structure we should expect to maintain to high standards. In order for this to work as well as it can, the lightest of the Cavalry options (often deployed in Jeeps or Mercedwes 4x4s) should be deleted. Instead, all three Cavalry Regiments should have two full Squadrons/Companies of Main Battle Tanks, giving each Regiment 28 vehicles, as well as 28 of the new Cavalry Reconnaissance vehicle in the LAV-6 pattern. As such, the Leopard fleet should be upgraded or replaced as soon as practicable, after discussions with Rhienmettal, and the Active Protective System planned for after 2022, should be incorporated as part of that.
• Artillery. The evaluation of the M777 is overwhelmingly positive with the RCHA Regiments, but we still only have 28 of them. Equipping all three Mechanised Brigades with full complements of 24 guns is essential, as is a reserve regiment to allow Reserve units to train with live fires, which can be dispersed throughout Canada in batteries. A total of 72 additional howitzers will be ordered.
• Strike Missiles. Canada currently has no rocket artillery, and in this day and age that is tantamount to not being able to deploy Brigades safely unless we count on other countries for this important shield. An open tender will be announced, with competing bids needing to be approved for precision and range; and the manufacture including supply chain in Canada.

 

Sea

Canada is a Maritime country, with three Oceans fronting our large nation. Our responsibility to ensure our territorial integrity, and to conduct ecologically sensitive monitoring over the entire area is our primary focus. Secondarily, the expeditionary potential afforded to us by more capable platforms, and the need to support NATO, and ensure our engagement with the international community remains connected, means we must also ensure we have the means to do those things.

• Frigates. Work has now begun on the Future Canadian Surface Combatant, with the winner being the Type 26 design. Due to be assembled in the three Eastern Shipyards designated part of the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy, under BAE and Lockheed Martin Canada. By far the most expensive naval project ever for Canada, these 15 ships will give us the reach in all three of our Oceans (Pacific, Arctic, Atlantic), and ensure we can press our interests and support our allies wherever, and whenever we need. The first ship should arrive in service in 2026, and then annually after that, with ships destined to serve in Maritime Forces Atlantic, and Maritime Forces Pacific, alternately.
• Arctic Patrol Ships. The 8 Harry DeWolff Class Patrol Vessels received their second ship into service this year, and will receive the other six annually, the project completing in time for the commissioning of the first Type 26 Frigate. These ships will serve both the Pacific and Atlantic Naval Forces, and no new amendments need to take place to this project. The two vessels destined to enter Coastguard Service as disarmed civilian ships, are still due to be on course for delivery.
• Submarines. The four submarines in Canadian service are aged and will be out of commission from 2030. By then, Canada needs to have found a solution that works for us. We cannot, and should not, seek an "off the shelf option" built overseas, neither can we afford to allow the Submarine service to deteriorate to such a point so as to become unserviceable. Canada should begin our search for a fleet of submarines able to operate under ice for extended periods of time, with the endurance necessary to cover our vast coastline and protect our waters from nefarious exploration by uninvited guests. This review finds the following points to act as a skeletal structure for future enquiries:
  • Nuclear propulsion is not at this stage ruled out, but has been found to be politically too hard a sell in the past. AIP systems produced in France, Sweden, Germany, and Japan, are capable of being adapted to our requirements, and we should seek clarity on whether those countries are prepared to work with Canada on such a project. The makers of nuclear submarines are now proliferated, but we will approach the US, UK, and France, to seek clarity on a future potential purchase.
  • Canada would be wise in this matter to take a leaf out of Australia's book, with their successful courting of an Australia-specific design having resulted in massive investment in domestic industry, and a fleet of capable boats due to enter service over the next two decades. Such an achievement is laudable and lessons for Canada should be learned from the delivery of this programme.

 

Air

• Future Fighter Capability. The three candidates for Future Fighter Capability (CF-188 replacement) are Saab Gripen, LM Lightning II, and the Boeing Super Hornet. With Prime Minister Trudeau's commitment not to buy the F-35 has sat at odds with Canada's continuous investment in the F-35 program, with $70m additionally invested in it in May of last year. The following points are, at this point, relevant.
  • As of 2019, the three contenders (Saab, Boeing, and Lockheed) have bids that are evaluated by a points system, assigning 60% for technical merit, 20% for cost and 20% for industrial benefits to Canada.
  • While the latest payments brings Canada's total investment in the F-35 to US$541.3 million since 1997, the government finds that Canadian companies have also secured US$1.8 billion in work related to the stealth fighter. The F-35 has far from been bad news for Canada, and our option to buy the aircraft remains on the table.
  • While there is much to admire of the Saab Gripen, the logistical mileaux required to bring production in Canada of the future fleet, is at this stage seen to be substantially inferior to the case made by Lockheed and Boeing. As the Gripen is additionally less capable as a Stealth platform, therefore the Gripen is at this point excluded from contention.
  • Canada and Boeing have been at odds before, especially with a legal challenge from Boeing with regards to sales of C-Series Bombardier aircraft which it felt were unfair. This issue is now resolved, and previous commitments that outside issues will not negatively affect valid bids, will be upheld.
  • The Super hornet is the most powerful of the three options, and offers Canada the most seamless transition from our current Hornet fleet. It also offers the E/A-18 Growler concept, which mitigates its ostensible lack of stealth, and promises future capabilities which will expand and complement Canada's ability to deliver sophisitcated combat capability in a safe way. Canada also already has massive industrial base in Boeing's longstanding commitment to our current fleet, and the seamless transition will offer more jobs, and continuity, without so much high new cost. Whilst acrimony may be heard from those arguing a combined Super Hornet/Growler fleet are not truly next-generational, arguments amount to precious little practical value. Therefore, Canada should seek to expedite its acquisition of a combined fleet of Growlers and Super Hornets, with the proposed admixture being 24 Growlers and 64 Block III Super Hornets, resulting in two squadrons of ten Electronic Attack Jets to be stood up (to include 414 Sqn, and 4 to serve in the training and operational conversion squadron. It also gives six squadrons of ten frontline Super Hornets, with four to serve in the training/operational conversion squadron. In addition to these positive strengths, and in keeping with Canada's "no strike first" defence policy, the added bonus of the versatile Super Hornet is that variants can be equipped with in-air refuelling systems, and conformal fuel tanks for extended range. Canada will thus seek the acquisition of Block III Super Hornets subject to negotiations with Boeing and the US about costs, and boosts to Canadian manufacturers and suppliers.
• Next Generation Fighters. Additionally, Canada should seek to prevent the languishing delays that came with this project, by seeking to join a next-generation fighter program that will offer new capabilities from the late 2030s. The Tempest, the European FCAS, and the American next-generation fighter concepts, and this time no small attention should be given on the part of Canada to exactlty what we are signing up for. That means we need, ahead of our commitment to such a program:
  • An already complete design, at the time of evaluation
  • An industrial partnership that benefits Canadian aerospace and business, with a focus on jobs
  • A key strategic partnership with the other nations involved
• Maritime Patrol Aircraft. Our joining of the M3A forum has resulted in a clarity regarding our need to replace our CP-140 MPA with a modern system capable of endurance, and multimission capability, means that we should seek to acquire a fleet of NATO compliant planes as soon as practically possible. The Maritime Search and rescue aircraft are a useful stepping stone to a modern MPA airfleet, and we should seek to secure a MPA from the time of that project's completion in 2023.
• Helicopter Fleet. As our current commitments make clear, the Griffons will be in service until around 2030, where replacements in VTOL roles across the combat spectrum will be needed. In the shorter term, the Griffon's impact as a "one size fits all" attempt has not worked, and although logistical simplicity is to be desired, Canada has the following unmet requirements to improve our rotary wings in operation:
  • Attack Helicopters. Canada should seek to Replace the Griffon in the Combat Support Role, with three squadrons (417, 439, 444) of modern attack rotorcraft procured to provide not only first rate sensors, endurance, longrange targetting, but also Electronic Warfare spectrum combat effectiveness - all of which we currently lack.
  • Troop Transport. The Griffon's endurance, altitude, and front line survivability were decisively shown to be inadequate in Afghanistan, and its upgraded engines and sensors will go some distance to keeping our six squadrons (400, 403, 408, 427, 430, 438) operational for the next ten years. It will be the task of the next defence review to evaluate and select future alternatives.
  • Heavy Lift. Our 15 CH-146 Chinooks ain 450 Wing are providing outstanding capacity, and their use in frontline military service is without question extraordinarily highly esteemed. 450 Wing should be joined by a new Wing, 451, which will provide this capability to the Pacific coastline, with an extra 15 Chinooks purchased and operational basing in BC or AL, depending on pricing and deployment usefulness.
  • Naval Helicopters. The acquisition of the Sikorsky Cyclone family of helicopters for the Maritime Search and Rescue, ASW, and Naval Warfare roles, should be complete within the next four years, and at this point the class size acquisition of 28 should be expanded to around 48, to allow Canadian maritime helicopters to comfortably undertake operations in the Pacific, Arctic, and Atlantic Seaboards, currenlt overlimited by availability and total numbers. It is also necessary for us at this time to reactivate Canada's Naval Air Squadrons, and for the Sea Combat helicopters embarked on frigates on behalf of the Canadian Navy, to be under their sole control and operation. Thus, two Sea Combat Helicopter Squadrons will be stood up (870 NASqn and 871 NASqn), with one serving Pacific, and the other serving Atlantic Maritime forces. MPA, Maritime Search and Rescue, Coastal rotor squadrons, and all other air power will remain in the hands of the Air Force, however.
• UAV. We should expand acquisitions of the Saab SkeldaCU-176 Gargoyle, and incorporate new high altitude and long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles for surveillance, and special focus should be attended to aircraft able to endure operations in the Arcic zones, to assist with our need to operate effective surveillance in this area. Additionally,expanding our fleets of UCAV with cutting edge long-endurance craft is an essential means of ensuring that our air combat capability is as strong as it needs to be.

Good morning from the UK. It’s Tuesday 14th April.
In case you missed it, Boris Johnson is now out of hospital and recovering at Chequers (a stately home in Buckinghamshire that’s available as a prime ministerial perk, basically it’s the UK equivalent of Camp David).
​

Virus story in depth

​
The Covid-19 situation in the US continues to deteriorate in terms of the infections / deaths count. Having been unable to fill the churches in time for Easter, President Trump is now targeting the 1st of May to get America fully back to work and in a White House press conference yesterday vowed that the economy would fire up "ahead of schedule" but did not explain how this would be achieved given that many states are currently at or are approaching their peak infection rates.
In the same press conference Trump also alleged that he would try to force open state economies including shops, schools and restaurants that have been closed by governors and mayors. Such a stance though would put him at odds with any Governor who would rather sustain the lockdown and on this matter states have autonomy thus the decision making power for when to lift the lockdown lies with the governors, not the president. Trump insisted that this was not the case, stating “When somebody is the President of the United States, the authority is total.” This comment was picked up by CNN White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins, who asked him about his “authority is total” line, saying that his belief he has “total power” is not true. Trump replied: “You know what we’re going to do? We’re going to write up papers on this. It’s not going to be necessary. Because the governors need us one way or the other. Because ultimately it comes with the federal government. That being said we’re getting along very well with the governors, and I feel very certain that there won’t be a problem.”
Several media and legal commentators rapidly pointed out on twitter that Trump’s statement that he has total authority is incorrect because the US does not have a totalitarian government (which is one of the biggest benefits of having the US constitution, it stops that kind of thing). People who have contradicted Trump’s statement on the matter include Stephen Vladeck (the A. Dalton Cross Professor in Law at the University of Texas School of Law, and a specialist in national security law), Jonathan Turley (a professor at George Washington University Law School who’s known for having testified in United States Congressional proceedings about constitutional and statutory issues) or Laurence Tribe (professor at Harvard School of Law and frequent visitor to the US Supreme Court).
This story will no doubt rumble on, although hopefully the infection and death count will be minimised by individual citizen decisions to stay at home as well as the governors themselves. It should be noted that many Republican governors do not subscribe to their President’s stance; as an example Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker emphasized in his own daily briefing that a "ton of testing" needs to be available at both state and federal levels before residents would be comfortable resuming business as usual.
​

Virus story in brief

​
Sources: Guardian live blog, CNN live blog, Deutsche Welle live blog unless otherwise stated

• The USS aircraft carrier Harry S Truman and its supporting strike group vessels will delay their homecoming to Norfolk, Virginia after a deployment to the Middle East back in November last year, Navy officials said. In a Facebook posting, Rear Adm. Andrew Loiselle, commander of the Truman’s carrier strike group, told families of the crew that he would update them on the status of the deployment in three weeks. “It has been over 40 days since our last port call, and no one has been allowed to come aboard our ships since then, so we are sure we are COVID-free,” Loiselle said. Meanwhile, the USS aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt has over 600 infections with one death.

​

• A group of Southern California pastors is suing California Gov. Gavin Newsom and several other officials in federal court over health directives that have prevented worshipers from attending church services due to the coronavirus pandemic. The plaintiffs include Dean Moffatt, a pastor at an Indio church who alleges he was fined $1,000 for holding a church service on Palm Sunday.

​

• New York state governor Andrew Cuomo said Monday that "the worst is over" in his state, but that people need to continue to be smart going forward and practice social distancing. Cuomo said the state is looking at a plan to reopen after the shutdown that is in coordination with other surrounding states. On a related topic, the New York Fire Department has reported no new cases of Covid-19 today which is the first time since the pandemic hit the city.

​

• New Zealand’s lockdown has been extended by another week.

​

• The unemployment rate in Australia is predicted to double to 10% in June because of the coronavirus crisis, new estimates from the country’s treasurer have forecast. This would be the first time Australian unemployment has reached double digits since April 1994. "The economic shock facing the global economy from the coronavirus is far more significant than what was seen during the global financial crisis over a decade ago," said Treasurer Josh Frydenberg in a statement.

​

• Public health authorities in China recorded 89 new cases of the novel coronavirus on Monday, the country's National Health Commission reported. 86 of the cases were reported as having originated from other countries and the majority of them are being reported in the northeast province of Heilongjiang, which shares a border with Russia.

​

• A general election is still due to be held in South Korea tomorrow (Wednesday 15th April) despite the Covid-19 outbreak.

​

• India’s nationwide coronavirus lockdown has been extended until May 3, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said.

​

• Vladimir Putin has warned officials to brace for “complex and extraordinary” scenarios in Russia as a result of the outbreak. Putin told officials in a video conference the situation was “changing practically every day, and unfortunately not for the better” and Russia’s next few weeks would be “decisive”.

​

• The French government’s budget deficit is set to hit a post second world war record of 9% of economic output this year, the budget minister has said in the second revision in less than a week. Budget minister Gerald Darmanin said that the financial shortfall would exceed the 7.6% prediction announced last week after President Emmanuel Macron extended a nationwide lockdown until 11 May.

​

• Berlin police have busted a 16th birthday party attended by 31 people amid a coronavirus lockdown. The girl's mother had apparently rented the property especially for the occasion. Police have said that all 32 party attendees are being investigated for criminal offenses and violating social distancing rules put in place to curb the spread of coronavirus. The mother who rented the apartment, along with the the landlord, will also be investigated, they said. More on that story here.

​

• Around 300,000 nonessential workers are estimated to have gone back to their jobs in Spain's Madrid region on Monday as the country began a partial lifting of lockdown restrictions aimed at curbing the spread of coronavirus.

​

• Austria on Tuesday became one of the first European countries to lift its lockdown measures, with a limited number of shops reopening.

​

• Poland will follow Austria’s lead soon - "From the 19th we will slowly start unfreezing the economy," Health Minister Lukasz Szumowski said in a radio interview. Government spokesman Piotr Muller said that restrictions on shops are likely to be raised first, adding that an official decision will be taken on Wednesday or Thursday.

​

• The UK will not ease lockdown this week, said to the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, who added that it was “still far too early”, and that the UK would be getting ahead of itself if ministers relaxed restrictions before medical experts advised them to.

​

• An Irish twitter thread has gone viral critiquing the difference in media coverage between the UK and Ireland asking why two countries which are very similar in terms of culture and healthcare availability have such different infection and death rates. If you’re British, you might want to consider reading it (here). (Personal note: I think the eye opening bit for me was the report that deaths in the UK are only counted if the person had had a Covid-19 test. If they hadn’t but it’s blatantly obvious Covid-19 caused the death, it won’t be counted).

​

• Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and his health minister Luiz Henrique Mandetta are in open conflict over the country's coronavirus response, leading many to worry that the far-right leader could soon fire the official who has played a major role in containing the outbreak.

​

Supply chain stories

​

• Wondered why PPE is so hard to get for so many medical professionals around the world? This twitter thread does a decent job of explaining it.

​

• UK PPE government stockpiles containing protective equipment for healthcare workers in the event of a pandemic fell in value by almost 40% over the past six years, the Guardian has found. Analysis of official financial data suggests £325m was wiped off the value of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) emergency stockpile, reducing it from £831m in 2013 under the Conservative-led coalition government to £506m by March last year.

​

• Heathrow Airport, traditionally the busiest in Europe, has forecast that passenger demand will be down 90% in April, as coronavirus restrictions stop most people from travelling. One of the two runways remains open as flights continue for cargo purposes. Source; Guardian live blog (link above)

​

• Smithfield Foods, the world's biggest pork processor, said on Sunday it will shut a U.S. plant indefinitely due to a rash of coronavirus cases among employees and warned the country was moving "perilously close to the edge" in supplies for grocers. Smithfield extended the closure of its Sioux Falls, South Dakota, plant after initially saying it would idle temporarily for cleaning. The facility is one of the nation's largest pork processing facilities, representing 4% to 5% of U.S. pork production, according to the company. (Reuters link). Bloomberg reports other facilities also have outbreaks including 50 people at a JBS SA beef facility in Colorado’s Weld County tested positive and more than 160 cases at a Cargill Inc. meat-packaging plant in Pennsylvania.

​

• The Andy Slavitt daily twitter TLDR: Food banks in the US are fine for the rest of April, but there are serious concerns for May, particularly for finding rice and beans. Meanwhile, testing capacity is continuing to grow - it’s now at 1m per week capacity in the US, but that’s still nowhere near enough. The thread is here.

​

• Queues for food banks in the US are in some cases several miles long with some people having to queue overnight to ensure they get food (link) (Personal note: I’m not sure how legit people think commondreams.org is, but they’re including multiple links to mainstream media so I included this story)

​

• Loadstar says that MSC (major container ship operator) has announced four additional container wayport storage hubs as part of its Covid-19 suspension of transit (SOT) offering to shippers looking to avoid congestion and high storage costs at destination ports on non-essential goods. The SOT product is targeted at shippers that have been unable to cancel or halt orders from Asia and will have containers en route in the coming weeks for markets in lockdown. Freeport (Bahamas), Gioia Tauro (Italy), Klaipeda (Lithuania) and Las Palmas (Spain) are the latest transhipment hub storage facilities MSC will offer its customers at time of booking. The original six “buffer ports” were: Bremerhaven (Germany), Busan (South Korea), King Abdullah (Saudi Arabia), Lome (Togo), Rodam PSA International Terminal (Panama) and Tekirdag Asyaport (Turkey). Maersk and CMA CGM (other major operators) are offering similar services too.

​

• Talking of MSC, Splash247 points out here that MSC’s website is still down after a cyber attack (that’s 4 days and counting now). The site, as well as booking platform MyMSC, have been down for nearly 85 hours, the longest outage for a top five carrier since Maersk was hit by the NotPetya malware attack in 2017. MSC’s latest announcement on its IT troubles – issued just after midnight Geneva time – states that the network outage is confined to its Swiss headquarters. “MSC operates different IT systems to separate Headquarters from the Agencies network to ensure that in case of an issue they cannot affect each other. In this case, the outage is limited to one of the company’s data centers in Geneva effecting solely some internal data processes, msc.com and MyMSC,” the company stated.

​

• LATAM (the major South American airline) is reorganising its network to prioritize cargo, especially medical supplies. LATAM, which is based in Chile, said April 13 it is adding a seventh freighter frequency between South America and Europe to help compensate for the lack of available passenger aircraft with cargo space. LATAM has increased capacity on this route by 40% since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic and the contraction of passenger travel. (Source: Freightwaves)

​

• The largest plane in the world the Antonov An-225 has landed in Warsaw with medical supplies says airlive.net complete with videos (link). Its cargo capacity is 250 tonnes, equal to 2.5 times a 777 freighter.

​

• FedEx Express added 150 flights for the month of April to carry personal protective equipment (PPE), medical supplies and "other essential items" from Asia to the U.S., a FedEx spokesperson confirmed to Supply Chain Dive Monday. The project will use previously grounded aircraft. More here.

​

• US truck rates and volumes are declining sharply at levels not seen since the 2008 freight crisis due to sharply reduced consumer demand says Freightwaves.

​

Good news section

​
25 poorest countries have had debt cancelled - Kristalina Georgieva, the managing director of the IMF has announced (link) that under the IMF’s revamped Catastrophe Containment and Relief Trust (CCRT), $500m will be provided in grants to the poorest and most vulnerable members of IMF to cover their IMF debt obligations for an initial phase over the next six months. The move will help these countries channel more of their scarce financial resources towards vital emergency medical and other relief efforts. The countries that will receive debt service relief are Afghanistan, Benin, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, D.R., The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Tajikistan, Togo, and Yemen.
​
Endangered New Zealand bird sent to safety offshore despite Covid-19 lockdown - The Guardian reports (link) that a rare New Zealand bird has been evacuated to a remote island despite the strict coronavirus lockdown, with the high-risk mission “essential” to the survival of the species, conservationists say. Despite stringent lockdown orders in place country-wide, as New Zealand battles Covid-19, five juvenile shore plovers – or tūturuatu – were flown from captivity in Christchurch to the remote, predator-free Mana Island off the coast of Wellington on Saturday. The birds caught a near-empty Air New Zealand flight for the 450km journey, taking up full rows, and were monitored by cabin crew (who the Guardian says have few human passengers to attend to anymore).
​

Donations

​
Several asked if they can send me $/£/€ via Patreon (in some cases because I've saved them time or money, others for no reason at all). I don't need the cash (that's lovely though) but food bank charities are getting really hit hard with all this panic buying. Please consider giving whatever you'd have given me to a foodbank charity instead:
UK: https://www.trusselltrust.org/
France: https://www.banquealimentaire.org/
Germany: https://www.tafel.de/
Netherlands: https://www.voedselbankennederland.nl/steun-ons/steun-voedselbank-donatie/
Italy: https://www.bancoalimentare.it/it/node/1
Spain: https://www.fesbal.org/
Australia: https://www.foodbank.org.au/
Canada: https://www.foodbankscanada.ca/
USA: https://www.feedingamerica.org/
Thanks in advance for any donations you give. If there's foodbank charities in your country and it's not listed above, please suggest it and I will include it going forward.
Please hold for the stats for 30-45 minutes.