US defence firms lining up deals with European counterparts to hedge against any shift away
As the allies rush to rebuild their fighting forces, leaders are confronting the reality that they'll have to rely on
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
9 hours ago
- Scoop
Trump, Leakers And Journalists: The Assange Precedent And Revisiting The Espionage Act
When campaigning in 2016, presidential candidate Donald Trump was delighted by leaked, hacked or disclosed material that wound its way to the digital treasure troves of WikiLeaks. The online publisher of government secrets had become an invaluable resource for Trump's battering of the Democratic establishment hopeful, Hillary Clinton, with her nonchalant attitude to the security of email communications and a venal electoral strategy. 'Very little pick-up by the dishonest media of incredible information provided by WikiLeaks,' he tooted on what was then Twitter. 'So dishonest! Rigged system!' After winning the keys to the White House, he mysteriously forgot the organisation whose fruit he so merrily feasted on. During the Biden administration, the fate of the founding publisher of WikiLeaks, an Australian national who had never been on American soil and had published classified US defence and diplomatic material outside the country (Cablegate was a gem; Collateral Murder, a chilling exposure of atrocity in Baghdad), was decided. Kept in the excruciating, spiritually crushing conditions of Belmarsh Prison in London for over five years, Julian Assange was convicted under the US Espionage Act of 1917 in June 2024, the victim of a relic dusted and burnished for deployment against the Fourth Estate. Assange's conviction on one count of conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information has paved a grim road for future prosecutions against the press, a pathway previously not taken for its dangers. With this nasty legacy, recent threats by Trump against journalists who published and discussed the findings of a leaked preliminary report from the Defense Intelligence Agency are hard to dismiss. The report dared question the extent of damage inflicted on Iran's nuclear facilities by Operation Midnight Hammer, which involved 75 precision guided munitions in all. 'Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images,' Trump asserted with beaming confidence. 'Obliteration is an accurate term!' CNN and The New York Times duly challenged the account in discussing the findings of the short DIA report. Damage to the program had not been as absolute as hoped, setting it back by a matter of months rather than years. This sent Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth into a state of apoplexy, haranguing those press outlets who 'cheer against Trump so hard, it's like in your DNA and in your blood'. For his part, Trump accused the Democrats on a Truth Social post of leaking 'information on the PERFECT FLIGHT on the Nuclear Sites in Iran', demanding their prosecution. He further charged his personal lawyer to harangue The New York Times with a letter demanding it 'retract and apologize for' the article, one it claimed was 'false' and 'defamatory'. To Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business, Trump also added that reporters could be forced to reveal their sources on 'National Security' grounds. 'We can find out. If they want to, we can find out easily. You go up and tell a reporter, 'National security, who gave it?' You have to do that, and I suspect we'll be doing things like that.' According to Rollingstone, the President has already queried whether the press could be snared by the Espionage Act. While the magazine misses a beat in ignoring the Assange precedent, it notes the current administration's overly stimulated interest in the statute. Prior to returning to the White House, Trump and his inner circle considered how the Act could be used not only to target leakers in government and whistleblowers 'but against media outlets that received classified or highly sensitive information'. The publication relies on two sources who had discussed the matter with the President. One source, a senior Trump administration official, insists that the Act has again come up specifically regarding reports on the efficacy of the US strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Members of the administration are 'looking for the right case to launch their 'maiden voyage' of an unprecedented type of Espionage Act prosecution', one designed to deter news outlets from publishing classified government information or concealing the identities of their leaking sources. 'All we'd really need is one text or email from a reporter telling a source: 'Can you pull something for me?' or something very direct of that nature'.' A less ignorant source would not have to look far for the one existing, successful example in the US prosecutor's kit. When pressed on the issue of whether the espionage statute would become the spear for the administration to target leakers and journalists, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly was broad in reply: 'Leaking classified information is a crime, and anyone who threatens American national security in this manner should be held accountable.' The unanswered question regarding Assange's prosecution and eventual conviction remains the possible and fundamental role played by the Constitution's First Amendment protecting press freedom. Unfortunately, the central ghastliness of the Espionage Act is its subversion of free speech and motive. Given the Australian publisher's plea deal, the mettle of that defence was never tested in court. Some members of Congress have shown a worthy interest in that valuable right, notably in the context of defending Assange. In their November 8, 2023 letter to President Joe Biden, sixteen lawmakers spanning both sides of politics, including Trump loyalist Marjorie Taylor Greene and progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, declared their commitment 'to the principles of free speech and freedom of the press' in urging the withdrawal of the US extradition request for Assange. Unfortunately, and significantly, that request was ignored. Where Greene and other MAGA cheerleaders sit on Trump's dangerous enchantment with the Espionage Act remains to be seen, notably on the issue of prosecuting publishers and journalists. MAGA can be incorrigibly fickle, especially when attuned to the authoritarian impulses of their great helmsman. Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. Email: bkampmark@
Scoop
11 hours ago
- Scoop
Don't Just Do Something, Stand There!
'Every action matters now. Every effort small or large counts. And moving, movement is the essential key to dispelling despair.' That directive sounds compelling, but it's the cri de coeur of the externally oriented activist mindset, and it is simply false. Sadly, there are three reasons why it made no difference that an estimated 4 million to 6 million people marched in the streets of America on 'No Kings' day. The first is that mass marches are no remedy for the moribund core of the American body politic that gave rise to the bare-knuckle fascism of the Trump Administration. There's a tremendous hollowness and untruth behind this sentiment: 'Mass marches are public moments to show the rest of the world that we are the majority and we do not want and will not accept a king.' Why do activists and pundits need to be reminded that a majority of Americans elected Trump a second time, and that polls are mere numbers, which don't measure the absence of passion in a benumbed people? Mass marches, inveterate activists maintain, 'Are places to let off steam and make great art and music and network…the expression of our collective sorrow and outrage, thereby saving our own souls.' Bullshit. Can a woman or man save their individual soul if the soul of their people has expired? Not if s/he denies the collective deadness that gave rise to Trump's authoritarianism, and finds false comfort in 'collective sorrow and outrage.' The second reason is that once unvarnished evil is entrenched in positions of power, its course cannot be altered by the means that previously affected less mendacious and malignant governments. Advertisement - scroll to continue reading President Nixon is an example. As spiteful and malicious as he was, he was brought down by an intact people and an intact Congress. But the American people are no longer whole, and the checks and balances of the founders no longer work, which is why Trump is able to send in thousands of troops to crush non-violent protests in Los Angeles, and leave them there with impunity. Once in power, only external war or internal revolution can dislodge a complete tyrant. Since humankind cannot have another world war without the total destruction of civilization, and since political revolutions belong to bygone eras in previously distinct cultures and countries, it will take a psychological revolution to rid the world (and not just America) of Daddy Dictator and his ilk, as well as his domestic and international sycophants. The third reason marches and movements make no difference is that the attitude of 'strengthening the bonds with our own tribe' is very much part of the problem. Tribalism is primal source of the nationalism that tyrants like Trump exploit. Defunct patriotism is no antidote to virulent jingoism. It's true: 'Your humanity is also your resistance. Don't underestimate its power. It's the only thing they can't take away from you.' But it's egregiously false to conflate that with 'every action matters now; every effort small or large counts…and moving – movement is the essential key to dispelling despair.' Engaging in collective movements without individual self-knowing means running away from one's despair through the crowd. Remaining with what is within one is the essential key to dispelling despair, and changing what is. Stepping back from the world, without cutting off and numbing your heart, is essential. Joining some march to make one feel alive and part of something larger, under the illusion that numbers will make a difference, benefits neither the individual nor the society. Ironically, the idea that we are separate from the world is also a feature of the mindfulness movement, which has given rise to the retreat industry and the wellness craze. Rather than providing life-giving water to the deserts of political life, the retreat industry reinforces the underlying individualism that has made marches and movements so ineffective. After all, for the majority of people, mass marches hold the same appeal and have as much meaning as attending big concerts -- 'places to let off steam and make music and network.' It comes down to what one puts first – collective action, or self-knowing? The first is an extension of externalization and busyness, the accepted excuse for not doing the spadework within, and thereby taking responsibility as a microcosm of humanity. Despite the risk of isolation and navel staring, self-knowing is the truly radical course. Effective collective action flows from attentive individual inaction. Ten self-knowing human beings, who stand alone before working together, will make more of a difference than ten million clones that march together to ward off alienation, powerlessness and loneliness. What's at stake is not the socio-political future of a precipitously declining former superpower, or any other nation-state in an utterly dysfunctional and defunct international order, but the viability of the Earth and the future of humanity. Activism can't cut it. But self-knowing reflection plus shared revolutionary insight can.
NZ Herald
18 hours ago
- NZ Herald
David Seymour and James Baldwin: The fire this time
Act leader David Seymour had to deal with massive opposition to his Treaty Principles Bill. Photo / Mark Mitchell THE FACTS Act Party leader David Seymour was guest of honour at a party held by his party recently, to celebrate his becoming Deputy Prime Minister. In his speech, Seymour quoted the American founding father and Boston Tea Party revolutionary Samuel Adams: 'It does not take a majority to prevail
