Category: Headlines

Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories 

The lack of specialized Covid-19 treatments for people with weak immune systems has left millions of Americans with limited options if they get sick as the pandemic heads into an uncertain winter.

Once heralded as game-changers for Covid patients considered at risk for getting seriously ill — one was used to treat then-President Donald Trump in 2020 — monoclonal antibodies are now largely ineffective against current Covid variants. Easier-to-administer antiviral drugs, such as Paxlovid, have largely taken their place but aren’t safe for all immune-compromised people because they interact with many other drugs.

But the federal government funding that drove drug development in the early days of the pandemic has dried up, and lawmakers have rebuffed the Biden administration’s pleas for more. Without that, there’s little incentive for drugmakers to work on new antibody treatments that could be more effective.

And without a government program like Operation Warp Speed to develop second-generation vaccines and treatments, at-risk patients could be in danger of developing severe cases of Covid and flooding hospitals when the U.S. health care system is already strained, thanks to an influx of patients with an array of respiratory illnesses, including flu and RSV.

“Just because we have exited the emergency phase of the pandemic does not mean that Covid is over or that it no longer poses a danger,” said Leana Wen, a public health professor at George Washington University and former Baltimore health commissioner. “There are millions of Americans who are vulnerable to severe illness.”

The FDA pulled authorizations for four antibody treatments in 2022 as Omicron and its myriad subvariants wiped out their effectiveness. The treatments were geared toward adult and pediatric patients with mild-to-moderate Covid who were considered at risk of developing severe disease and ending up hospitalized.

While antiviral pills are plentiful and remain an option for some with weak immune systems, they won’t work for everyone — Pfizer’s Paxlovid interacts with many widely prescribed drugs.

Monoclonal antibodies — which have been made by companies like Regeneron, Eli Lilly and Vir — are lab-created molecules designed to block a virus’ entry into human cells. But they must bind to the virus’ spike protein to neutralize it, and the coronavirus’ many mutations since its 2019 emergence have gradually rendered the available products ineffective.

“It’s a bit risky to develop this,” said Arturo Casadevall of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, pointing to how quickly some Covid variants have surfaced before quickly receding.

A massive spending bill that lawmakers passed before Christmas left out the administration’s $9 billion request for more money to fight the pandemic, meaning there are fewer dollars to be spread around to address emerging Covid needs.

“Due to congressional inaction and a lack of funding, HHS does not have the resources it needs to fund the development of new treatments, and we could find ourselves with a very limited medicine cabinet at a time when we need more tools to combat Covid-19,” a department spokesperson told POLITICO, adding that HHS is working with providers and other groups “to ensure that Americans are able to take advantage of all available treatment options.”

The Biden administration has strongly promoted oral antiviral regimens like Paxlovid, which debuted a year ago and marked a turning point in managing the virus for most Americans.

Immunocompromised individuals — who are either born with immune-suppressing conditions or acquire them after organ transplants or by taking certain drugs — also may not mount sufficient immune responses after vaccination, making treatment options like antibody therapies a critical tool for them.

A CDC alert issued Dec. 20 to clinicians and public health professionals warned of the lack of viable monoclonal antibody treatments — including the diminished efficacy of a prophylactic antibody, Evusheld — and the availability of the antiviral options that to date have seen lackluster uptake. The agency urged providers to consult the National Institutes of Health’s Covid treatment guidelines for ways to potentially manage drug interactions with Paxlovid, such as temporary pauses or reductions in dose.

Remdesivir, an antiviral administered intravenously, is another treatment option for the immunocompromised, but it requires infusions over three days in either hospital or outpatient settings. HHS is urging states to support its health departments and systems in setting up infusion clinics to expand access to remdesivir, especially on an outpatient basis, and is working with maker Gilead to broaden the types of providers eligible to buy the drug.

Covid convalescent plasma remains an option for immunocompromised people who contract the virus, but its availability is scattershot across the country, Casadevall said. The treatment has pros and cons, he said — it’s less likely to be defeated by any one variant and can adapt to different strains, but it’s difficult to administer and requires blood-typing to be done for the recipient.

Still, Casadevall said, the main issue is educational because its use has changed since the pandemic’s early days, when treatments were scarce. Some hospital systems, like Hopkins, use it routinely, while some doctors don’t know plasma is still an option, he said.

The FDA has authorized the emergency use of convalescent plasma containing high Covid antibody levels for immunocompromised patients. But NIH has remained neutral on the treatment in that population, which Janet Handal, president of the Transplant Recipients and Immunocompromised Patient Advocacy Group, says has led to some hospitals balking at administering it.

NIH spokesperson Renate Myles pointed to the agency’s treatment guidelines for Covid, which are developed by an expert panel.

The recommendations for Covid convalescent plasma, last updated on Dec. 1, say there’s “insufficient evidence” to recommend for or against the treatment’s use in immunocompromised patients, while noting some panel members would use plasma to treat an immunocompromised person “with significant symptoms attributable to COVID-19 and with signs of active [viral] replication and who is having an inadequate response to available therapies.”

“In these cases, clinicians should attempt to obtain high-titer [Covid convalescent plasma] from a vaccinated donor who recently recovered from Covid-19 likely caused by a … variant similar to the variant causing the patient’s illness,” the guidelines say.

Casadevall, who leads the Covid-19 Convalescent Plasma Project, says NIH’s stance on plasma is inconsistent with its previous recommendations of monoclonal antibodies, which were made without clinical efficacy data, since Covid antibodies are the active component in both therapies. He led a petition earlier this month — signed by several doctors, including past and current presidents of the Infectious Diseases Society of America — asking NIH to change its recommendations.

Handal’s group also has asked the NIH and the White House to convene a meeting with scientists on the issue.

“To just not be having a dialogue about it is infuriating to us,” Handal said. “People are dying while people are just going through this bureaucratic dance.”

The FDA and European Medicines Agency held a virtual workshop this month to bring doctors, industry and regulators together to discuss supporting novel monoclonal antibody treatments.

“The FDA is committed to working with industry sponsors to expedite the development of new drug products to meet unmet needs, such as the need for new preventive therapies for immune-suppressed patients who are unlikely to respond to vaccination,” an agency spokesperson said.

In the meantime, Regeneron spokesperson Tammy Allen said the company, whose antibody cocktail’s use was limited in January, is committed to evaluating antibody treatment options as the coronavirus evolves.

“We believe monoclonal antibodies have played an important role in the COVID-19 pandemic to date and may again in the future, particularly among people with immunocompromising conditions,” Allen said.

Vir, which partnered with GSK on sotrovimab, continues to study whether the treatment could work against emerging variants and is also evaluating next-generation antibodies and small-molecule therapies, said spokesperson Carly Scaduto.

Still, pharmaceutical companies may be more inclined — both financially and practically — to pursue developing better antiviral pills that pose fewer drug interactions and are easier to administer, said Jason Gallagher, a clinical pharmacy specialist in infectious diseases at Temple University Hospital. Antivirals also hold up better against an ever-changing virus, he added.

“There’s way more money in Paxlovid than there is in any monoclonal” antibody treatment, Gallagher said, and it may take incentives to drugmakers to encourage their development. “They’re not going to make anyone really rich.”

​ Read More 

Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories 

One of the oldest forms of clean power is ready for a comeback — and it’s not wind or solar.

Geothermal energy — the technology that harnesses the heat beneath the Earth’s crust — is drawing fresh interest after lawmakers boosted funding flows for it in the bipartisan infrastructure law and Inflation Reduction Act, dovetailing with advances in technology, new state incentives and interest from the oil drilling sector.

While the next generation of geothermal projects are still in the early stages of development, advocates say the underground energy source has the potential to supply more than 60 gigawatts of firm, flexible power by 2050 — a more than 15-fold jump from the 3.7 GW of capacity it now has in the United States.

“Not since, say the 1970s, where there was a huge pivot to the geothermal side of the house, have we seen the type of interest that we’re seeing today,” said Kelly Blake, president of the board of directors at Geothermal Rising, a geothermal-focused trade association.

“It just really seems as though geothermal has an upward trajectory at the moment, in terms of innovation, funding, interest at all levels of business, but also the government,” Blake added.

The Biden administration is pushing oil and gas companies to take a serious look at incorporating geothermal projects into their business plans. At a December meeting of the National Petroleum Council, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm described geothermal as a favorite topic of hers.

“That’s kind of irresistible when you consider the skills set and the know-how that this industry already has in extracting energy from the subsurface,” Granholm told the gathering of oil companies executives, which included Exxon CEO and Chair Darren Woods. “I know you manage [carbon] molecules, but you can manage a lot of things. Think: You drill holes, too. You go beneath the surface, you know where things are. And fracking really opens up a huge opportunity for enhanced geothermal.”

Like its name suggests, geothermal refers to the heat energy from below the Earth’s surface. It relies on tapping into reservoirs of hot water that are brought to the surface to generate electricity and for heating and cooling. Most of the United States’ reservoirs are located in the West, but the emergence of potential new technology could also expand its use.

Companies that invest in geothermal projects and meet prevailing wage requirements would be eligible for a 30 percent tax credit under the Inflation Reduction Act, with an additional 10 percent applied if the project meets domestic content requirements or is located in an energy community, which include areas where a coal mine has closed or that have been economically reliant on fossil fuel extraction and processing.

The bipartisan infrastructure law authorized $84 million for four enhanced geothermal systems demonstration projects — applications for which are expected to open early next year. The Energy Department has also set a target to cut the cost of enhanced geothermal systems — which could enhance existing reservoirs or create new ones — by 90 percent by 2035. And it’s examining the geothermal energy and heat production potential from abandoned oil and gas wells.

“Over the last 15 years, huge numbers of wells have been drilled in the United States because of the shale revolution,” said Sarah Jewett, head of strategy at Fervo Energy, a company that develops next-generation geothermal projects. “All of this technology has evolved and grown and that can be directly applied to geothermal power, but has just never needed to be applied.”

Companies already normally associated with oil and gas drilling in the United States have started delving more deeply into geothermal projects. Baker Hughes, one of the largest drilling companies in the world, is expanding its geothermal business and has formed a partnership with Continental Resources and Chesapeake Energy — two giants in the independent oil and gas sector — to test whether they can profitably turn spent natural gas wells into geothermal facilities.

The increased interest stems from a number of carrots and sticks, said Ajit Menon, Baker Hughes vice president of geothermal. While government subsidies help, there’s also a desire in the private sector to find ways to conform with new reliability regulations in California and elsewhere that are seeking carbon-free, baseload electricity that can be produced around the clock.

“The development today, both from a technology startup perspective and with strong interest and support from or at least potential support from institutions from the government, it’s probably the most exciting time I’ve seen for geothermal in a long time,” Menon said.

Geothermal development may also benefit from the know-how and data that oil and drilling companies have already accumulated over the past decade. The industry already possesses maps of existing geothermal hot spots, and engineering advances hold the potential to make even “dry” geothermal wells — those that have heat but no fluid — profitable in the future.

Oil and gas giant Chevron Corp. signed a partnership in December for its Chevron New Energies business to partner with Sweden’s Baseload Capital to develop a new generation of geothermal development technologies, including a project in Weepah Hills mountains in Nevada.

“If you look at geothermal, we’re leveraging some of Chevron’s core capabilities,” said Barbara Harrison, vice president of offsets and emerging technology at Chevron New Energies. “That’s why we’re looking at geothermal to be able to support our operations versus some other more traditional renewable energy resources.”

Still, the technology faces its own challenges beyond the technical barriers like the need for better exploration technologies. Among them, are permitting obstacles and comparatively higher costs than traditional renewable energy sources, like wind and solar.

Capital costs for the development of conventional geothermal are between $3,000 to $6,000 per kilowatt-electric, whereas land-based wind or utility-scale solar photovoltaic capital costs are between $1,700 to $2,100/kWe, according to a report from the Energy Department based on 2016 data.

Lauren Boyd, acting director of DOE’s Geothermal Technologies Office, said the lengthy processes that developers must go through to get geothermal online isn’t “necessarily aligned” with other other industries that do similar groundwork. And, she said that the oil and gas industry has flagged the long permitting timelines that could slow development and the timeline for profitability.

“If you waste seven years permitting, that’s not attractive, especially to industries like oil and gas that have really large operations [where] things happen pretty quickly,” Boyd said.

Geothermal is the “more expensive black sheep” compared to wind and solar, said Jewett, but she and other advocates warn it’s not a simple “apples-to-apples” comparison. DOE is examining how communities and utilities can better value geothermal, given that it is a baseload power producer that can provide flexible and reliable generation, Boyd said.

Advocates also point to the need for even more funding from lawmakers to help the capital-intensive technology reduce its costs in the future.

“We as an industry are or have been historically happy with however much funding we can get, but when you take a look at the distribution of the funding to different types of energy, geothermal really is a drop in the bucket,” Blake of Geothermal Rising said.

Still, working in the industry’s favor is long-time bipartisan interest, with the technology receiving boosted funding under both Republican and Democratic administrations, making it a potential area of interest as lawmakers head into a divided Congress in January.

“When it comes down to it, the value of this solution, especially when you think of the numerous baseload energy sources that are likely to continue to come offline, this can really fill in the gap and the industry is in a sweet spot bipartisanly,” Blake said.

​ Read More 

Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories 

The race to the moon between the United States and China is getting tighter and the next two years could determine who gains the upper hand.

So says NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, who warns that Beijing could establish a foothold and try to dominate the most resource-rich locations on the lunar surface — or even keep the U.S. out.

“It is a fact: we’re in a space race,” the former Florida senator and astronaut said in an interview. “And it is true that we better watch out that they don’t get to a place on the moon under the guise of scientific research. And it is not beyond the realm of possibility that they say, ‘Keep out, we’re here, this is our territory.’”

He cited an Earthly example in the South China Sea, where the Chinese military has established bases on contested islands. “If you doubt that, look at what they did with the Spratly Islands.”

Nelson’s hawkish comments follow NASA’s 26-day Artemis I mission, in which an uncrewed Orion space capsule flew around the moon. That mission, widely regarded as a success, was the first big step toward NASA’s plan to land astronauts on the lunar surface to begin building a more permanent human presence — which could come as early as 2025.

It also comes on the heels of Congress’ passage of a full-year budget for NASA. The agency did not get all the funding it requested, but Nelson insisted that the “have to haves” were not shortchanged. That includes the key components for the next two moon missions, Artemis II and Artemis III.

But looming ever-larger is China’s aggressive space program, including its recent opening of a new space station. Beijing has announced a goal of landing taikonauts on the moon by the end of this decade. In December, China’s government laid out its vision for more ambitious endeavors such as building infrastructure in space and creating a space governance system.

Any significant delays or mishaps in the U.S. program, which is counting on a series of new systems and equipment that are still under development, could risk falling behind the Chinese. And NASA’s moon-landing timeline has already slipped a year from the Trump administration.

Over the past few years, Beijing has launched a series of robotic landers and rovers to collect lunar samples — including for the first time ever on the far side of the moon — as well as an orbiter, lander and rover that reached Mars.

The U.S. military, which has also expressed growing concerns about Beijing’s development of space systems that could threaten U.S. satellites, has been sounding the alarm about the security implications of Beijing’s forays into deep space.

“It’s entirely possible they could catch up and surpass us, absolutely,” Space Force Lt. Gen. Nina Armagno said last month during a visit to Australia as China was launching its 10th crew to its Shenzhou space station. “The progress they’ve made has been stunning — stunningly fast.”

A recent Pentagon report to Congress highlighted a series of recent leaps for the Chinese space program.

It cited China’s pioneering ability to not just to land on the far side of the moon but to set up a communications relay using a satellite that was launched the year before between the Earth and the moon.

The report also found that China is improving its ability to manufacture space launch systems for human exploration farther into space.

Some NASA veterans are also watching with growing concern.

Terry Virts, a former commander of the International Space Station and Space Shuttle and a retired Air Force colonel, said the competition has political and security components.

“On one level, it is a political competition to show whose system works better,” he said in an interview. “What they really want is respect as the world’s top country. They want to be the dominant power on Earth, so going to the moon is a way to show their system is working. If they beat us back to the moon it shows they are better than us.”

But there are practical threats that a Chinese foothold on the moon could present, he added.

“There is potentially mischief China can do on the moon,” Virts said. “If they set up infrastructure there they could potentially deny communications, for example. Having them there doesn’t make things easier. There is real concern about Chinese meddling.”

The Chinese communist government maintains that such concerns about its motives are unfounded.

“Some U.S. officials have spoken irresponsibly to misrepresent the normal and legitimate space endeavors of China,” Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said in a statement. “China firmly rejects such remarks.”

“Outer space is not a wrestling ground,” he added. “The exploration and peaceful uses of outer space is humanity’s common endeavor and should benefit all. China always advocates the peaceful use of outer space, opposes the weaponization of and arms race in outer space, and works actively toward building a community with a shared future for mankind in the space domain.”

Nelson expressed confidence that the U.S. effort to get back to the moon first is on schedule, noting the congressional funding for the Artemis program. Congress this week approved $24.5 billion for NASA in fiscal 2023, about half a billion dollars less than what President Joe Biden requested.

But it still marks a more than 5 percent increase from this year. And Nelson said the moon effort is getting what NASA has asked for.

“Don’t look at the topline,” he said. “Look at the essentials.” Nelson cited, for example, the Human Landing System in the form of SpaceX’s Starliner and a competition for a second lander that is now underway.

“That was fully funded at the president’s request,” Nelson said.

He expressed confidence that the next moon mission, Artemis II, can take place “within two years” and “hopefully we can speed that up.” That mission plan is to send a crew into the moon’s orbit by 2024.

But he said the space agency is under intense pressure because it has been forced, as a cost-saving measure, to reuse all the avionics inside the Artemis I capsule for Artemis II.

Because it didn’t develop a fully outfitted spacecraft for Artemis II, NASA has to strip the capsule that just returned of all its spaceflight systems and reinstall them in another. “That is costing us time,” Nelson said.

The goal is still to fly Artemis II by the end of 2024, he said, but “they tell me they can’t [speed it up,] that they need that time to redo them and recertify and all that.”

Then follows the signature goal of Artemis III to land astronauts on the moon by the end of 2025, which is already a year later than the Trump administration’s plan.

“All of that is going to depend on two things,” Nelson said. “The space suits, are they ready? And is SpaceX ready? And I ask the question every day: ‘How is SpaceX’s progress? And all of our managers are telling me they are meeting all of their milestones.”

But he is clearly worried about China also gaining ground — and eyeing some of the same locations for its moon landings.

“China within the last decade has had enormous success and advances,” he said. “It is also true that their date for landing on the moon keeps getting closer and closer” based on the country’s announcements.

“And there are only so many places on the south pole of the moon that are adequate for what we think, at this point, for harvesting water and so forth,” he said.

Asked whether American astronauts will get back to the moon before China arrives, Nelson responded, “The good Lord willing.”

Still, not everyone is convinced Washington and Beijing are spiraling toward a moon brawl.

“I’m dubious,” said Victoria Samson, Washington director of the Secure World Foundation, which is dedicated to the peaceful use of outer space.

She noted that China, like the United States, is a party to the Outer Space Treaty, which bars nations from making territorial claims on any celestial body, including the moon.

It also will be difficult for any nation to maintain a long-term human presence in deep space, she said. “That seems unrealistic. It is going to be extremely challenging.”

But she agreed there could be competition between Washington and Beijing for “limited landing sites and resources” on the lunar surface.

“That’s where we have made the argument that there is a need to engage with China,” Samson said, “because of the possibility of landing near each other or having to provide emergency services to astronauts or taikonauts.”

​ Read More 

Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories 

A year makes a difference after all.

President Joe Biden begins 2023 politically stronger than 12 months ago, bolstered by his party’s surprise midterms success, a robust set of legislative accomplishments and the resilience of the alliance he rallied to support Ukraine after Russia’s invasion. Indeed, as he vacations on St. Croix, the biggest decision he faces is whether to seek reelection to the office he holds.

Biden has not yet fully committed to another term, according to three people with knowledge of the deliberations but not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations. On his island vacation, Biden continued his running conversation with family and a select few friends and allies about a reelection bid.

There are challenges still on the horizon, from an economy threatening to slow down, to the war in Europe, to an incoming Republican House majority threatening gridlock and investigations. But those in the president’s circle believe there is a strong and growing likelihood that he will run again and that an announcement could potentially come earlier than had been expected, possibly as soon as mid-February, around the expected date of the State of the Union, according to those people.

That potentially accelerated time is owed, in part, to a sense inside the White House and among Biden allies, that the new year dawns on a note of revival, one marked by an unlikely comeback that has reassured fellow Democrats.

Revamping the primary calendar to put Biden-friendly South Carolina first was another sign of intention to run again. First Lady Jill Biden has signaled that she is onboard with another bid, even as some close Biden worry about the toll of a campaign on the 80-year-old president. Advisors privately acknowledge that Biden benefitted in 2020 by being spared the full rigors of a campaign due to the pandemic and some close to him harbor anxieties as to how he will handle a punishing, full-blown itinerary this time around.

Though some Democrats still express worry about Biden’s age, their public doubts were largely silenced by the party’s strong November showing, in which Democrats grew their Senate lead and prevented a red wave in the House. There are still worries, chief among them, per White House aides, is the economy.

Though inflation has somewhat cooled, it remains high in most sectors and there are fears that gas prices could rise again next year. Moreover, there is a quiet concern in the West Wing that the nation’s economy will slow for at least the first quarter of 2023, according to administration officials, even if the United States manages to technically avoid a recession.

Europe, meanwhile, seems poised for a possibly significant setback, having been battered by inflation and an energy crisis exacerbated by the war in Ukraine. That could cause residual effects in the U.S. as could a lingering Covid crisis in China, which has sparked worries in Washington about supply line challenges as well as the possible birth of a new virus variant that could spread throughout the globe.

China looms as another concern for other reasons. Though Biden’s November summit with Xi Jinping in Bali helped cool some tensions between the two superpowers, Beijing has continued to send menacing signals toward Taiwan and has not fully abandoned its Russian allies. And while Kyiv has shown remarkable resilience in repelling Russia’s forces, Moscow has shown no signs of abandoning its invasion and has resorted to terror strikes against Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure to plunge much of the nation into darkness during a cold winter.

Closer to home, while the Republicans’ majority in the House will be slim and unruly, the newly empowered GOP lawmakers will be able to exact a price on the West Wing. After two years of unified Democratic control, Biden will now see much of his agenda stall. And armed with the power of subpoena, Republicans are vowing to open a slew of investigations into the president’s policies and family. Already, there are frictions between the two sides over document production and records requests.

But the Biden White House points to its success in 2022 as proof that its strategy has been working. Rewarded by voters, the West Wing sees no reason to change course.

The president’s aides believe that the Republican agenda on many issues — from entitlements to abortion — is out of step with a majority of the public. Biden took office promising an alternative to the extremist elements in the Republican Party and pledged to work across the aisle. He managed to achieve some bipartisan victories in 2022, including on a semiconductor chips bill and a modest gun control package.

“The American people were clear in the best midterms for a new President in 60 years that they want leaders to focus on improving their lives — not partisan divisiveness — and President Biden’s hand is outstretched to his Republican colleagues in an offer to make bipartisan progress for the country,” said White House spokesperson Andrew Bates.

While many GOP election deniers were defeated in November, the extreme right will wield power in the new Congress and has all but pledged obstruction. Biden has steadfastly promised to find areas of compromise, and his aides believe that he’ll be cheered by voters for the effort even if the results are scarce. The West Wing also believes the planned congressional investigations could backfire on the new GOP House majority, considering some of the likely areas of inquiry.

Republicans have vowed to look into the administration’s handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal and the migrant crisis at the border. But they’ve also pledged to investigate the business dealings of the president’s son, Hunter Biden. Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), expected to be a loud voice in the new Congress, recently declared “We are going to make it very clear that this is now an investigation of President Biden.”

While a newly empowered GOP majority in the House will block most chances of significant policy action, White House aides believe that some previous legislative wins will more fully take effect next year and prove popular with voters, furthering their momentum. Biden’s inflation reduction act will lock in key priorities on climate funding and prescription drug prices. The transportation law will continue to fund projects across the country. And his final piece of legislation for the year, a $1.7 trillion bipartisan spending package, includes an overhaul of the law his predecessor cited in the lead up to the January 6 riot.

“There were questions about whether or not Biden would run again but not only are those questions muted, there is more energy and enthusiasm to run again,” said Basil Smikle, a Democratic strategist. “He got elected to bring the pendulum back to the middle, to create some sort of normalcy, and he’s done that. He’s also cast a light on Republicans to make their candidates less desirable.”

But 2023 will also be a year of war. Perhaps Biden’s signature accomplishment over the past 12 months was his ability to hold an alliance together to support Ukraine in its rebellion against Russia, framing the fight as one for democracies around the globe. The conflict appears nowhere close to abating: neither side will entertain peace negotiations, and there are worries about how long European solidarity will last in the face of a growing economic crisis.

The war has become a vital test of Biden’s governing principle: that this century would be a battle between democracies and autocracies and the free world would win if it proved it could deliver for its people. So far, Biden believes it has.

“The American people know that if we stand by in the face of such blatant attacks on liberty and democracy and the core principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, the world would surely face worse consequences,” said Biden as he stood alongside Ukraine’s president at the White House. “American people are prepared to have us stand up to bullies, stand up for freedom. That’s who we are as Americans. And that’s exactly what we’ve done.”

​ Read More 

Just In | The Hill 

The sheriff of Erie County, New York, said the deadly winter storm that led to almost 40 deaths in Buffalo last week was “unlike anything” he has seen before. 

John Garcia told radio talk show host John Catsimatidis on his show, “The Cats Roundtable,” on WABC 770 AM that officials have progressed from the rescue phase to the recovery phase. He said authorities are doing welfare checks on people and is hoping that the community is “out of the woods” with casualties. 

“This was unlike anything I’ve ever seen. The freezing temperatures with the zero visibility, if you ventured out in your car, you’re not going anywhere,” Garcia said. 

He said the 70-mile-per-hour winds that the storm brought along with the snow caused zero visibility, which produced a “domino effect” of snowplows not being able to get on the streets safely and power lines coming down. The fallen power lines caused people to lose electricity and heating amid freezing temperatures. 

Garcia said the city can handle the snow, pointing to a storm over Thanksgiving that only caused three deaths due to cardiac issues in people shoveling their driveways. But he said the snow of the most recent storm was compounded by the wind. 

The storm, called a bomb cyclone, dropped more than 40 inches of snow in the city and brought hurricane-force winds. A bomb cyclone occurs when pressure in a storm system rapidly drops in 24 hours. 

Garcia said officials learned that they need equipment to handle not just a snowstorm but a blizzard. 

“We always have to get better, and that’s what we’re doing now,” he said. 

“It’s 2022, and losing 40 people in a storm is unacceptable,” he added. 

Garcia said officials need to make sure people understand the severity of an incoming storm before it hits next time. 

A driving ban was instituted in the area last Friday, and some blamed local officials for putting it in place just as people were heading to work and as strong winds were arriving. 

Garcia said he believes people have realized they need to take a driving ban more seriously following the storm.

​State Watch, Bomb cyclone, Buffalo snow storm, Erie County, John Catsimatidis, John Garcia, winter storm deaths Read More 

Just In | The Hill 

The time is now for Ukraine to conduct a winter shaping operation to set conditions for an offensive next summer to end the war on terms favorable to Ukraine and its Western benefactors.  

Building on its successful fall operations in the Kharkiv and Kherson regions, Ukraine must take advantage of the winter freeze to put itself in a position to deliver a decisive blow to the Russian invasion in the summer and force Russia into a disadvantaged negotiating position. That blow should come in Crimea, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky repeatedly has stated, but Ukraine’s military is not yet in position to threaten Crimea directly.  

A winter offensive in the south can put Ukraine in a position to make good on Zelensky’s vow to recapture Crimea. However, Ukraine cannot successfully carry out a winter operation, let alone a major summer offensive, without a commitment and substantial ramp-up of military and financial assistance by the U.S. and its allies now. 

Ukraine cannot afford to postpone operations until spring, because further delay will enable Russia to fully integrate its mobilized reservists, acquire more munitions and hardware, and prepare for its own spring offensive while the destruction of Ukrainian energy and water infrastructure and its devastating impact on the Ukrainian population continues unabated.  Furthermore, Western resolve and assistance may wane after next summer. Thereafter, the conflict likely will become frozen until Russia has recovered its military capacity to continue the hot war. 

Eventually, all wars end in negotiations. This war will end in a negotiated settlement, but as with any war, the facts on the ground vastly shape the decision for negotiations and eventual settlement. Military theorist Carl von Clausewitz wrote in “On War” that since “war is controlled by its political object, the value of this object must determine the sacrifices to be made for it in magnitude and also in duration.” Today, Russian President Vladimir Putin has no intention of giving up his objective to subjugate Ukraine, despite the incomprehensible losses of manpower and materiel Russia has suffered in the war.

Yet, short of the unrealistic complete destruction of the Russian army, the surest path Ukraine has to dissuade Putin from his objective is to convincingly threaten or recapture his prize — Crimea — which may make his already damaged domestic position untenable. 

The West’s incremental assistance to Ukraine, by design, has prevented the war’s escalation into broader war with NATO but has not decidedly hastened Russia’s defeat. In some respects, this policy has lengthened the duration and destruction of the war without a durable and better peace in sight. According to the recently released U.S. National Security Strategy, America and its allies are “helping to make Russia’s war on Ukraine a strategic failure”; however, the level of Western assistance to Ukraine seems to merely offer Russia a strategic setback. Time will tell, but time is short. A decisive Russian military defeat in Ukraine could certainly make Russia’s strategic failure in Ukraine possible.   

In the near term, the Western allies must provide intelligence and operational planning support to the Ukrainian army for a winter offensive and future operations. They must provide the Ukrainians a combination of advanced and tactical drones and counter-drone capabilities.  Already months late, the recent announcement by the U.S. to deliver advanced air defense systems, such as the Patriot missile system, will take some of the destructive pressure off the Ukrainian energy infrastructure and help shield Ukrainian army forces for a winter offensive. 

In the intermediate term, the West must provide equipment and training to the Ukrainian military to prepare it to conduct a sustained, combined arms offensive in the south next summer to force Russia to abandon their objective of subjugating Ukraine. Reports have at once praised and decried the U.S. for failing to deliver the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and extended-range munitions known as Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), which would allow Ukraine to strike targets as far as 300 kilometers away. The point is not about the system or munition, but about the critical Ukrainian need to reliably target deep to enable its close fight — without which a large summer offensive is not likely to succeed. 

The Ukrainian army has demonstrated an aptitude for exercising combined arms maneuver using a variety of equipment sets. They will need equipment and crew training for artillery, tactical and integrated air defense systems, manned and unmanned attack aircraft, light naval craft, and protected mobility in the form of tanks, fighting vehicles and sapper engineering equipment. The West should offer existing NATO equipment based in Europe, rather than continuing to trade out NATO ally-held Soviet-era equipment. It is difficult to envision a post-war Ukraine exclusively going back to antiquated Cold War equipment. German Leopard tanks and Marder fighting vehicles finally could get some use. All of this takes time to train, so the time for equipping and planning for subsequent decisive operations and training is now. 

The U.S. and its allies must apply the means to achieve the National Security Strategy’s objective for a Russian strategic failure by next summer. The West’s incremental military support to Ukraine so far has balanced two competing strategic interests: Ukraine’s sovereign right to defend against and repel Russian imperial aggression, and the prevention of a NATO-Russia war that might lead to nuclear escalation. 

This winter is the moment to shape a decisive operation to end the war in the summer on terms favorable to Ukraine and the West. Typically, the ground in southern Ukraine along the approaches to Crimea freezes around the beginning of January, making cross-country maneuver feasible before the spring melt in early March. The Orthodox Christmas occurs on Jan. 7, which seems about right to start a winter shaping operation for the summer.   

Bob Ashley Jr. is a retired lieutenant general who served over 36 years in the U.S. Army as an intelligence officer. He was the 21st director of the Defense and Intelligence Agency (DIA) from October 2017 until November 2020. He previously served as the Army G2 and the Commandant of the U.S. Army Intelligence Center. He works as a private consultant for defense and security affairs.

Dan Soller is a retired colonel who served over 31 years in the U.S. Army as an intelligence officer, including more than 12 years in Europe beginning in the era of the Soviet Union’s collapse. He has worked with the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. He works in the commercial space industry. 

The authors’ views expressed in this article are their own and do not represent the U.S. government’s position. 

​National Security, Opinion Read More