One of the great benefits of democracy is that politics impacts policy, even national security policy. Elections, confirmation battles, and legislative fights all affect the way the United States balances its competing priorities, interests and values as it conducts foreign and security affairs. National security professionals would therefore be wise to keep an eye on what candidates are saying about national security matters, how they are faring in the polls, and on which way the winds in Congress seem to be blowing the national security issues of the day.
Latest in Politics & National Security
Cuomo’s resignation says something important about the Democratic Party’s commitment to anti-authoritarianism.
Prediction markets and other geopolitical forecasting methods are the stuff of science, finance, and statistics, not fantasy. Yet decision-makers in the U.S. government, except for the intelligence community, have yet to embrace experimentation with these types of markets.
We have aggregated sections of Biden’s speech that are relevant to Lawfare readers.
Policymakers have paid scant consideration to the national security implications of unfettered, largely unregulated data brokering. That may be changing.
On Wednesday, April 14 at 10:00 a.m., the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will hold a hearing on worldwide threats.
Ruling in the Jimmy Lai case, the Court of Final Appeals preserved its judicial independence, enabled the continued protection of fundamental rights by common law principles and fended off the risk of executive backlash.
The hearing was polite, informative and moving—and nonetheless reflected the post-truth world in which Republican senators choose to live.
Pentagon leaders gravely erred in gaming the process to avoid a backlash from then-President Trump to promotions for two well-deserving female generals.
Why did problems in meat production lead the president to invoke a statute designed to preserve the nation’s security?
The intelligence bureaucracy still looks remarkably apolitical.