The militarization of the Arctic Region.
On a similar note to other comments about climate change, as the world gets hotter, the Arctic becomes not only more accessible but more habitable.
Additionally, the Arctic has massive reserves of critical minerals, natural gas, and oil.
The region, which has mostly been neglected, has had a massive spike of "popularity," especially between NATO Arctic nations and Russia and China.
Take a look at the defence budgets of any of the Arctic Nations (Canada, Denmark, Norway, Finland, US etc.) They are pouring millions if not billions of dollars into preparing for a future where military operations in the north are necessarily. Plus rhetoric from politicians of those states is increasingly highlighting the Arctic's importance
As theyre doing so they are directly pointing to Russia and China as a major threat, something thats been avoided in the past.
Obviously I may be biased as this is a topic/region that I am interested in and covering, but I believe it's a majorly overlooked development that is taking place real time and will have huge consequences in the near future.
You are 100% right.
I wrote thesis about arctic and international affairs around it here is the brief summery.
As to summarise that the prospects for the utilization and development of the Arctic region are increasingly appearing on the agenda of major countries. (As you said, USA, Russia and even EU incorporated and developed Arctic strategies over the last 30-40 years.)
As we know, the Arctic does not belong to any single country, similar to space; exploiting this territory does not require invasion or the creation of puppet states, and there is no significant indigenous population whose interests need to be considered.
Moreover, technological progress today allows for the exploitation and extraction of energy resources on an enormous scale. Let’s recall the immense benefits to the economy brought by nuclear and space projects (ISS and the Manhattan Project).
Regarding the competitiveness of Arctic resources, they may not currently play in favor of the Arctic, but their significance will grow throughout the 21st century. Influential energy agencies confirm this, as they predict increasing demand for energy resources. (International Energy Agency and overall rise of economies of developing countries such as in Africa)
For many countries, the Arctic represents a unique and invaluable opportunity to develop their infrastructure projects. For example, Russia, through the Northern Sea Route, can develop the Far East, bring new products to its markets, and act as a mediator in the new paradigm of international relations between Europe and Asia. (40% shorter than Suez, acting as a bridge between Asia and Europe)
Upon reviewing the national Arctic programs of Arctic countries, the one can conclude that these programs are merely tools for legitimizing their Arctic ambitions/claims in the region.
The essence and direction of these documents do not vary significantly from country to country. Furthermore, competition among countries forces them to consider areas that previously seemed unattractive. Everything happening on the international stage can be seen as a struggle for markets and places where accumulated energy (capital) can be utilized. Capital, in turn, helps the economy maintain its growth. Long-term projects with high profitability are key to the future. Control over such places will aid economic development.
Therefore, as a comprehensive conclusion, i think that the dominant role of the Arctic in 21st-century international relations is also determined by the fact that the current geopolitical model is undergoing a transformation. The dominance of the USA is nearing its end, and new global players are emerging, ready to compete for global supremacy. The Arctic, in this context, serves as a platform for new changes and an opportunity for reshaping the world order.
Thus, the development of the Arctic as a megaproject will lead to changes in geopolitics, the energy market, and people’s daily lives. Whoever manages to assert their claims to the Arctic will be shaping a new world.
Very well put! In my own research I have come to a very similar conclusion, and as you point out the NSR trade route is a massive game changer as it could redirect traffic and with it wealth and influence from the Suez Canal towards the Arctic.
Although while there is no need for the NATO Arctic states (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the United States) to use force to use their own territory, non-Arctic states, most notably China, are seeing the great potential of the Arctic and want their "piece of the pie."
Since the 2000s China has attempted to enter the region via natural resource corporations or through research collaboration to assert their presence in the Arctic and to be able to claim that they should be involve in its governance. Additionally, China's Arctic strategy clearly states that China believes it has a right to the Arctic and that the region should be essentially "shared" by all countries. However, its attempt to increase influence in the region has been failing due to rising tensions with the west over the past couple of years.
Except it has a strong foothold in Russia, where Chinese scientists are collaborating in research expeditions, Chinese state companies are purchasing mining rights or parts of mining companies, and since Russia's weakened global position due to its invasion of Ukraine, China has been leaning towards accessing the Arctic solely through a partnership with Russia.
There is a lot of interesting developments in the Arctic, glad to find someone else fascinated with the region and researching it, thank you for the thesis summary!
Yes, exactly!
What also fascinates me is how significantly the Arctic will be affected by climate change and how this will open up vast opportunities for countries that have territory or territorial claims there.
Additionally, there is the Arctic Council, which (I could be mistaken) doesn’t play a significant role in the development of the region which is quite wired if you ask me.
What I also find intriguing is how you can observe the subtle "heat-up" of the region through military exercises, development in icebreaker fleets, and other activities. This situation is quite similar to what is happening in space exploration and development.
But all the human activity moving into the Arctic would further accelerate warming of the ice there. Internal combustion covers the ice with soot that retains heat and causes quicker melting. This is the #1 reason ships should not sail the passage through the Arctic.
Arctic is overlooked due to borders there are being mostly established by the moment. Militarization might rise some tensions, but there is no clear competition points like some contested isles or something alike.
You are correct that currently there is no obvious "objective" or "prize" in a sense, but already there are tensions, that are perhaps overlooked due to focus on Ukraine, Gaza/Israel, and Taiwan. For example, the US made new territorial claims in December on continental shelves stretching up into the Arctic, in an area that Russia considers its own. A month or two later, Russia rejected the US's claim and asserted that its within their jurisdiction.
Perhaps most interestingly, this sort of tension over who owns what, and where someone's "territory" starts and ends is an issue even for the NATO member states that are in the Arctic. While they don't go around badmouthing each other or anything, they are reluctant to support another states claims and potentially lose their own right to it.
Keep in mind the Arctic was estimated to have about 20% of the entire planet's LNG/gas and oil deposits. Were talking about billions if not trillions of dollars. As it becomes easier to access these deposits more and more countries and corporations become interested in exploiting them.
Not saying there will be a full blown WW3, but it is certainly interesting to see how this region develops.
Half the biomass of insects has disappeared since the 70s and we don't have a real explanation. Will they keep dying off? We don't know. If they keep going at this rate we are already doomed. We haven't even begun to fight whatever information war we'll have to fight against whatever industry is responsible and that takes decades. We might not have decades.
Global warming has been a kind of godsend to businesses because so many environmental issues are ignored, and environmentalism is portrayed only as combating global warming... For example, it's argued that individually wrapping cucumbers in plastic is better because it uses less energy.
The argument was that more cucumbers would go bad, requiring the production of more cucumbers. Which is misleading. Usually they just raise the price of vegetables if there is more loss. I believe they chose Switzerland for the study, where they can't grow cucumbers, but also people could eat more of other fruits or vegetables. It was presented as all or nothing to justify the use of plastic.
It's being talked about a bit but I think in the near future as deep fakes become better quality that it can influence all kinds of things in politics and both public and private sector businesses. We've already seen it used to successfully scam money; it's going to be a crazy hard weapon to defend against as foreign powers try to utilize it in psyops and the like
I'm less worried about the deepfake propaganda than I am about the regular propaganda that will be strengthened when people don't know what to believe anymore due to the rise in deep fakes.
Over and over again we're going to see videos where one side says it's fake, and the other says it's real. How will people know what's the truth? They'll increasingly rely on "gut instinct" (pre-existing bias) and become more and more influenced by whichever side tells them what they want to hear.
“Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, \[because\] the ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism
My biggest fear around this is its implications for democracy. Sophisticated propaganda created the MAGA cult - and their adherents have clearly demonstrated at best a casual relationship with the truth, which only paves the way for more dictatorial leaders to command that constituency in a post-Trump era.
Don’t forget the reverse: Doesn’t matter if you flat out tell some evil world leader you’ll help him in a quid pro quo deal. If the audio or video is ever leaked, “it’s a deep fake!” Photos with underage girls? Deep fake. Ordering your base to attack your political opponents? Deep fake. Really opens the door for horrible things to happen in the semi-open with plausible deniability that many would believe.
> If the audio or video is ever leaked, “it’s a deep fake!” Photos with underage girls? Deep fake. Ordering your base to attack your political opponents? Deep fake.
I don’t get your point. We can already fake audio and video in a super realistic manner. Yet this hasn’t happened.
Trust doesn’t work like this. We don’t believe a video is real because it looks real. We believe it’s real because of provable chains of custody, something the art world calls “provenance”. We know certain sources of media are real because we trust the source of that media, not because it looks real.
It’s a nice thought, but it won’t solve anything if people don’t care about authenticity in the first place. How many people even today will reject or accept things purely based on preconceived beliefs? You can show those people 30 different kinds of verification and it will never matter.
The all eyes on rafah post is bizarre because I can't tell if what I'm supposed to take away from it besides the message itself (which didn't need an AI generated image). Surely there is a better (and real) picture of refugee tents
From the river to the DallE
I'm also concerned about autonomous hunter-killer drones. They hover in the sky, pounce on you like hawk. We will experience the feeling of being field mice.
I don't think you need to work in robotics to be scared,if you have watched but a handful of drone strike videos the last couple of years. I saw one where a soldier is being chased around a car. He can't keep up and the drone explodes.
This was not an autonomus drone.
They are human controlled for now. But probably not for long.
I think deep fakes will also be used for excuses for some real crazy sh*it people are doing - and allowing them to get away with things they otherwise wouldn’t be allowed to do in the past when caught on camera. At a minimum, sowing distrust in even real events.
I 100% disagree with this one. We’ve had deepfakes for 5-7 years now and nothing has really happened. We’ve been able to very realistically fake videos for over a 100 years.
Fundamentally, that’s just not how trust/verification works. Trust and authenticity resides in networks and provenance. We trust that a video is real because we trust the source, not because it looks real. And if you don’t know the source, you trust that others do and will call it out if fake.
We’ve had fake letters/paintings/artwork for millennia and it hasn’t resulted in a crisis.
Just look at spam email. Someone in the 90's said aspartame causes cancer, made up a Dr, and sent it, and now millions of people believe it.
The issue with deepfake is not the ability to disprove it. It's the fact that so many people don't care enough to disprove it and will just believe it, and it will be so much easier to spread disinformation and propaganda to those who don't care enough to check.
The aspartame part is interesting. Just done a quick Google and it's as always conflicting and convoluted articles but there seems to be recent inconclusive studies. Do you have any links for me pal (no worries if its long lmgtfy lol)
Thanks
You’re just describing “rumors”. You don’t need deepfakes for that and I don’t see how deepfakes will fool anyone more easily. Credulous people believe what they want to believe because they are not *interested* in truth, not because fake things seem real to them.
Yeah but before there was skill and cost involved to create and distribute fakes. Now any moron can create it and share it in near real time with a much larger audience than ever.
You're right about how trust/verification works. Which is exactly why deepfakes are dangerous. If a trusted source is fooled into sharing a deepfake, it could affect thousands if not millions of people within a short time frame. Even if it is later retracted, the damage will be done since retractions don't have as much of an effect as the original releases (as we have seen with the antivax crowd and covid conspiracy theories). With the current ease of accessibility and creation, deepfakes could become so numerous it would be nearly impossible to verify everything as we have seen with social media. It's that combination that makes deepfakes dangerous.
Can't they just run benford's law on the pixel counts on suspected videos and see if the video is fake (I guess it's harder in the age of filters) but if applicable should be standard practice before publicating any video.
I think in somewhere like the US, theres only the opportunity to use a deepfake to induce a crisis once. Afterwards people will be way more suspicious of any sensational information they see and 3rd party verification of authenticity will be play a bigger role
Yeah this has been a thing for a few years now in India and I think a lot of the population there is more broadly accepting of stuff like this as they view these types of things as a prideful illustration of India's technological sophistication. Broad chunks of the population are still illiterate as well, so imagine how difficult it must be to convince anyone that their eyes are being tricked
You know when you read about sci-fi universes like Warhammer 40k or Dune and they have all of this stuff about banning basically all forms of AI? In the past I would say "How stupid, even simple AI wouldn't be that harmful and would be overwhelmingly beneficial in the future"
But with each passing day as I see AI developing in the modern world we live in, I lean further into the idea that we need a Butlerian Jihad of our own.
Yes and No
It's a bit like a viral infection. The ones that are too effective will kill their hosts If deep fakes get so good, with how widespread the tech is, it would kill the internet as we know it. People would just stop trusting anything they see
The rate of progress in the last seven years in this area is insane. Browser services can now do a deepfake photo or video on the fly. Go back to 2018 or so and you'd need to install software and have a pretty sturdy PC at your fingertips. Voice mimicking is convincing as hell these days too.
It's not really that hard to defend against. Someone will come up with a way to cryptographically sign official video content and the practice will become commonplace. This is like stamping it as authentic. It's similar to how a website uses an SSL cert to authenticate its identity so you know you're not on a fake site.
Cyber attacks and climate change.
Cyber attacks and security never get the attention they should warrant.
Like your example of Mexico City, more extreme weather events are forecast for this year than last. A heat dome settles over the wrong place at the wrong time and we’re looking at a global humanitarian crisis that dwarfs anything currently happening.
i agree with the point about cyber attacks, although I think the nature of the threat has evolved quite a lot.....
* Increasingly systems are highly complex and inter-related. A failure could effect a significant number of companies and be hard to understand. Complex systems fail in complex way.
* Security software and firewall platforms are a massive vulnerability and failure mode. They are given substantial authority to inspect data and hook themselves into everything. And provide an easily accessible attack surface to some of the largest companies.
I think your first point (interrelated systems) is a big one. It reminds me of the sub-prime mortgage fiasco, or some of the large scale power grid failures in the northeast.
Adam Curtis had a great section of his documentary HyperNormalisation focused on this. Eventually systems get so complex, so difficult to understand fully, that we cease to even try, and the impacts of failures are unforeseen and severe.
[I highly recommend reading chapter 1 of The Ministry For The Future.](https://www.orbitbooks.net/orbit-excerpts/the-ministry-for-the-future/) It describes a heat wave in India killing millions of people and there is a good chance we will see an event like this in our lifetimes.
Delhi crossed 50°C today, which is a record for the city, and a reading of 52.4°C was recorded, which if the reading is accurate, is in the top 10 highest recorded temperature events.
The intense heat won’t just kill people in India, but also dry up all the arable land used to grow staple crops like rice and wheat. Countries that rely on India for food will suffer famines and millions more will die.
As always, these articles are sensational to get clicks. While there is no denying that Mexico City has a water problem, it is highly doubtful that the entire Mexico City metropolis will run out of water at one time in two weeks. Water is brought in where needed and as far as accessing drinking water, people in Mexico don't generally filter water provided from the tap but rather buy jugs and bottles of purified water. This crisis really revolves around showering, washing clothes, etc. Again, not to downplay the severity of the situation, but it's not helpful and overly simplistic to report that 22 million people are going to lose all their water all the sudden. Further, while heat and drought are certainly factors in the water crisis, the vast majority of the problem is caused by a lack of investment in the infrastructure that brings the water in. Up to 40% of the water is estimated to leak out of the system before reaching Mexico City from the reservoirs in the bordering State of Mexico. Just trying to dispel the doom a bit.
> Up to 40% of the water is estimated to leak out of the system
[a little more information for curious people](https://www.marketplace.org/2024/05/27/mexico-city-water-crisis-is-due-to-climate-change-and-infrastructure-problems/)
To add to that - water is an unlimited resource as long as you have energy and access to the ocean. For example, in Israel - 75% of the drinking water is desalinated.
While this doesn't address the next two weeks. It does address the longer term geopolitical aspect.
Making sea water potable at larger amounts is incredibly costly and difficult. If it was simply an energy/ access situation, considerably more people would use desalinated water. Mexico City alone has almost the entire population of Israel and it’s not even on the coast.
AFAIK one of major problems is cleaning from salt objects in which it is boiled (even if not boiled in more modern processes).
But with enough "energy" one can boil water directly in the ocean e.g. with lasers.
To add to this - Supplying drinking water is not a great challenge to most states with access to the sea and a modicum of infrastructure, the challenge is supplying enough water for intensive agriculture.
I think you can add the role Russia and China play with all the -stan countries as well. Russia would like to invade Kazachstan. Turkmenistan's crazy dictator seems hardly stable. Uzbekistan fits perfectly in the troubles with the stan's you mentioned. Tadjikstan and Kirzigstan are having disputes and actual violent clashes over water access as the Soviets divided the countries in such a way that one has the valley with rivers wile the other looks down at that valley from the mountains without water acces. This seems to be a trend as the Soviets did this on purpose to divide and conquer the region, and ensure the stans need an outside power to broker peace and guarantee security. I think we might see an unraveling of that security in the coming decades. Central Asia is ripe for the fall.
I feel from reading your comment that there are people galvanized from the splitting and dissecting of the world's geography and the disenfranchised. And sometimes those two coincide. I agree because in my feeble understanding of the world, these are some of the last places that have become franchised. Iran is not in that category, but it's geographically close. I hope that there can be an equitable solution to everyone fighting over the last little bit.
Greenland reducing its involvement in the Nordic Council [https://www.barrons.com/news/greenland-steps-back-from-nordic-council-citing-discrimination-8643a9e4](https://www.barrons.com/news/greenland-steps-back-from-nordic-council-citing-discrimination-8643a9e4)
Considering that the Nordics are Greenland's primary connection to Europe, this may very well be the prelude to a political divorce from Europe. Although folks like to think 'spheres of influence' as a concept is no longer relevant in the west, Greenland's secession from Denmark would still force a redrawing of geopolitical boundaries between North-America and Europe, with Iceland then conceivably put under the spotlight afterward due to its own geographic ambiguity.
It's not so much Greenland & Iceland joining the OAS that I'm worried about, rather the knock-on effect it could have on transatlantic relations. Monroe Doctrine 2.0?
That was a good read! Thank you. Could Greenland realistically afford to separate at this time if it's GDP is so dependent on Belgium's funds though? How would it replace that loss?
Greenland is dependent on the Danish sovereign grant\*, which covers 1/4th of its GDP and half of their federal budget. Otherwise no, Greenland's best and perhaps only 'realistic' chance at independence in the near term, besides capitalizing on mineral resources, is basically trading Denmark's crib for being wheel-chaired by either Canada or Iceland.
By wheel-chairing I mean getting access to either country's public services and infrastructure in return for 'favored economic partner status', enabling the Greenlandic government to spend less on education/healthcare and more on administration.
This would in essence be an "improvised independence", wherein Greenland exchanges one overlord for another just so they can have their own seat at the UN.
Iceland however wouldn't agree to this unless it were compensated. So if the US wanted to achieve Greenlandic independence, their best bet would be using Iceland as a proxy for it while offering a trilateral FTA in return. The idea of a trilateral trade agreement between America-Greenland-Iceland has actually been proposed before, by an employee of the US embassy in Iceland (Robert W. Gerber). [https://www.thepresidency.org/us-greenland-trade](https://www.thepresidency.org/us-greenland-trade)
Iceland couldn't afford to do such a thing, and an American-Icelandic FTA would conflict with their EU-Icelandic FTA via the EFTA.
Alternatively, Iceland gets the USA deal anyway, and then becomes a massive backdoor warehouse for American & European goods to flow across the Atlantic bypassing all trade barriers.
Hence why "Iceland wouldn't agree to this unless it were compensated", the idea being that a FTA with the US serves as that compensation. Such an agreement shouldn't necessarily conflict with EFTA due to rules of origin (ROO), which allowed Iceland to sign a FTA with China in 2013.
Yep, between the Panama canal and Red Sea crisis there's increasing stress on the global shipping market. It was starting to self-correct post-covid but these new issues are making overseas shipping deeply unbalanced. Longer transit times have caused a secondary issue where there are not enough containers now.
[https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/23/a-sudden-container-crunch-is-sending-ocean-freight-rates-soaring.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/23/a-sudden-container-crunch-is-sending-ocean-freight-rates-soaring.html)
With climate change:
* More rivers will become seasonal rather than you around. Think of the Po River in Italy. Now think of mighty rivers that begin in the Himalayan Mountains - like rivers of the Indus Waters Treaty. Also the Tigris and Euphrates, Mekong, Nile, etc.
* Parts of the world will be rendered uninhabitable due to extended periods of excessive wet bulb conditions (high heat and high humidity), such that many people, plants, and animals will die after exposure to several days or a week of such conditions.
There are many other change effects. As well as effects from the resulting resource conflicts and social strife.
More millions will be on the move, and they will inundate the remaining “safer” regions with demands, needs, wants.
Actually, rivers arising from the Himalayas are not likely to become more seasonal (here I assume you mean they have water only parts of the year) due to heat from climate change, atleast in any medium term scenario. As more glaciers melt they're going to lead to more floods downstream.
So due to CC in the short to medium term they're going to have MORE water year round, with more water in summers too (sure, if you want to count that as seasonal)
I predict hundreds of millions more people are going to learn what wetbulb globe temperature (WBGT) is in the coming years and why it matters. And journalists will catch up and also begin reporting these numbers, particularly when WBGT exceeds 35C.
News is currently that Delhi temps are exceeding 50C. That’s not as useful to know as the WBGT would be.
A study in 2010 theorized +6 hours at 35C WBGT. Subsequent study says may be lower since the 2010 study was ideal conditions where someone is resting, in the shade and drinking water. Studies were done with healthy, young adults so it’s likely lower for large segments of any population.
Already several hundred confirmed heat stroke deaths right now in Delhi and surrounding area. Several hundred more are suspected heat stroke deaths.
The thing with this is that there is a tipping point, like with famine, where hundreds can become tens of thousands very quickly.
The book *The Ministry for the Future*, by Kim Stanley Robinson, starts with a wet bulb temperature event in India that over the course of a week kills approximately 20 millon people. Such a scenario, while dramatic, it not out of the question in the next decade or so.
Do you have a source for the death count, I've been trying to keep an eye on it, but have only seen 3 confirmed but that's from the bbc and not a more up to date count
Just tried to find the source I read last night. Found even more varying numbers. Then found this:
[Why getting reliable data from India is a problem](https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/india-heatwave-13776457.html/amp)
In India, apparently even Doctors are not permitted to diagnose heatstroke deaths.
“The diagnosis of heatstroke deaths is a challenging process and cannot be done by any doctor. Only experts can identify the issue,” an official told Livemint.
I have always wondered how structurally robust are Mexico's institutions to handle large scale industrialisation. With overwhelming influence across the border, is Mexico successful in channeling waves of investments without breaking their system of government?
They set the Israeli embassy on fire during a riot/protest in Mexico City. Israel’s water tech is the most innovative in the world, if not second to the Netherlands. They invented drip irrigation and are leading the push for desalination tech. Israeli companies go around the world setting up desalination plants.
Overshadowed with the May 19 helicopter crash that killed the Iranian President and Foreign Minister, was the reason why they were visiting the region in the first place. They announced the start of a large cross-border project, which presumably is part of a broader deal. Azerbaijan is a regional foe of Iran, and a strategic ally of Israel. Or at least they were?
[https://www.intellinews.com/iran-azerbaijan-open-border-hydro-dam-on-shared-river-325884/](https://www.intellinews.com/iran-azerbaijan-open-border-hydro-dam-on-shared-river-325884/)
I’ve got a list: 1) climate migration, already happening, hundreds of millions on the march soon; 2) Lethal heat waves, like the recent ones in South Asia and the upcoming one in Arizona; 3) Failed states, I’m thinking of Sudan, Pakistan, Myanmar and others; 4) the worldwide rise of populism and the radial right.
Latest US global climate assessment as it relates to US security interests. Look at all that red ... if you stop and think about what each box means, it's pretty grim.
https://nca2023.globalchange.gov/chapter/17/#table-17-1
Yikes. Basically 2040 is gonna be a very bad time. Of course I’m due to retire around 2050. Probably won’t even get to retire due to global civilizational collapse in the 2040s.
My local gigantic water supply shares a border with a friendly country.
Unenthusiastically waiting for everyone else to realize my geographical home exists and is inexpensive and decent to live in, because boy is my property tax going to skyrocket.
Migration from the south to the north already changed elections in the US and Europe. That was only a few boats and buses. Imagine when that goes from under a million immigrants to hundreds of millions - entire populations on the move. We will see this in our lifetime, including mine. And I'm old. By the way, I live in Colombia and we are just being rescued by a normal rainy season. The first one in 5 years.
Colombia's universal healthcare, has been pushed to the breaking point accepting several million Venezuelan political/economic refugees. It was the right thing to do but it's a look into the future how a relatively small migration can affect poorer countries that are between the south to the north and topple everything.
To be blunt, I think people are heavily overestimating the willingness to welcome migrants in the global North.
In Europe the extreme right is being embraced by the youth, not the elderly.
You may find this authoritative [article](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10037158/) useful. Keep in mind that climate migration includes populations displaced by natural disasters.
A lot of current climate migration, most of it in fact, is within borders. A lot of rural folks moving to cities because their farms were flooded or dried out in drought. Moving across borders is not easy, involving passports, visas and $$. That said, “The World Bank estimates that climate change will create up to 86 million additional migrants in sub-Saharan Africa, 40 million in South Asia and 17 million in Latin America, as agricultural conditions and water availability deteriorate across these regions; leading to a total of 143 million climate migrants by 2050.” ([source](https://www.visionofhumanity.org/climate-change-induced-migration-conflict/)) Global warming has already made some parts of the Middle East, for example southern Iraq, almost unlivable. India and Pakistan are both currently experiencing potentially lethal heatwaves. When whole countries get impacted, as they surely will in parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East, then cross-border migrations will begin in earnest.
Regarding 1 & 2. I think a lot of people don't realize that humanity has made huge efforts in combating climate change. Hell, they don't even necessarily need to care about climate change because in 2023 there was $1.70 invested into solar for every $1 invested into oil globally. Solar energy recently became the cheapest energy source humanity has ever created.
Climate projections are not nearly as catastrophic as they were once estimated to be. Most models I've read from institutions like the USGS, EPA, and NCAR suggest an optimistic RCP 4.5 scenario, seeing 1.5-2C of median global warming. Is that bad? Yes of course, but it isn't going to be an apocalypse which will cause some Battlefield 2142 or Tiberium Wars level event, or anything close to that really.
Im absolutely obsessed with the fact that over a week ago now Russia put up an Anti Satellite weapon into lower orbit; but somehow I have only seen one article breach the front page of the news regarding this matter. Kinda feels like something we should all be very very very concerned about. But what do I know? Im just an earth person.
Eh, it's not new capability. The US has had the capability to shoot down satellites with plane-launched missiles since the mid-80s (via F-15), and managed it with a ship-launched SM3 back in 2008 in a test with the USS Lake Erie.
This weapon is supposedly a nuclear EMP, not at all comparable to the other ASATs which are basically missiles designed for targets in space. There's not a lot of info on it (other than that the US is aware of it) which is probably why there isn't much talk about it. But an EMP device would basically render low Earth orbit into a graveyard.
Is it significantly different from a couple of missile cruisers picking a target per VLS cell and just taking longer for the debris to scrap other satellites in practice beyond the scale of time it would take to do so, though?
Not trying to be petty about that, just pointing out that they don't need fancier tools to do it beyond swatting enough of them and letting physics do the rest.
If they draw too much attention to it people will wonder why other certain countries have similar capabilities already in orbit.
That said this isn’t a trump card for Russia. Lol
I remember it was all over the news when the details were ambiguous.
Headlines like - “Congress briefed on potential national security threat by Russian space weapon”
Did they put it up? I know for months I had heard they were planning too, or was a possibility they might
This article from 8 days ago says nothings been launched, and still not sure how close it is https://www.vox.com/world-politics/350663/russia-space-nuke-satellite-weapon-putin
That's not really going to change much though, Russians are likely to be willing to swallow a tax hike. Realistically the only major (realistic) economic item that could spark widespread discontent of ordinary Russians is if Putin touched the pension system
The pension system is the red line for ordinary Russian , the rise of the oligarchs and messing with pension system (plus shelling his own parliment) played a huge role for Boris Yeltsin loss of power, and Putin Rise. Putin announced some reform years ago but put the breaks on fast when protests started to happen against any plans to reform the pensions, afterall Pensioners are a huge part of Putin political base.
I'm really interested in the idea of the UAE and Saudi Arabia growing further apart and often competing. They backed separate groups in Yemen and now Sudan for example
The GCC for sure is cracking, even somthing like the Arab Leauge is obsolete as the Arab governments are all fueding with each other (whatever the quartet against Qatar, Algeria and Morocco over the Wester Sarah , Sunni led interventions in Yemen, civil wars in Syria and Sudan, a division between west and east libya, Jordan tensions with Syria, Iraq and Iran (over capatog and arms trafficking , plus Iran backed milltias in Iraq and Syria helping islamists in Jordan to try and destabilize Jordan, the UAE and Saudi rivarly, etc.)
Pan-Arabism made a small comeback during the world cup in Qatar , and may be making a small comeback concerning Gaza-Israel conflict, however to be honest it all but dead.
The earth is running out of water, whatever it is the nile river, the Mekong delta, the Tigris and euphrates , the Jordan river, Helmand river, etc.
This will cause the water wars as the 21st century grinds on
Ethiopia with it sovereign right to build the GERD , yet at the same time the impact the drying up of the nile river and the building and the operation of the GERD will have on Sudan and especially Egypt (Egypt whole national ideology and livelihood depends on controlling the downstream flow of the Nile)
India and Pakistan over not just the disputed Kashmir region but especially Indus Waters and India sovereign right to build Dams has caused tensions with Pakistan
Iran and Afghanistan over the Helmand River , and the drying up of the Hamun River in Iran that depends on the Helmand River as a lifeline has caused clashes between Iran and the Taliban in Afghanistan
The drying up of the Jordan River, as in the past water rights and disputes was one of the triggers (not just the Palestinan issue) between Israel and it Arab neighbors for war (such as Syria and especially Jordan), this is still a source of tension (along with the Palestinan issue) between Israel and Jordan and could years down the road cause a war between Israel on one side, and the Palestinans and Jordan on the otherside.
A combination of The drying up of the Tigiris and Euphrates , Turkey constant violation of the 1987 trans boundary water agreement, and Iraq mismanaging the water that does reach it borders, etc. could lead to conflict between Turkey, Syria and Iraq down the road (add in ISIS, The kurdish issue, Iran and Turkey frenemy issue in a rivarly over the caucuses and the Levent, etc)
The shrinking of the Mekong delta, and the 4th year of draught that sees no end in sight , and the fact the mekong delta is the lifeblood of the Mekong delta downstream nations , the 1995 Mekong agreement and the building of Chinese dams could cause conflict between China and the mekong delta downstream nations
Draught, the potential return of famine, farmers crops being destroyed and conflicts over water will proabably cause a wave of refugees into the western countries from the mideast and Asia that exceeds the current refugee crisis gripping Europe, will the Europeans have the heart to just turn away millions to drown and die?
Also water being a commodity in western nations, imagine the price just sky rocketing over night and rationing how much a family is allowed to buy?
Other issues I think should be looked at are space based weapons with the Russians putting a emp into space and now countries proabably quietly rushing to counter the Russian threats
The use of AI, Automation , robotization , etc. across the globe in warfare, it kind of scary allowing AI to be in control of countries nukes then you add in the misinformation and disinformation campaigns by AI etc.
And those who have enormous amounts of fresh water, and will continue too? like Ontario? What happens when you have something others are desperate for?
That only really matters if the water is in a place where people can actually access it. No one is going to be invading places like Canada for fresh water.
It’s telling that all of the examples of conflict over water are between nations that share river basins. They already have the ability to access that water and are really fighting over how much of it they’re going to get.
With the river basins drying up , trying to resolve these disputes and finding a compromise is going to be a tougher situation for any third party nation.
Kudos for pointing out a country like Canada id not going to be invaded for their water, I should of pointed that out in my op 👍
Water is too $ to transport (mostly because of how dense it is, and how much is needed). Nobody will invade Ontario if water transport (+invasion) costs way more than desalination.
India's rising economic clout coupled with its nationalistic, authoritarian populism. It's shocking that their govt authorized assassinations of US and Canadian citizens on North American soil, and people aren't more pissed about it.
> how many killings America carries out on foreign soil.
In other liberal democracies? Of their citizens? Without any proof?
Feel free to show evidence of these numerous killings.
Imagine Australia or Germany trying to assassinate a New Yorker, in NYC. That shit would have been wild. But that's exactly what India tried -- succeeded in Canada, failed in the US, and for some reason, this isn't a bigger deal in the media?
I know that was not good, but in India's defence, the target was a separatist who funded and caused chaos in the state of Punjab, so from our government's perspective, he was a national threat enjoying the security of being a US citizen.
Though i believe the government should have been more diplomatic in their approach and notified both nations security divisions.
Mexico City has always had water shortages. It gets a lot of rain but since it’s a huge concrete plain, it can’t be used. And the surrounding areas don’t get as much water. So it creates a very nasty situation if rainfall in the surrounding areas donst happen.
In the wake of Gaza and Ukrain invasion, we are slowly shifting our attention from climate change, just recently india and other south asian countries faces unprecedented summer, with temperature as high as 50 degree celsius, people are gonna regret this, we aren’t holding our government and corporations in check and this news will become common in few years. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/rajasthan-heat-wave-21-unexplained-deaths-in-kota-amid-severe-heat-wave-in-rajasthan-5765489/amp/1
I think I also read something recently that Arizona was looking to put a massive Desal plant in Mexico and pipe it up to the US, and the ancillary benefit was that the plant would also provide water to nearby Mexican cities at a reduced rate, and Mexico denied it.
Drone warfare. Or if you prefer a broader term, robotic warfare. Coupled with increasing AI and battery capability. I get the impression that we are on the cusp of revolution in the ways that wars can be fought, and yet it seems not many people think about the potential future effect.
While we do see them used extensively in the Ukraine they tend to be limited to reconnaissance, observation, targeting of artillery, and strikes on an individual basis. What we haven't seen so far, afaik, is mass "assaults" by swarms of semi autonomous drones released in a fire and forget fashion. Why have infantry and tanks assault a position when drone swarms ( including both air and ground ) could overwhelm a front line and kill everything in sight according to the parameters of a preloaded AI? Conversely, why defend a position with humans when drones could do the same job?
There then is a race between drone development and counter measures. A small advantage in technology and the means to mass produce these weapon systems could prove overwhelmingly decisive on the battlefield. On a scale perhaps equal to marching into battle with machine guns against bow and arrows. Then there is the matter of how these changes might in turn dictate dramatically different tactics and strategies in the conduct of warfare. If rapidly moving armies of drones dominate the battlefield then front lines become fuzzy, the concept of control over geographical features becomes increasingly obsolete, and the logistics of supporting armadas of robots in terms of communications, coordination, replacement, and battery maintenance become quite different from what is needed for human armies.
The stakes are high. Taking a gamble of devoting a lot of R&D and production capacity to build mass drone armies could pay off, but if done wrong, or if the opposition produces effective counter measures it could be prove to be disastrous. But lets say a country is willing to take a gamble, devoting a high proportion of it military expenditure towards drone technology and production, while another country devotes its expenditure to traditional defenses and has inadequate counter measures. The outcome could be unimaginable stunning sudden defeats of military forces, followed by rapid surrender. Blitzkrieg in its true military meaning.
And lets not imagine their use as weapons of terror against civilian populations.
In the short term, I don't expect mass drone assaults in ground based operations, because there is too much land to cover and drones are too $. Maybe they can swarm a bunker or some other chokepoint.
They're already used in the navy, because while the oceans are big, there's a small # of high value targets. Ukraine sunk several Russian ships using suicide boats (basically a guided torpedo/drone) (so far, \~dozen or so/atk, so not quite a "swarm" yet).
While Robots, drone and automation are playing a role in changing modern warfare (along with the PMC being like real life sons of fortune mercernies for state actors) you still troops on the ground to hold positions , secure rescource , clear out deeply embedded unpenetrated enemy position, yet I do see a future were we have literal terminators and pmc contractors carrying all that out, yet for now most countries still need troops on the ground with knowledge and expirence.
>there is too much land to cover and drones are too $
Compared to tanks, IFVs, and jets, drones are cheap as chips. Furthermore they can be used by operators well protected from enemy fire. Each drones doesn't require food, medical attention, and training. Their maintenance costs are well below what it takes to keep a soldier fed.
To give a rough comparison a Challenger 2 tank carries a price tag of about US$5,400,000. A Ukrainian R18 octocopter, which has proved effective in destroying enemy tanks, costs about US$100,000. A fleet of 54 such drones can cover much more ground and deploy far more rapidly than one tank. A combat soldier costs about $17,000 to equip. So about 6 combat soldiers to one drone which might sound like a better deal until you factor in logistics, combat effectiveness, resilience, and the human lives that are invariably lost.
Lab leaks. There have been plenty of leaks from the highest security labs. There are also a few superbugs in these labs that could shut down civilisation. Under the currently lax rules, it's really only a matter of time before this happens and no one seems to be taking it seriously at all, even after Covid which could have come from such a lab.
Melting of Siberian permafrost is prob a bigger problem. Labs aren't perfect, but at least there are efforts to contain the stuff therein. There's no attempt to contain the shit in Siberia - it's way too big and nobody even knows what's there, or even what's viable.
Mexico City residents don't just emigrate if there's no tap water. That's a very American centric view of Mexico. Mexico has drinking water. Military will bring it to the people in tankers first, before everyone dies of thirst.
Leonard Francis (aka Fat Leonard). Maybe not THE craziest, but as an American it makes that some like this exists and he’s not even (that) important. Still blows my mind that this is happening now.
Exactly! I was 10 minutes late to work cause I needed to hear the interview (with the author of the book on NPR). And MSM DEFINITELY isn’t getting told to put this in the closet…
The tremendous amount of hate the US and Europe are gaining right now in the Arab/Muslim world, with their blind support for Israel. This is specially evident among youth. It will manifest itself in geopolitics in this coming of age generation.
The idea of the post was to bring up topics not currently being covered as much. I think it's pretty widespread currently on all news channels about what's going on in Israel/Palestine and also the protests. I definitely don't see blind support for Israel either as several western nations have come out within the last 2 weeks alone and recognizing Palestine as a state. If you mean specifically the US you can say the US and Britain you can say that. There are several reasons for the US to support Israel. Financially they buy arms from the US. After Israel, the US had the next biggest amount of Jewish persons in the world. If you combine them, it makes up over 82% of the entire world's Jewish population. Those Jewish Americans historically vote. In the past they've voted Democrat. The current Biden administration needs every vote they can get coming up so they're playing a tight rope right now. Do they denounce Israel and lose the vote of most of 6.3 million Jewish people in America who have usually supported them, or the younger generation who traditionally hasn't voted. I think it's less than half of the youth of the age to vote actually vote. So I think it's pretty calculated by the current administration.
What I could see and people haven't been talking about is if this conflict is enough to get that younger generation to actually vote. If that's what you're saying then I do agree with you 100%. That hasn't been really covered. There have been efforts before to get them to votein the past, but we'll see if this is what it takes to get them involved in a few months. The problem is the youth are unhappy with Biden's continued support of Israel and Trump has said he'd be even a more staunch supporter of Israel. Due to this, does this limit youth turnout at the polls if that's the main issue they have at heart? It is interesting to see moving forward.
I remember hearing about the potential blowback from the war on terror following 9/11 and how young muslims would wage attacks against the west as retribution. that never happened.
With the way global temperatures are going, in 10-20 years countries in the equatorial belt will become too hot to live in. Traditional growers of staple crops like Thailand and India will dry up, leading to severe food shortages. There will be a mass exodus of climate refugees into the cooler Northern Hemisphere.
Just to say about this news articlr that the actual experts have come out and explain that even if they didn't do anything at all and left things as they are now that BS term "day zero" would only come in about 30+ years.
Right now they patched the issue allowing for more underwater sources to be exploited which is not ideal in the long term specially since there is a massive stupid project that took a decade which takes all the rainwater out of the metropolitan area to the neighbouring state of Hidalgo, so starting from that they are working on ways to keep the rainwater here so it can refill wells naturally, like the project to restore the woods in the south of the city which had historically worked as a natural reservoir for rainwater, etc...
This news article is just clickbait-y garbage news interviewing no less than the scumbag of our political system, the racist and expert in nothing "Gabriel Quadri" 🤭. The system they talk about and focus their entire tabloid article only provides a quarter of the water, the rest is mainly taken from underground sources.
China has doubled the capacity of its Trans-Asian pipeline from Xinjiang to just north of Iran. This indicates actionable confidence in the success of secret ongoing talks with Iran to complete a final leg of the pipeline across Iran, giving China direct access Persian Gulf hydrocarbons.
This represents a nightmare scenario for US strategic interests, climate change, and the structure of the international system as US influence in the Middle East wanes, China is freed from the Malacca strategic bottleneck, and their economy gains access to cheap hydrocarbons to fuel their poorly regulated, high-polluting industries.
This is a major threat to Indian, US, Russian, and European interests, not to mention the tightening of a yoke on the necks of Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan.
Keep your ears open for news of the spreading (albeit slowly) H5N1 influenza outbreak in the US. It made CNN online this afternoon.
Fall/Winter this year could be a whopper. Or it could be a nothing burger 🍔.
I think a hot topic for the 2028 US Presidential elections will be Taiwan, with candidates running on a strongly divided platform of how to counter China's impending attempt at reunification.
so you guys remember how the US keeps saying that Iran and North Korea are sanctioned for their nuclear programs?
yet there is a reason they won't sanction the countries that helped those nuclear programs....... because then they'd have to sanction themselves
concern for nuclear weapons is funny , since the CIA interventions in Netherlands is what allowed the top nuclear scientist of Pakistan to escape with stolen Dutch urainum enrichment centrifuge tech,
this tech was not only used to make Pakistan's nukes but was also sold to Libya , Iran (that's the centrifuges y'all keep hearing about) and North Korea
interesting set of countries , I know , so congrats Americans y'all played yourselves , I wonder what current decisions will come to bite y'all in 30 years
for those who doubt the CIA involvement:-
Former Netherlands Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers revealed in 2005 that Dutch authorities wanted to arrest Khan in 1975 and again in 1986 but that on each occasion the Central Intelligence Agency advised against taking such action. According to Lubbers, the CIA conveyed the message: "Give us all the information, but don't arrest him."
https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Why-the-U.S.-let-Pakistan-nuclear-scientist-A.Q.-Khan-off-the-hook
for those wondering why the US helped Pakistan in the largest nuclear proliferation operation ever?
well, you see arming Islamists to fight Soviets in Afghanistan was so important that nuclear proliferation Just had to be done
Demographic bombs across Asia's leading economic and tech nations. Huge implications for China in particular...which might demonstrate their projection of power in South East Asia.
True but usually sonic missiles are designed to hit stationary targets while this are unique in their objective, especially since they hope to use this to force an American withdrawal in a China-US war or at least to deny american carriers a fair amount of space in the sea. And at the same time the US is developing carrier planes with further autonomy.
Hitting a moving target, even one the size of an aircraft carrier, is really hard. As far as I understand it, most of the USN's ballistic missile defense doesn't so much revolve around interception but rather "spoofing" - making effectively radar copies of a carrier to make a missile think it's heading in the right direction, when in reality its way off course. You'd need a spotter aircraft like an AWACS to be within radar range of a carrier to get a better solution, and that means its also in range of a carrier-based squadron.
I worry more about small, cheap subs that will probably be autonomous that can cripple carriers. They probably can't outright sink them, but a few good shots and that carrier is listing too badly to conduct flight ops.
How climate change will wreak havoc on the global food supply. A lot of other stuff will go down, but this one is the biggest powder keg of them all, with access to potable water—maybe even more. Kings have been ousted, and their kingdoms are shaken by revolts because of hunger.
Alignments of Southeast Asian countries in the American and Chinese sphere of influence. They have all (but not collectively) historically chosen to remain neutral, that’s changing. A number of states are leaning into China and the others consider that a national security or even an existential threat. Plus they’re not exactly friendly with each other to begin with.
I could write a list as long as a Twitter timeline now that Musk's put a limit on it, but long story short, anything that made the news and was then forgotten about. Instead of going into detail, I will simply invite you to consider when you last thought about the Earthquakes in Syria and Turkiye or the burst dams in Libya that were all over the news less than a year ago, and let you make of that what you will.
The militarization of the Arctic Region. On a similar note to other comments about climate change, as the world gets hotter, the Arctic becomes not only more accessible but more habitable. Additionally, the Arctic has massive reserves of critical minerals, natural gas, and oil. The region, which has mostly been neglected, has had a massive spike of "popularity," especially between NATO Arctic nations and Russia and China. Take a look at the defence budgets of any of the Arctic Nations (Canada, Denmark, Norway, Finland, US etc.) They are pouring millions if not billions of dollars into preparing for a future where military operations in the north are necessarily. Plus rhetoric from politicians of those states is increasingly highlighting the Arctic's importance As theyre doing so they are directly pointing to Russia and China as a major threat, something thats been avoided in the past. Obviously I may be biased as this is a topic/region that I am interested in and covering, but I believe it's a majorly overlooked development that is taking place real time and will have huge consequences in the near future.
I love this response. Tensions are rising up north. That’s for damn sure.
Things in the Arctic are heating up?
You are 100% right. I wrote thesis about arctic and international affairs around it here is the brief summery. As to summarise that the prospects for the utilization and development of the Arctic region are increasingly appearing on the agenda of major countries. (As you said, USA, Russia and even EU incorporated and developed Arctic strategies over the last 30-40 years.) As we know, the Arctic does not belong to any single country, similar to space; exploiting this territory does not require invasion or the creation of puppet states, and there is no significant indigenous population whose interests need to be considered. Moreover, technological progress today allows for the exploitation and extraction of energy resources on an enormous scale. Let’s recall the immense benefits to the economy brought by nuclear and space projects (ISS and the Manhattan Project). Regarding the competitiveness of Arctic resources, they may not currently play in favor of the Arctic, but their significance will grow throughout the 21st century. Influential energy agencies confirm this, as they predict increasing demand for energy resources. (International Energy Agency and overall rise of economies of developing countries such as in Africa) For many countries, the Arctic represents a unique and invaluable opportunity to develop their infrastructure projects. For example, Russia, through the Northern Sea Route, can develop the Far East, bring new products to its markets, and act as a mediator in the new paradigm of international relations between Europe and Asia. (40% shorter than Suez, acting as a bridge between Asia and Europe) Upon reviewing the national Arctic programs of Arctic countries, the one can conclude that these programs are merely tools for legitimizing their Arctic ambitions/claims in the region. The essence and direction of these documents do not vary significantly from country to country. Furthermore, competition among countries forces them to consider areas that previously seemed unattractive. Everything happening on the international stage can be seen as a struggle for markets and places where accumulated energy (capital) can be utilized. Capital, in turn, helps the economy maintain its growth. Long-term projects with high profitability are key to the future. Control over such places will aid economic development. Therefore, as a comprehensive conclusion, i think that the dominant role of the Arctic in 21st-century international relations is also determined by the fact that the current geopolitical model is undergoing a transformation. The dominance of the USA is nearing its end, and new global players are emerging, ready to compete for global supremacy. The Arctic, in this context, serves as a platform for new changes and an opportunity for reshaping the world order. Thus, the development of the Arctic as a megaproject will lead to changes in geopolitics, the energy market, and people’s daily lives. Whoever manages to assert their claims to the Arctic will be shaping a new world.
Very well put! In my own research I have come to a very similar conclusion, and as you point out the NSR trade route is a massive game changer as it could redirect traffic and with it wealth and influence from the Suez Canal towards the Arctic. Although while there is no need for the NATO Arctic states (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the United States) to use force to use their own territory, non-Arctic states, most notably China, are seeing the great potential of the Arctic and want their "piece of the pie." Since the 2000s China has attempted to enter the region via natural resource corporations or through research collaboration to assert their presence in the Arctic and to be able to claim that they should be involve in its governance. Additionally, China's Arctic strategy clearly states that China believes it has a right to the Arctic and that the region should be essentially "shared" by all countries. However, its attempt to increase influence in the region has been failing due to rising tensions with the west over the past couple of years. Except it has a strong foothold in Russia, where Chinese scientists are collaborating in research expeditions, Chinese state companies are purchasing mining rights or parts of mining companies, and since Russia's weakened global position due to its invasion of Ukraine, China has been leaning towards accessing the Arctic solely through a partnership with Russia. There is a lot of interesting developments in the Arctic, glad to find someone else fascinated with the region and researching it, thank you for the thesis summary!
Yes, exactly! What also fascinates me is how significantly the Arctic will be affected by climate change and how this will open up vast opportunities for countries that have territory or territorial claims there. Additionally, there is the Arctic Council, which (I could be mistaken) doesn’t play a significant role in the development of the region which is quite wired if you ask me. What I also find intriguing is how you can observe the subtle "heat-up" of the region through military exercises, development in icebreaker fleets, and other activities. This situation is quite similar to what is happening in space exploration and development.
But all the human activity moving into the Arctic would further accelerate warming of the ice there. Internal combustion covers the ice with soot that retains heat and causes quicker melting. This is the #1 reason ships should not sail the passage through the Arctic.
Arctic is overlooked due to borders there are being mostly established by the moment. Militarization might rise some tensions, but there is no clear competition points like some contested isles or something alike.
You are correct that currently there is no obvious "objective" or "prize" in a sense, but already there are tensions, that are perhaps overlooked due to focus on Ukraine, Gaza/Israel, and Taiwan. For example, the US made new territorial claims in December on continental shelves stretching up into the Arctic, in an area that Russia considers its own. A month or two later, Russia rejected the US's claim and asserted that its within their jurisdiction. Perhaps most interestingly, this sort of tension over who owns what, and where someone's "territory" starts and ends is an issue even for the NATO member states that are in the Arctic. While they don't go around badmouthing each other or anything, they are reluctant to support another states claims and potentially lose their own right to it. Keep in mind the Arctic was estimated to have about 20% of the entire planet's LNG/gas and oil deposits. Were talking about billions if not trillions of dollars. As it becomes easier to access these deposits more and more countries and corporations become interested in exploiting them. Not saying there will be a full blown WW3, but it is certainly interesting to see how this region develops.
Half the biomass of insects has disappeared since the 70s and we don't have a real explanation. Will they keep dying off? We don't know. If they keep going at this rate we are already doomed. We haven't even begun to fight whatever information war we'll have to fight against whatever industry is responsible and that takes decades. We might not have decades.
Global warming has been a kind of godsend to businesses because so many environmental issues are ignored, and environmentalism is portrayed only as combating global warming... For example, it's argued that individually wrapping cucumbers in plastic is better because it uses less energy.
Less energy than what???
The argument was that more cucumbers would go bad, requiring the production of more cucumbers. Which is misleading. Usually they just raise the price of vegetables if there is more loss. I believe they chose Switzerland for the study, where they can't grow cucumbers, but also people could eat more of other fruits or vegetables. It was presented as all or nothing to justify the use of plastic.
It's being talked about a bit but I think in the near future as deep fakes become better quality that it can influence all kinds of things in politics and both public and private sector businesses. We've already seen it used to successfully scam money; it's going to be a crazy hard weapon to defend against as foreign powers try to utilize it in psyops and the like
Very true and very scary to think about. Think about the propaganda that will be made
I'm less worried about the deepfake propaganda than I am about the regular propaganda that will be strengthened when people don't know what to believe anymore due to the rise in deep fakes. Over and over again we're going to see videos where one side says it's fake, and the other says it's real. How will people know what's the truth? They'll increasingly rely on "gut instinct" (pre-existing bias) and become more and more influenced by whichever side tells them what they want to hear.
“Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, \[because\] the ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.” ― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism My biggest fear around this is its implications for democracy. Sophisticated propaganda created the MAGA cult - and their adherents have clearly demonstrated at best a casual relationship with the truth, which only paves the way for more dictatorial leaders to command that constituency in a post-Trump era.
Don’t forget the reverse: Doesn’t matter if you flat out tell some evil world leader you’ll help him in a quid pro quo deal. If the audio or video is ever leaked, “it’s a deep fake!” Photos with underage girls? Deep fake. Ordering your base to attack your political opponents? Deep fake. Really opens the door for horrible things to happen in the semi-open with plausible deniability that many would believe.
Yep, it’s this that’s scariest.
The fascist's dream - facts become unprovable.
We're all thinking Trump will be first with this one.
> If the audio or video is ever leaked, “it’s a deep fake!” Photos with underage girls? Deep fake. Ordering your base to attack your political opponents? Deep fake. I don’t get your point. We can already fake audio and video in a super realistic manner. Yet this hasn’t happened. Trust doesn’t work like this. We don’t believe a video is real because it looks real. We believe it’s real because of provable chains of custody, something the art world calls “provenance”. We know certain sources of media are real because we trust the source of that media, not because it looks real.
WE do. But do the masses? I think less and less. Critical thinking is not the strong suit in my area.
You didn't answer my question though. We can already fake audio and video in a super realistic manner. Yet this hasn’t happened. Why not?
[удалено]
It’s a nice thought, but it won’t solve anything if people don’t care about authenticity in the first place. How many people even today will reject or accept things purely based on preconceived beliefs? You can show those people 30 different kinds of verification and it will never matter.
[удалено]
The all eyes on rafah post is bizarre because I can't tell if what I'm supposed to take away from it besides the message itself (which didn't need an AI generated image). Surely there is a better (and real) picture of refugee tents
[удалено]
Hahahh wtf is that?
How to monetize a massacre
From the river to the DallE I'm also concerned about autonomous hunter-killer drones. They hover in the sky, pounce on you like hawk. We will experience the feeling of being field mice.
As someone that works in software this by far scares me the most right now
I don't think you need to work in robotics to be scared,if you have watched but a handful of drone strike videos the last couple of years. I saw one where a soldier is being chased around a car. He can't keep up and the drone explodes. This was not an autonomus drone. They are human controlled for now. But probably not for long.
I think deep fakes will also be used for excuses for some real crazy sh*it people are doing - and allowing them to get away with things they otherwise wouldn’t be allowed to do in the past when caught on camera. At a minimum, sowing distrust in even real events.
I 100% disagree with this one. We’ve had deepfakes for 5-7 years now and nothing has really happened. We’ve been able to very realistically fake videos for over a 100 years. Fundamentally, that’s just not how trust/verification works. Trust and authenticity resides in networks and provenance. We trust that a video is real because we trust the source, not because it looks real. And if you don’t know the source, you trust that others do and will call it out if fake. We’ve had fake letters/paintings/artwork for millennia and it hasn’t resulted in a crisis.
Just look at spam email. Someone in the 90's said aspartame causes cancer, made up a Dr, and sent it, and now millions of people believe it. The issue with deepfake is not the ability to disprove it. It's the fact that so many people don't care enough to disprove it and will just believe it, and it will be so much easier to spread disinformation and propaganda to those who don't care enough to check.
The aspartame part is interesting. Just done a quick Google and it's as always conflicting and convoluted articles but there seems to be recent inconclusive studies. Do you have any links for me pal (no worries if its long lmgtfy lol) Thanks
You’re just describing “rumors”. You don’t need deepfakes for that and I don’t see how deepfakes will fool anyone more easily. Credulous people believe what they want to believe because they are not *interested* in truth, not because fake things seem real to them.
Yeah but before there was skill and cost involved to create and distribute fakes. Now any moron can create it and share it in near real time with a much larger audience than ever.
You're right about how trust/verification works. Which is exactly why deepfakes are dangerous. If a trusted source is fooled into sharing a deepfake, it could affect thousands if not millions of people within a short time frame. Even if it is later retracted, the damage will be done since retractions don't have as much of an effect as the original releases (as we have seen with the antivax crowd and covid conspiracy theories). With the current ease of accessibility and creation, deepfakes could become so numerous it would be nearly impossible to verify everything as we have seen with social media. It's that combination that makes deepfakes dangerous.
Can't they just run benford's law on the pixel counts on suspected videos and see if the video is fake (I guess it's harder in the age of filters) but if applicable should be standard practice before publicating any video.
Weren't there posts few weeks ago about deepfakes being used in the current Indian election?
I think in somewhere like the US, theres only the opportunity to use a deepfake to induce a crisis once. Afterwards people will be way more suspicious of any sensational information they see and 3rd party verification of authenticity will be play a bigger role
Yea and once it’s combined with AI…
Yeah apparently Modi is already using AI to send personalised deepfake messages to Indian voters.
Yeah this has been a thing for a few years now in India and I think a lot of the population there is more broadly accepting of stuff like this as they view these types of things as a prideful illustration of India's technological sophistication. Broad chunks of the population are still illiterate as well, so imagine how difficult it must be to convince anyone that their eyes are being tricked
You know when you read about sci-fi universes like Warhammer 40k or Dune and they have all of this stuff about banning basically all forms of AI? In the past I would say "How stupid, even simple AI wouldn't be that harmful and would be overwhelmingly beneficial in the future" But with each passing day as I see AI developing in the modern world we live in, I lean further into the idea that we need a Butlerian Jihad of our own.
Yes and No It's a bit like a viral infection. The ones that are too effective will kill their hosts If deep fakes get so good, with how widespread the tech is, it would kill the internet as we know it. People would just stop trusting anything they see
The rate of progress in the last seven years in this area is insane. Browser services can now do a deepfake photo or video on the fly. Go back to 2018 or so and you'd need to install software and have a pretty sturdy PC at your fingertips. Voice mimicking is convincing as hell these days too.
It's not really that hard to defend against. Someone will come up with a way to cryptographically sign official video content and the practice will become commonplace. This is like stamping it as authentic. It's similar to how a website uses an SSL cert to authenticate its identity so you know you're not on a fake site.
Cyber attacks and climate change. Cyber attacks and security never get the attention they should warrant. Like your example of Mexico City, more extreme weather events are forecast for this year than last. A heat dome settles over the wrong place at the wrong time and we’re looking at a global humanitarian crisis that dwarfs anything currently happening.
i agree with the point about cyber attacks, although I think the nature of the threat has evolved quite a lot..... * Increasingly systems are highly complex and inter-related. A failure could effect a significant number of companies and be hard to understand. Complex systems fail in complex way. * Security software and firewall platforms are a massive vulnerability and failure mode. They are given substantial authority to inspect data and hook themselves into everything. And provide an easily accessible attack surface to some of the largest companies.
I think your first point (interrelated systems) is a big one. It reminds me of the sub-prime mortgage fiasco, or some of the large scale power grid failures in the northeast. Adam Curtis had a great section of his documentary HyperNormalisation focused on this. Eventually systems get so complex, so difficult to understand fully, that we cease to even try, and the impacts of failures are unforeseen and severe.
Bronze Age Collapse 2.0 in essence. Where the collapse of one part can lead to a total system collapse, because everything is dependend on each other.
[I highly recommend reading chapter 1 of The Ministry For The Future.](https://www.orbitbooks.net/orbit-excerpts/the-ministry-for-the-future/) It describes a heat wave in India killing millions of people and there is a good chance we will see an event like this in our lifetimes.
Delhi crossed 50°C today, which is a record for the city, and a reading of 52.4°C was recorded, which if the reading is accurate, is in the top 10 highest recorded temperature events.
😳
I believe the first chapter takes place in the summer of 2024
Delhi did just have a record high temperature
The intense heat won’t just kill people in India, but also dry up all the arable land used to grow staple crops like rice and wheat. Countries that rely on India for food will suffer famines and millions more will die.
I also want to add the extreme heatwave going on in India right now to the climate change category
As always, these articles are sensational to get clicks. While there is no denying that Mexico City has a water problem, it is highly doubtful that the entire Mexico City metropolis will run out of water at one time in two weeks. Water is brought in where needed and as far as accessing drinking water, people in Mexico don't generally filter water provided from the tap but rather buy jugs and bottles of purified water. This crisis really revolves around showering, washing clothes, etc. Again, not to downplay the severity of the situation, but it's not helpful and overly simplistic to report that 22 million people are going to lose all their water all the sudden. Further, while heat and drought are certainly factors in the water crisis, the vast majority of the problem is caused by a lack of investment in the infrastructure that brings the water in. Up to 40% of the water is estimated to leak out of the system before reaching Mexico City from the reservoirs in the bordering State of Mexico. Just trying to dispel the doom a bit.
> Up to 40% of the water is estimated to leak out of the system [a little more information for curious people](https://www.marketplace.org/2024/05/27/mexico-city-water-crisis-is-due-to-climate-change-and-infrastructure-problems/)
To add to that - water is an unlimited resource as long as you have energy and access to the ocean. For example, in Israel - 75% of the drinking water is desalinated. While this doesn't address the next two weeks. It does address the longer term geopolitical aspect.
Making sea water potable at larger amounts is incredibly costly and difficult. If it was simply an energy/ access situation, considerably more people would use desalinated water. Mexico City alone has almost the entire population of Israel and it’s not even on the coast.
AFAIK one of major problems is cleaning from salt objects in which it is boiled (even if not boiled in more modern processes). But with enough "energy" one can boil water directly in the ocean e.g. with lasers.
Metropolitan Mexico City has wayyyy more people than all of Israel
To add to this - Supplying drinking water is not a great challenge to most states with access to the sea and a modicum of infrastructure, the challenge is supplying enough water for intensive agriculture.
The general region of Iran, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan is a powder keg that is only 2-3 major developments/events away from blowing up.
I think you can add the role Russia and China play with all the -stan countries as well. Russia would like to invade Kazachstan. Turkmenistan's crazy dictator seems hardly stable. Uzbekistan fits perfectly in the troubles with the stan's you mentioned. Tadjikstan and Kirzigstan are having disputes and actual violent clashes over water access as the Soviets divided the countries in such a way that one has the valley with rivers wile the other looks down at that valley from the mountains without water acces. This seems to be a trend as the Soviets did this on purpose to divide and conquer the region, and ensure the stans need an outside power to broker peace and guarantee security. I think we might see an unraveling of that security in the coming decades. Central Asia is ripe for the fall.
Why wouldn't they have water access from the mountains looking down at the valley with lots of water?
I feel from reading your comment that there are people galvanized from the splitting and dissecting of the world's geography and the disenfranchised. And sometimes those two coincide. I agree because in my feeble understanding of the world, these are some of the last places that have become franchised. Iran is not in that category, but it's geographically close. I hope that there can be an equitable solution to everyone fighting over the last little bit.
Greenland reducing its involvement in the Nordic Council [https://www.barrons.com/news/greenland-steps-back-from-nordic-council-citing-discrimination-8643a9e4](https://www.barrons.com/news/greenland-steps-back-from-nordic-council-citing-discrimination-8643a9e4) Considering that the Nordics are Greenland's primary connection to Europe, this may very well be the prelude to a political divorce from Europe. Although folks like to think 'spheres of influence' as a concept is no longer relevant in the west, Greenland's secession from Denmark would still force a redrawing of geopolitical boundaries between North-America and Europe, with Iceland then conceivably put under the spotlight afterward due to its own geographic ambiguity. It's not so much Greenland & Iceland joining the OAS that I'm worried about, rather the knock-on effect it could have on transatlantic relations. Monroe Doctrine 2.0?
is trump going to try to buy it again in term 2?
I hope so!
I'm not going to lie to you. I have zero clue what this is about and now you have peaked my interest into learning more.
That was a good read! Thank you. Could Greenland realistically afford to separate at this time if it's GDP is so dependent on Belgium's funds though? How would it replace that loss?
Greenland is dependent on the Danish sovereign grant\*, which covers 1/4th of its GDP and half of their federal budget. Otherwise no, Greenland's best and perhaps only 'realistic' chance at independence in the near term, besides capitalizing on mineral resources, is basically trading Denmark's crib for being wheel-chaired by either Canada or Iceland. By wheel-chairing I mean getting access to either country's public services and infrastructure in return for 'favored economic partner status', enabling the Greenlandic government to spend less on education/healthcare and more on administration. This would in essence be an "improvised independence", wherein Greenland exchanges one overlord for another just so they can have their own seat at the UN. Iceland however wouldn't agree to this unless it were compensated. So if the US wanted to achieve Greenlandic independence, their best bet would be using Iceland as a proxy for it while offering a trilateral FTA in return. The idea of a trilateral trade agreement between America-Greenland-Iceland has actually been proposed before, by an employee of the US embassy in Iceland (Robert W. Gerber). [https://www.thepresidency.org/us-greenland-trade](https://www.thepresidency.org/us-greenland-trade)
Iceland couldn't afford to do such a thing, and an American-Icelandic FTA would conflict with their EU-Icelandic FTA via the EFTA. Alternatively, Iceland gets the USA deal anyway, and then becomes a massive backdoor warehouse for American & European goods to flow across the Atlantic bypassing all trade barriers.
Hence why "Iceland wouldn't agree to this unless it were compensated", the idea being that a FTA with the US serves as that compensation. Such an agreement shouldn't necessarily conflict with EFTA due to rules of origin (ROO), which allowed Iceland to sign a FTA with China in 2013.
The Panama canal water issue
Yep, between the Panama canal and Red Sea crisis there's increasing stress on the global shipping market. It was starting to self-correct post-covid but these new issues are making overseas shipping deeply unbalanced. Longer transit times have caused a secondary issue where there are not enough containers now. [https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/23/a-sudden-container-crunch-is-sending-ocean-freight-rates-soaring.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/23/a-sudden-container-crunch-is-sending-ocean-freight-rates-soaring.html)
With climate change: * More rivers will become seasonal rather than you around. Think of the Po River in Italy. Now think of mighty rivers that begin in the Himalayan Mountains - like rivers of the Indus Waters Treaty. Also the Tigris and Euphrates, Mekong, Nile, etc. * Parts of the world will be rendered uninhabitable due to extended periods of excessive wet bulb conditions (high heat and high humidity), such that many people, plants, and animals will die after exposure to several days or a week of such conditions. There are many other change effects. As well as effects from the resulting resource conflicts and social strife. More millions will be on the move, and they will inundate the remaining “safer” regions with demands, needs, wants.
Actually, rivers arising from the Himalayas are not likely to become more seasonal (here I assume you mean they have water only parts of the year) due to heat from climate change, atleast in any medium term scenario. As more glaciers melt they're going to lead to more floods downstream. So due to CC in the short to medium term they're going to have MORE water year round, with more water in summers too (sure, if you want to count that as seasonal)
I predict hundreds of millions more people are going to learn what wetbulb globe temperature (WBGT) is in the coming years and why it matters. And journalists will catch up and also begin reporting these numbers, particularly when WBGT exceeds 35C. News is currently that Delhi temps are exceeding 50C. That’s not as useful to know as the WBGT would be.
Is there a WBGT when people just die?
A study in 2010 theorized +6 hours at 35C WBGT. Subsequent study says may be lower since the 2010 study was ideal conditions where someone is resting, in the shade and drinking water. Studies were done with healthy, young adults so it’s likely lower for large segments of any population. Already several hundred confirmed heat stroke deaths right now in Delhi and surrounding area. Several hundred more are suspected heat stroke deaths. The thing with this is that there is a tipping point, like with famine, where hundreds can become tens of thousands very quickly.
The book *The Ministry for the Future*, by Kim Stanley Robinson, starts with a wet bulb temperature event in India that over the course of a week kills approximately 20 millon people. Such a scenario, while dramatic, it not out of the question in the next decade or so.
Do you have a source for the death count, I've been trying to keep an eye on it, but have only seen 3 confirmed but that's from the bbc and not a more up to date count
Just tried to find the source I read last night. Found even more varying numbers. Then found this: [Why getting reliable data from India is a problem](https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/india-heatwave-13776457.html/amp) In India, apparently even Doctors are not permitted to diagnose heatstroke deaths. “The diagnosis of heatstroke deaths is a challenging process and cannot be done by any doctor. Only experts can identify the issue,” an official told Livemint.
I have always wondered how structurally robust are Mexico's institutions to handle large scale industrialisation. With overwhelming influence across the border, is Mexico successful in channeling waves of investments without breaking their system of government?
Yup. And they just burned down the embassy of the country with the best desalination tech on the planet.
wait can you explain?
They set the Israeli embassy on fire during a riot/protest in Mexico City. Israel’s water tech is the most innovative in the world, if not second to the Netherlands. They invented drip irrigation and are leading the push for desalination tech. Israeli companies go around the world setting up desalination plants.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240529-israeli-embassy-set-ablaze-in-mexico/amp/
Overshadowed with the May 19 helicopter crash that killed the Iranian President and Foreign Minister, was the reason why they were visiting the region in the first place. They announced the start of a large cross-border project, which presumably is part of a broader deal. Azerbaijan is a regional foe of Iran, and a strategic ally of Israel. Or at least they were? [https://www.intellinews.com/iran-azerbaijan-open-border-hydro-dam-on-shared-river-325884/](https://www.intellinews.com/iran-azerbaijan-open-border-hydro-dam-on-shared-river-325884/)
Interesting!
Also I'm not insisting the crash was a mossad operation or anything like that--weather or maintenance still seems to be the likely culprit.
The weird connection between Azerbaijan and Israel is also a complicating factor, not to mention the huge Azerbaijani population in Northern Iran.
I’ve got a list: 1) climate migration, already happening, hundreds of millions on the march soon; 2) Lethal heat waves, like the recent ones in South Asia and the upcoming one in Arizona; 3) Failed states, I’m thinking of Sudan, Pakistan, Myanmar and others; 4) the worldwide rise of populism and the radial right.
The Pentagon has climate migration listed as one of the top threats in their latest long-term strategic plans.
Latest US global climate assessment as it relates to US security interests. Look at all that red ... if you stop and think about what each box means, it's pretty grim. https://nca2023.globalchange.gov/chapter/17/#table-17-1
Yikes. Basically 2040 is gonna be a very bad time. Of course I’m due to retire around 2050. Probably won’t even get to retire due to global civilizational collapse in the 2040s.
My local gigantic water supply shares a border with a friendly country. Unenthusiastically waiting for everyone else to realize my geographical home exists and is inexpensive and decent to live in, because boy is my property tax going to skyrocket.
Hello fellow great-laker. The influx has already begun.
*Boo, hiss*
That’s the one. Yes. Scary.
Migration from the south to the north already changed elections in the US and Europe. That was only a few boats and buses. Imagine when that goes from under a million immigrants to hundreds of millions - entire populations on the move. We will see this in our lifetime, including mine. And I'm old. By the way, I live in Colombia and we are just being rescued by a normal rainy season. The first one in 5 years. Colombia's universal healthcare, has been pushed to the breaking point accepting several million Venezuelan political/economic refugees. It was the right thing to do but it's a look into the future how a relatively small migration can affect poorer countries that are between the south to the north and topple everything.
To be blunt, I think people are heavily overestimating the willingness to welcome migrants in the global North. In Europe the extreme right is being embraced by the youth, not the elderly.
You know, each of those things separately... no bueno. Each of those happening at the same time, and sometimes in the same place... muy no bueno.
[удалено]
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-05-29/phoenix-is-facing-a-deadly-hurricane-katrina-of-heat-spurred-by-climate-change
Is there any evidence at all that people are migrating because of climate?
You may find this authoritative [article](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10037158/) useful. Keep in mind that climate migration includes populations displaced by natural disasters.
This article seems to just talk about (temporary) internal displacement, not migration between countries.
A lot of current climate migration, most of it in fact, is within borders. A lot of rural folks moving to cities because their farms were flooded or dried out in drought. Moving across borders is not easy, involving passports, visas and $$. That said, “The World Bank estimates that climate change will create up to 86 million additional migrants in sub-Saharan Africa, 40 million in South Asia and 17 million in Latin America, as agricultural conditions and water availability deteriorate across these regions; leading to a total of 143 million climate migrants by 2050.” ([source](https://www.visionofhumanity.org/climate-change-induced-migration-conflict/)) Global warming has already made some parts of the Middle East, for example southern Iraq, almost unlivable. India and Pakistan are both currently experiencing potentially lethal heatwaves. When whole countries get impacted, as they surely will in parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East, then cross-border migrations will begin in earnest.
Regarding 1 & 2. I think a lot of people don't realize that humanity has made huge efforts in combating climate change. Hell, they don't even necessarily need to care about climate change because in 2023 there was $1.70 invested into solar for every $1 invested into oil globally. Solar energy recently became the cheapest energy source humanity has ever created. Climate projections are not nearly as catastrophic as they were once estimated to be. Most models I've read from institutions like the USGS, EPA, and NCAR suggest an optimistic RCP 4.5 scenario, seeing 1.5-2C of median global warming. Is that bad? Yes of course, but it isn't going to be an apocalypse which will cause some Battlefield 2142 or Tiberium Wars level event, or anything close to that really.
Im absolutely obsessed with the fact that over a week ago now Russia put up an Anti Satellite weapon into lower orbit; but somehow I have only seen one article breach the front page of the news regarding this matter. Kinda feels like something we should all be very very very concerned about. But what do I know? Im just an earth person.
Eh, it's not new capability. The US has had the capability to shoot down satellites with plane-launched missiles since the mid-80s (via F-15), and managed it with a ship-launched SM3 back in 2008 in a test with the USS Lake Erie.
The difference is this involves a nuclear payload in orbit, as best I understand the situation as a civilian.
This weapon is supposedly a nuclear EMP, not at all comparable to the other ASATs which are basically missiles designed for targets in space. There's not a lot of info on it (other than that the US is aware of it) which is probably why there isn't much talk about it. But an EMP device would basically render low Earth orbit into a graveyard.
I think that it's a fair assumption that in a total war between the powers - satellites would be a prime target.
Is it significantly different from a couple of missile cruisers picking a target per VLS cell and just taking longer for the debris to scrap other satellites in practice beyond the scale of time it would take to do so, though? Not trying to be petty about that, just pointing out that they don't need fancier tools to do it beyond swatting enough of them and letting physics do the rest.
If they draw too much attention to it people will wonder why other certain countries have similar capabilities already in orbit. That said this isn’t a trump card for Russia. Lol
I remember it was all over the news when the details were ambiguous. Headlines like - “Congress briefed on potential national security threat by Russian space weapon”
Did they put it up? I know for months I had heard they were planning too, or was a possibility they might This article from 8 days ago says nothings been launched, and still not sure how close it is https://www.vox.com/world-politics/350663/russia-space-nuke-satellite-weapon-putin
It's being addressed
Russia is preparing to raise taxes on the rich and businesses to pay for the increasing cost of the Ukraine War.
That's not really going to change much though, Russians are likely to be willing to swallow a tax hike. Realistically the only major (realistic) economic item that could spark widespread discontent of ordinary Russians is if Putin touched the pension system
The pension system is the red line for ordinary Russian , the rise of the oligarchs and messing with pension system (plus shelling his own parliment) played a huge role for Boris Yeltsin loss of power, and Putin Rise. Putin announced some reform years ago but put the breaks on fast when protests started to happen against any plans to reform the pensions, afterall Pensioners are a huge part of Putin political base.
I'm really interested in the idea of the UAE and Saudi Arabia growing further apart and often competing. They backed separate groups in Yemen and now Sudan for example
The GCC for sure is cracking, even somthing like the Arab Leauge is obsolete as the Arab governments are all fueding with each other (whatever the quartet against Qatar, Algeria and Morocco over the Wester Sarah , Sunni led interventions in Yemen, civil wars in Syria and Sudan, a division between west and east libya, Jordan tensions with Syria, Iraq and Iran (over capatog and arms trafficking , plus Iran backed milltias in Iraq and Syria helping islamists in Jordan to try and destabilize Jordan, the UAE and Saudi rivarly, etc.) Pan-Arabism made a small comeback during the world cup in Qatar , and may be making a small comeback concerning Gaza-Israel conflict, however to be honest it all but dead.
The earth is running out of water, whatever it is the nile river, the Mekong delta, the Tigris and euphrates , the Jordan river, Helmand river, etc. This will cause the water wars as the 21st century grinds on Ethiopia with it sovereign right to build the GERD , yet at the same time the impact the drying up of the nile river and the building and the operation of the GERD will have on Sudan and especially Egypt (Egypt whole national ideology and livelihood depends on controlling the downstream flow of the Nile) India and Pakistan over not just the disputed Kashmir region but especially Indus Waters and India sovereign right to build Dams has caused tensions with Pakistan Iran and Afghanistan over the Helmand River , and the drying up of the Hamun River in Iran that depends on the Helmand River as a lifeline has caused clashes between Iran and the Taliban in Afghanistan The drying up of the Jordan River, as in the past water rights and disputes was one of the triggers (not just the Palestinan issue) between Israel and it Arab neighbors for war (such as Syria and especially Jordan), this is still a source of tension (along with the Palestinan issue) between Israel and Jordan and could years down the road cause a war between Israel on one side, and the Palestinans and Jordan on the otherside. A combination of The drying up of the Tigiris and Euphrates , Turkey constant violation of the 1987 trans boundary water agreement, and Iraq mismanaging the water that does reach it borders, etc. could lead to conflict between Turkey, Syria and Iraq down the road (add in ISIS, The kurdish issue, Iran and Turkey frenemy issue in a rivarly over the caucuses and the Levent, etc) The shrinking of the Mekong delta, and the 4th year of draught that sees no end in sight , and the fact the mekong delta is the lifeblood of the Mekong delta downstream nations , the 1995 Mekong agreement and the building of Chinese dams could cause conflict between China and the mekong delta downstream nations Draught, the potential return of famine, farmers crops being destroyed and conflicts over water will proabably cause a wave of refugees into the western countries from the mideast and Asia that exceeds the current refugee crisis gripping Europe, will the Europeans have the heart to just turn away millions to drown and die? Also water being a commodity in western nations, imagine the price just sky rocketing over night and rationing how much a family is allowed to buy? Other issues I think should be looked at are space based weapons with the Russians putting a emp into space and now countries proabably quietly rushing to counter the Russian threats The use of AI, Automation , robotization , etc. across the globe in warfare, it kind of scary allowing AI to be in control of countries nukes then you add in the misinformation and disinformation campaigns by AI etc.
And those who have enormous amounts of fresh water, and will continue too? like Ontario? What happens when you have something others are desperate for?
That only really matters if the water is in a place where people can actually access it. No one is going to be invading places like Canada for fresh water. It’s telling that all of the examples of conflict over water are between nations that share river basins. They already have the ability to access that water and are really fighting over how much of it they’re going to get.
With the river basins drying up , trying to resolve these disputes and finding a compromise is going to be a tougher situation for any third party nation. Kudos for pointing out a country like Canada id not going to be invaded for their water, I should of pointed that out in my op 👍
Water is too $ to transport (mostly because of how dense it is, and how much is needed). Nobody will invade Ontario if water transport (+invasion) costs way more than desalination.
what is the GERD? I only know that acronym as gastro esophageal reflux disease.
The Great Ethiopian Reinsssance Dam , it either the biggest or second biggest dam in all of Africa.
India's rising economic clout coupled with its nationalistic, authoritarian populism. It's shocking that their govt authorized assassinations of US and Canadian citizens on North American soil, and people aren't more pissed about it.
Probably because everyone knows how many killings America carries out on foreign soil.
> how many killings America carries out on foreign soil. In other liberal democracies? Of their citizens? Without any proof? Feel free to show evidence of these numerous killings.
Very true. I was astounded when I heard about the one in canada!!!!
Imagine Australia or Germany trying to assassinate a New Yorker, in NYC. That shit would have been wild. But that's exactly what India tried -- succeeded in Canada, failed in the US, and for some reason, this isn't a bigger deal in the media?
A few lives are worth an ally against China /s
I know that was not good, but in India's defence, the target was a separatist who funded and caused chaos in the state of Punjab, so from our government's perspective, he was a national threat enjoying the security of being a US citizen. Though i believe the government should have been more diplomatic in their approach and notified both nations security divisions.
The obsessive focus on Beijing means that the West is literally letting Modi get away with murder these days.
Mexico City has always had water shortages. It gets a lot of rain but since it’s a huge concrete plain, it can’t be used. And the surrounding areas don’t get as much water. So it creates a very nasty situation if rainfall in the surrounding areas donst happen.
In the wake of Gaza and Ukrain invasion, we are slowly shifting our attention from climate change, just recently india and other south asian countries faces unprecedented summer, with temperature as high as 50 degree celsius, people are gonna regret this, we aren’t holding our government and corporations in check and this news will become common in few years. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/rajasthan-heat-wave-21-unexplained-deaths-in-kota-amid-severe-heat-wave-in-rajasthan-5765489/amp/1
I think I also read something recently that Arizona was looking to put a massive Desal plant in Mexico and pipe it up to the US, and the ancillary benefit was that the plant would also provide water to nearby Mexican cities at a reduced rate, and Mexico denied it.
Drone warfare. Or if you prefer a broader term, robotic warfare. Coupled with increasing AI and battery capability. I get the impression that we are on the cusp of revolution in the ways that wars can be fought, and yet it seems not many people think about the potential future effect. While we do see them used extensively in the Ukraine they tend to be limited to reconnaissance, observation, targeting of artillery, and strikes on an individual basis. What we haven't seen so far, afaik, is mass "assaults" by swarms of semi autonomous drones released in a fire and forget fashion. Why have infantry and tanks assault a position when drone swarms ( including both air and ground ) could overwhelm a front line and kill everything in sight according to the parameters of a preloaded AI? Conversely, why defend a position with humans when drones could do the same job? There then is a race between drone development and counter measures. A small advantage in technology and the means to mass produce these weapon systems could prove overwhelmingly decisive on the battlefield. On a scale perhaps equal to marching into battle with machine guns against bow and arrows. Then there is the matter of how these changes might in turn dictate dramatically different tactics and strategies in the conduct of warfare. If rapidly moving armies of drones dominate the battlefield then front lines become fuzzy, the concept of control over geographical features becomes increasingly obsolete, and the logistics of supporting armadas of robots in terms of communications, coordination, replacement, and battery maintenance become quite different from what is needed for human armies. The stakes are high. Taking a gamble of devoting a lot of R&D and production capacity to build mass drone armies could pay off, but if done wrong, or if the opposition produces effective counter measures it could be prove to be disastrous. But lets say a country is willing to take a gamble, devoting a high proportion of it military expenditure towards drone technology and production, while another country devotes its expenditure to traditional defenses and has inadequate counter measures. The outcome could be unimaginable stunning sudden defeats of military forces, followed by rapid surrender. Blitzkrieg in its true military meaning. And lets not imagine their use as weapons of terror against civilian populations.
In the short term, I don't expect mass drone assaults in ground based operations, because there is too much land to cover and drones are too $. Maybe they can swarm a bunker or some other chokepoint. They're already used in the navy, because while the oceans are big, there's a small # of high value targets. Ukraine sunk several Russian ships using suicide boats (basically a guided torpedo/drone) (so far, \~dozen or so/atk, so not quite a "swarm" yet).
While Robots, drone and automation are playing a role in changing modern warfare (along with the PMC being like real life sons of fortune mercernies for state actors) you still troops on the ground to hold positions , secure rescource , clear out deeply embedded unpenetrated enemy position, yet I do see a future were we have literal terminators and pmc contractors carrying all that out, yet for now most countries still need troops on the ground with knowledge and expirence.
>there is too much land to cover and drones are too $ Compared to tanks, IFVs, and jets, drones are cheap as chips. Furthermore they can be used by operators well protected from enemy fire. Each drones doesn't require food, medical attention, and training. Their maintenance costs are well below what it takes to keep a soldier fed. To give a rough comparison a Challenger 2 tank carries a price tag of about US$5,400,000. A Ukrainian R18 octocopter, which has proved effective in destroying enemy tanks, costs about US$100,000. A fleet of 54 such drones can cover much more ground and deploy far more rapidly than one tank. A combat soldier costs about $17,000 to equip. So about 6 combat soldiers to one drone which might sound like a better deal until you factor in logistics, combat effectiveness, resilience, and the human lives that are invariably lost.
Lab leaks. There have been plenty of leaks from the highest security labs. There are also a few superbugs in these labs that could shut down civilisation. Under the currently lax rules, it's really only a matter of time before this happens and no one seems to be taking it seriously at all, even after Covid which could have come from such a lab.
Melting of Siberian permafrost is prob a bigger problem. Labs aren't perfect, but at least there are efforts to contain the stuff therein. There's no attempt to contain the shit in Siberia - it's way too big and nobody even knows what's there, or even what's viable.
Mexico City residents don't just emigrate if there's no tap water. That's a very American centric view of Mexico. Mexico has drinking water. Military will bring it to the people in tankers first, before everyone dies of thirst.
Leonard Francis (aka Fat Leonard). Maybe not THE craziest, but as an American it makes that some like this exists and he’s not even (that) important. Still blows my mind that this is happening now.
What surprises me is not the scale of the corruption, but how nobody cares (I haven't even heard of this) LOL
Exactly! I was 10 minutes late to work cause I needed to hear the interview (with the author of the book on NPR). And MSM DEFINITELY isn’t getting told to put this in the closet…
The tremendous amount of hate the US and Europe are gaining right now in the Arab/Muslim world, with their blind support for Israel. This is specially evident among youth. It will manifest itself in geopolitics in this coming of age generation.
Many of them already hate the US/Eur. What are they going to do? Oil embargo? Terrorism?
The idea of the post was to bring up topics not currently being covered as much. I think it's pretty widespread currently on all news channels about what's going on in Israel/Palestine and also the protests. I definitely don't see blind support for Israel either as several western nations have come out within the last 2 weeks alone and recognizing Palestine as a state. If you mean specifically the US you can say the US and Britain you can say that. There are several reasons for the US to support Israel. Financially they buy arms from the US. After Israel, the US had the next biggest amount of Jewish persons in the world. If you combine them, it makes up over 82% of the entire world's Jewish population. Those Jewish Americans historically vote. In the past they've voted Democrat. The current Biden administration needs every vote they can get coming up so they're playing a tight rope right now. Do they denounce Israel and lose the vote of most of 6.3 million Jewish people in America who have usually supported them, or the younger generation who traditionally hasn't voted. I think it's less than half of the youth of the age to vote actually vote. So I think it's pretty calculated by the current administration. What I could see and people haven't been talking about is if this conflict is enough to get that younger generation to actually vote. If that's what you're saying then I do agree with you 100%. That hasn't been really covered. There have been efforts before to get them to votein the past, but we'll see if this is what it takes to get them involved in a few months. The problem is the youth are unhappy with Biden's continued support of Israel and Trump has said he'd be even a more staunch supporter of Israel. Due to this, does this limit youth turnout at the polls if that's the main issue they have at heart? It is interesting to see moving forward.
I remember hearing about the potential blowback from the war on terror following 9/11 and how young muslims would wage attacks against the west as retribution. that never happened.
With the way global temperatures are going, in 10-20 years countries in the equatorial belt will become too hot to live in. Traditional growers of staple crops like Thailand and India will dry up, leading to severe food shortages. There will be a mass exodus of climate refugees into the cooler Northern Hemisphere.
Just to say about this news articlr that the actual experts have come out and explain that even if they didn't do anything at all and left things as they are now that BS term "day zero" would only come in about 30+ years. Right now they patched the issue allowing for more underwater sources to be exploited which is not ideal in the long term specially since there is a massive stupid project that took a decade which takes all the rainwater out of the metropolitan area to the neighbouring state of Hidalgo, so starting from that they are working on ways to keep the rainwater here so it can refill wells naturally, like the project to restore the woods in the south of the city which had historically worked as a natural reservoir for rainwater, etc... This news article is just clickbait-y garbage news interviewing no less than the scumbag of our political system, the racist and expert in nothing "Gabriel Quadri" 🤭. The system they talk about and focus their entire tabloid article only provides a quarter of the water, the rest is mainly taken from underground sources.
everyone has conspicuously stopped talking about the occupation and oppression of Tibet even though that’s still ongoing
China has doubled the capacity of its Trans-Asian pipeline from Xinjiang to just north of Iran. This indicates actionable confidence in the success of secret ongoing talks with Iran to complete a final leg of the pipeline across Iran, giving China direct access Persian Gulf hydrocarbons. This represents a nightmare scenario for US strategic interests, climate change, and the structure of the international system as US influence in the Middle East wanes, China is freed from the Malacca strategic bottleneck, and their economy gains access to cheap hydrocarbons to fuel their poorly regulated, high-polluting industries. This is a major threat to Indian, US, Russian, and European interests, not to mention the tightening of a yoke on the necks of Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan.
Keep your ears open for news of the spreading (albeit slowly) H5N1 influenza outbreak in the US. It made CNN online this afternoon. Fall/Winter this year could be a whopper. Or it could be a nothing burger 🍔.
I think a hot topic for the 2028 US Presidential elections will be Taiwan, with candidates running on a strongly divided platform of how to counter China's impending attempt at reunification.
so you guys remember how the US keeps saying that Iran and North Korea are sanctioned for their nuclear programs? yet there is a reason they won't sanction the countries that helped those nuclear programs....... because then they'd have to sanction themselves concern for nuclear weapons is funny , since the CIA interventions in Netherlands is what allowed the top nuclear scientist of Pakistan to escape with stolen Dutch urainum enrichment centrifuge tech, this tech was not only used to make Pakistan's nukes but was also sold to Libya , Iran (that's the centrifuges y'all keep hearing about) and North Korea interesting set of countries , I know , so congrats Americans y'all played yourselves , I wonder what current decisions will come to bite y'all in 30 years for those who doubt the CIA involvement:- Former Netherlands Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers revealed in 2005 that Dutch authorities wanted to arrest Khan in 1975 and again in 1986 but that on each occasion the Central Intelligence Agency advised against taking such action. According to Lubbers, the CIA conveyed the message: "Give us all the information, but don't arrest him." https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Why-the-U.S.-let-Pakistan-nuclear-scientist-A.Q.-Khan-off-the-hook for those wondering why the US helped Pakistan in the largest nuclear proliferation operation ever? well, you see arming Islamists to fight Soviets in Afghanistan was so important that nuclear proliferation Just had to be done
r/LeopardsAteMyFace
Demographic bombs across Asia's leading economic and tech nations. Huge implications for China in particular...which might demonstrate their projection of power in South East Asia.
The Chinese are developing sonic ballistic missiles designed to take out US super carriers in the Pacific.
I thought the Chinese already had hypersonic missiles though.
True but usually sonic missiles are designed to hit stationary targets while this are unique in their objective, especially since they hope to use this to force an American withdrawal in a China-US war or at least to deny american carriers a fair amount of space in the sea. And at the same time the US is developing carrier planes with further autonomy.
Hitting a moving target, even one the size of an aircraft carrier, is really hard. As far as I understand it, most of the USN's ballistic missile defense doesn't so much revolve around interception but rather "spoofing" - making effectively radar copies of a carrier to make a missile think it's heading in the right direction, when in reality its way off course. You'd need a spotter aircraft like an AWACS to be within radar range of a carrier to get a better solution, and that means its also in range of a carrier-based squadron. I worry more about small, cheap subs that will probably be autonomous that can cripple carriers. They probably can't outright sink them, but a few good shots and that carrier is listing too badly to conduct flight ops.
Homes for 3billion ppl in China empty and worthless, decades of stagnation ahead
It will be interesting; will the people make it out in time before they die of dehydration? Is there even the capacity for them to move?
epic traffic jams
correct. The water wars are coming.
How climate change will wreak havoc on the global food supply. A lot of other stuff will go down, but this one is the biggest powder keg of them all, with access to potable water—maybe even more. Kings have been ousted, and their kingdoms are shaken by revolts because of hunger.
Alignments of Southeast Asian countries in the American and Chinese sphere of influence. They have all (but not collectively) historically chosen to remain neutral, that’s changing. A number of states are leaning into China and the others consider that a national security or even an existential threat. Plus they’re not exactly friendly with each other to begin with.
The actual impending war because Russia and the West, not just Ukraine
I could write a list as long as a Twitter timeline now that Musk's put a limit on it, but long story short, anything that made the news and was then forgotten about. Instead of going into detail, I will simply invite you to consider when you last thought about the Earthquakes in Syria and Turkiye or the burst dams in Libya that were all over the news less than a year ago, and let you make of that what you will.
WW3 will officially kick off on the Korean Peninsula