I have never been a Diplomat, although at times had to be diplomatic. Even though I had interactions with the State Department during my 33 years in the U.S. Army, I really am not sure about how American diplomats are instructed to speak to or about other great powers, specifically the Russian Federation. What I hear coming out of the mouths of officials in both the Legislative and Executive Branches leads me to believe the American government has little to no standards. In my judgment, these comments are made to denigrate Russia, but they also degrade us as a nation. This is not how great powers should deal with each other. If there is a rulebook of diplomatic speech these people are following, it needs to be thrown out the window. The same is true about how we treat all other great powers. To what standard should we then hold ourselves?

Rather than proceed toward a nuclear standoff, my basic message is that all American officials must speak about and treat the Russian Federation and its President Vladimir Putin with the respect due a great power (and a nuclear power). As our nation inches toward a senseless and avoidable nuclear world war, I am willing to risk being criticized for weakness or naivety or anything else that the Deep State may choose. I don’t care.

These same forces already tried their best to destroy me when I was appointed as President Trump’s first National Security Advisor and tried to calm the waters with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. People forget now, but the Obama Administration lied about Russian hacking of the Democrat National Committee servers and the 2016 election, and unfairly expelled 35 Russian Diplomats on December 29, 2016. Among other topics I spoke with Ambassador Kislyak about was to urge him to not overreact, as a new Administration would be taking over soon. For this, I paid a heavy price. In one of our calls, the transcript reflects me telling the Ambassador, “you are not talking to a diplomat; you are talking to a soldier. I am a very practical guy. It’s all about solutions.” That is how I still feel. Perhaps that put a target on my back then, and perhaps it will now. So be it.

For the sake of reducing the risk of nuclear war, and for the sake of having decent relations with Russia, and for the sake of our children and grandchildren, this is a time for American officials to stop mouthing off at Russia like spoiled children. And, we must follow some basic rules about behaviors like not lying, cheating, and stealing. Many in Congress are probably impossible to control, but here is my effort to lay down the rules that I would urge we follow regarding how we speak about and treat the Russian Federation, its leadership, and most important, the people of Russia.

The Rules:

Rule #1. The U.S. should not lie.

I was head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. I know people lie. I know governments lie. The establishment press lies and the CIA lies. However, great world power leaders cannot lie to each other. I am not saying that the White House press secretary should answer questions about military operations or the like, or be required to give away all information in response to a question, but that is an entirely different matter. Lying between great nations never accomplishes anything except breaking the trust that great nations must have in each other.

It was before my time, but I remember studying the damage done to our relationship with the Soviet Union when President Eisenhower lied about the U-2 flight by Francis Gary Powers. I was a child at the time, but from studying history, I know that relations were harmed when President Kennedy lied about U.S. involvement in the Bay of Pigs invasion into Cuba. By the time the Cuban Missile Crisis occurred, Kennedy had turned the corner and was dealing straight with the Soviet leadership (at the time, Nikita Khrushchev). That tough, but honest, straightforward talk helped avert a World War.

Some may say that lying is part of the game. That everyone lies. Rubbish. I am reminded of the scene from the 1955 movie The Sea Chase where John Wayne played the captain of a German freighter trapped in Sydney, Australia at the outbreak of World War II. Wayne discusses strategy with the German Consul-General and tells him using his best cowboy drawl: “I won’t lie for you.” The German diplomat’s response is classic: “Of course not! I wouldn’t think of asking you to lie. You haven’t had the necessary diplomatic training.” Lies may be the currency of covert operations, but not the direct communications between great nation leaders. And these days, with much more sophisticated intelligence capabilities, our adversaries can figure out we are lying almost as soon as the lie is stated. We simply cannot lie to our adversaries.

Rule #2. The U.S. must not break its word.

In recent years, it has been proven that the U.S. promised Russia that if it allowed the dissolution of the Soviet Union, we would not expand NATO eastward. Secretary of State James Baker promised in 1990 that NATO would move “not one inch eastward.” West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher repeated the assurances. But we lied. NATO expanded under President Clinton (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic); under President George W. Bush (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria); under President Obama (Albania and Croatia); and even under President Trump, two small countries (Montenegro and North Macedonia) joined NATO. Russia consistently has pointed to the U.S. breaking its word with the eastern expansion of NATO as the principal reason it viewed the Ukraine as an existential threat. How might the lives of the people of the Ukraine be different if we had kept our word and NATO had not expanded?

Rule #3. The U.S. should not insult, demean, ridicule, or threaten.

When I heard President Biden call President Putin “a pure thug,” a “murderous dictator” and a “war criminal,” I cringed. John McCain used the same terms. Even then-Senator Marco Rubio called President Putin “a gangster” and “an authoritarian thug,” although those days appear to be over in his current role. Now, Secretary of State Rubio, a man with a lot on his plate, comes across as a diplomat of the highest order. Lindsey Graham has also called President Putin a “thug.” What good does this kind of sound bite do? Perhaps Graham believes that the voters of South Carolina want to hear such nonsense, but I think soon, he will find out that South Carolina voters have had enough of his stirring the pot of war.

On July 16, 2025, for reasons no one has explained, Army General Christopher Donahue suggested that the U.S. and NATO might invade the Russian city of Kaliningrad, a small city surrounded by Lithuania and Poland. Donahue’s remarks are highly provocative and should be cause for his removal. That said, as Donahue noted, “Kaliningrad, Russia, is roughly 47 miles wide and surrounded by NATO on all sides and the Army and its allies now have the capability to ‘take that down from the ground in a timeframe that is unheard of and faster than we’ve ever been able to do…. We’ve already planned that and we’ve already developed it. The mass and momentum problem that Russia poses to us … we’ve developed the capability to make sure that we can stop that mass and momentum problem,’ Donahue said.”

Not surprisingly, Russian lawmaker Leonid Slutsky responded to the threat to invade Russian territory. “An attack on the Kaliningrad Region will mean an attack on Russia, with all due retaliatory measures, stipulated, among other things, by its nuclear doctrine. The US general should take this into account before making such statements,” Slutsky said.

What possible positive outcome Donahue thought would come from a comment about invading Russia remains unexplained. Nor is it explained why Russia should act any differently from the way Americans would react if Russia threatened a naval invasion of Alaska’s remote Aleutian Islands.

Rule #4. The U.S. should never support assassinations.

I could use Lindsey Graham for several of these points about what not to do, but after the Russians moved into the Ukraine, Graham said, “The only way this ends is for somebody in Russia to take this guy out… You would be doing your country — and the world — a great service.” Such comments are a disgrace. Have we not had enough assassination attempts on President Trump that we still want to legitimize assassination of world leaders? President Reagan signed Executive Order 12333 in 1981 banning the assassination of foreign leaders. This must be enforced.

Rule #5. The U.S. should never call for regime change.

On March 26, 2022, President Biden said in Warsaw, Poland: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” Neocon and former National Security Advisor John Bolton has said, “Putin must go: Now is the time for regime change in Russia.” Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul has called President Putin’s government “illegitimate” and accused him of “war crimes.” And, McFaul is supposed to be a trained diplomat. How would we feel if President Putin called for the downfall of President Trump? None of this is acceptable behavior.

Rule #6. The U.S. should always be willing to negotiate.

I confess with my background growing up in an Irish Catholic Democrat family in Rhode Island that I have always had great admiration for President John F. Kennedy. As I have traveled the country giving speeches, I have often referenced President Kennedy, and sometimes drew strange stares from my conservative friends as a result. However, I believe he often gave us wise counsel, including his January 1961 inaugural address when he said: “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.”

During the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy had to work around his own appointees, particularly at the Pentagon and the CIA, to establish a direct dialogue outside of normal channels with President Khruschev to resolve the crisis. It worked, and war was averted. Thank God he was willing to negotiate. From all appearances, it seems President Trump is attempting to do the same despite great pressure from the Neocon-Right and Left.

Rule #7. The U.S. should view this dispute from the other nation’s perspective.

Perhaps the most relevant illustration of this principle is the way many in our government view what the Russian Federation calls its Special Military Operation in Ukraine. The American people have been lied to incessantly that the Russian move was an unprovoked act of aggression. However, there is another side to this story as to why the Russian Federation believes it was forced to take the action it did, provoked by Western nations, including the endless expansion of NATO. But even if they refuse to face (or admit) the fact that there is another side to the story, our leaders need to have a moment of introspection. There is always another side to the story, even if it is not as persuasive.

Again, JFK explained this point much better than I ever could, this time in his American University Commencement Speech. He said,

But I also believe that we must reexamine our own attitude – as individuals and as a Nation – for our attitude is as essential as theirs. And every graduate of this school, every thoughtful citizen who despairs of war and wishes to bring peace, should begin by looking inward – by examining his own attitude toward the possibilities of peace, toward the Soviet Union, toward the course of the cold war and toward freedom and peace here at home. [Emphasis added.]

Rule #8. The U.S. should never back a nuclear power into a corner.

Here I go again, with another example of John F. Kennedy’s American University Commencement Speech:

Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to (a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war). To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy – or of a collective death-wish for the world. [Emphasis added.]

It may make us feel good to try to humiliate the leader of a great country, but it is among the worst types of mistakes we could make given Russia’s nuclear arsenal.

Rule #9. We should never assume that only the U.S. wants peace.

One last time, JFK said at American University:

Among the many traits the peoples of our two countries have in common, none is stronger than our mutual abhorrence of war. Almost unique among the major world powers, we have never been at war with each other. And no nation in the history of battle ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in the course of the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives. Countless millions of homes and farms were burned or sacked. A third of the nation’s territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland – a loss equivalent to the devastation of this country east of Chicago. [Emphasis added.]

In a 2025 poll, over 80 percent of Russians say their country should seek a closer relationship with the United States. The idea that Russians are irrevocably hostile to America is simply not true.

Rule #10. The U.S. should never steal.

After the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, the U.S. and its allies froze at least $300 billion in Russian assets, as well as property belonging to wealthy Russians. The G7 has proposed to use the interest earned on this money to fund the war against Russia. Is it any wonder that such treatment causes other countries not to trust us? Is it any wonder that other countries are motivated to create an alternative financial structure to avoid the West, such as BRICS? BRICS was created in 2006 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, soon joined by South Africa (the nations’ initials created the BRICS acronym). BRICS “was designed to bring together the world’s most important developing countries, to challenge the political and economic power of the wealthier nations of North America and Western Europe.” Given how much we took of what belongs to others, should we be surprised when Russia looks for more trustworthy economic partners?

Some Concluding Thoughts

As the leader of a great country, would you have confidence in dealing with a nation which violated these basic rules of diplomacy? Would you be willing to negotiate with a nation which routinely showed disrespect? It is no wonder we are moving toward a nuclear conflict with Russia, the world’s other great nuclear power.

President Kennedy’s speech at American University explained that it is nuclear weapons which force us to pursue peace with all our energy:

I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War.

Our nation has seen endless wars for decades, but those wars have always been “over there.” A nuclear war would not be like that. As President Kennedy explained,

[War] makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.

It is time for our leaders to control their emotions. It is time to guard our tongues. It is time to show respect to our adversaries as well as our friends. If we behave with respect, perhaps then we could find a way forward with our adversaries.

So, if I were advising him now, I would urge President Trump to implement these 10 rules for the Executive Branch.

I urge the voters to reject candidates for Congress whose irresponsible rhetoric brings us closer to nuclear war.

And perhaps most importantly, I ask that all Americans pray for our elected and appointed officials, that God would give them the wisdom, the discernment, and the character required to lead our nation. For we are told to pray: “For kings and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.” (I Timothy 2:2.)

I pray that if we demonstrate such an act of self-control, God would honor it, bring us back from the precipice of nuclear war, and protect the United States of America.

Michael T. Flynn, LTG USA (Ret.) is the chairman of the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC-based think-and-do tank.

The US-EU Trade Deal of 2025: A Pivot Toward Resilience, But at What Cost?

The US-EU trade agreement of July 2025 is not just a recalibration of tariffs and quotas—it’s a bold acknowledgment that advanced economies are prioritizing national resilience over the dogma of unfettered globalism. In a world of weaponized supply chains and geopolitical flux, this deal reflects a pragmatic shift toward sovereignty, but its benefits and costs are unevenly distributed. For the United States, it’s a strategic win; for Europe, it’s a fragile compromise that masks deeper vulnerabilities.

A Triumph for the United States

For the US, the deal is a masterstroke of economic and geopolitical strategy. By securing increased access for energy exports—potentially worth hundreds of billions over the next decade—and attracting European investment in manufacturing and AI, the agreement bolsters key sectors. It’s not just about dollars. It’s about reversing decades of offshoring that hollowed out industrial heartlands. Towns in Ohio and Michigan stand to gain from reshored factories, supported by pro-business policies and cheap domestic energy. The deal also cements US energy dominance, with LNG exports to Europe projected to reach 25% of EU gas supply by 2030, reducing reliance on volatile suppliers.

Critics argue that tariffs risk inflation and higher consumer prices. They’re not wrong—US import prices could rise by 2–3% in the short term. But for many Americans, stable jobs and national security outweigh marginal cost increases. The working class, long sidelined by coastal elites chasing efficiency, finally sees policy aligned with their needs.

Europe’s Precarious Truce

Europe, by contrast, has secured a tactical reprieve rather than a strategic victory. By averting a tariff war, the EU protects its export-driven economies, particularly Germany’s automotive sector (€250 billion in exports annually) and Ireland’s pharmaceuticals. Zero tariffs on semiconductors and aviation preserve high-value industries, while increased US LNG imports support energy diversification, cutting reliance on Russian gas (down to 8% of EU supply in 2024). Yet these gains come at a cost. Europe’s industries face structural pressures: German manufacturers grapple with energy costs 2–3 times higher than in the US, while Central European suppliers risk losing ground to American competitors offering lower costs and subsidies.

Wealthier EU states like Germany and the Netherlands may absorb these shocks, but southern and eastern Europe—already strained by high debt (e.g., Italy’s 140% debt-to-GDP ratio) and lower wages—face growing risks. Rising living costs, with inflation at 2.5% in 2025, hit households hard, particularly in Greece and Romania, where real incomes have stagnated. The deal’s focus on large industries overlooks small and medium enterprises, which employ 60% of EU workers and struggle with trade compliance costs.

Moreover, the agreement deepens Europe’s dependence on US energy, trading one external reliance (Russia) for another. This is not sovereignty restored but deferred. The EU’s push for renewables under the European Green Deal—aiming for 45% renewable energy by 2030—offers a path to self-reliance, but progress is uneven, and the deal does little to accelerate it.

The Bigger Picture: Sovereignty, China, and Society

This deal is not about economic optimality; it’s about geopolitical realism. Tariffs and industrial policies may distort markets, but they build resilience in a world where supply chains are strategic weapons. Both the US and EU are responding to China’s dominance in critical goods like semiconductors and rare earths. A true transatlantic partnership would align on reducing China’s leverage, perhaps through joint investment in chip production or green tech.

The deal also sidesteps digital trade and data privacy, where US-EU tensions (e.g., GDPR vs. US tech giants) remain unresolved. Without progress here, the agreement misses a chance to shape the digital economy. Socially, Europe risks further fragmentation. Economic strain in southern and eastern member states could fuel populist movements, as seen in Italy and Hungary, undermining EU unity.

A Necessary but Incomplete Step

The US-EU trade deal of 2025 marks the end of naive globalism and the return of strategic pragmatism. For the US, it’s a step toward industrial revival and energy dominance. For Europe, it’s a pause that preserves stability but exposes long-term vulnerabilities. To compete, the EU must double down on self-reliance—through affordable energy, diversified supply chains, and support for SMEs—while addressing social discontent to prevent political fracturing.

Economic inefficiencies may arise, but in a world of strategic decoupling, sovereignty is not a luxury—it’s a necessity. The US has seized this moment; Europe must find the courage to do the same, lest it remain a market bloc tethered to external powers. This deal is not the final chapter but a call to action for both sides to redefine prosperity in an age of uncertainty.

Rob Roos is a distinguished fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC-based think-and-do tank.

When Akam Rezaee talks about cinema, there’s a fire in his voice—a blend of passion, purpose, and persistence. Born in Mahabad, in the heart of Rojhelat (Eastern Kurdistan), Akam didn’t grow up with film schools, industry connections, or cutting-edge equipment. But what he did have was curiosity—and a fierce drive to tell stories. Today, he’s a VFX Supervisor and filmmaker whose credits include productions for Netflix, Apple TV, Showtime, and Paramount, as well as projects produced by Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg.

We caught up with Akam to talk about how he went from a handheld camera in the Kurdish underground music scene to contributing to some of the biggest productions in Hollywood.

No Film School? No Problem.

“There was no place to study filmmaking in my hometown,” Akam says.
“So we just started shooting.”

With borrowed camcorders and sometimes even phones, Akam began making music videos for local artists and short films with friends. His raw but inventive style quickly stood out. His work introduced storytelling, lighting, and even visual effects into a regional scene where none of that had been done before.

“I wouldn’t say I invented anything,” he says, smiling.
“But I do think I helped push our scene forward—visually, emotionally, technically.”

The Road to America Wasn’t a Red Carpet

Akam’s journey wasn’t just creative—it was political. He spent years as a refugee in Turkey before finally receiving asylum in the United States. But the dream of Hollywood wasn’t waiting with open arms.

“When I got here, I felt like I was 100 steps behind everyone else. I didn’t go to school here. I didn’t know anyone. I went to every event, messaged anyone I could—even total strangers. It was exhausting—and for a long time, it felt hopeless.”

But he didn’t stop. Instead, he looked for an edge. That’s when he found Gnomon—one of the most respected visual effects schools in the world.

A New Language: VFX

“I realized VFX was something that every film and show needed. And I already had a passion for it—but now, I wanted to master it.”

Gnomon became the turning point. Through technical discipline and sheer persistence, Akam broke into the VFX industry. He went from learning the software to delivering shots for indie films, studio features, and high-end episodic TV.

“Eventually, I got to work on some incredible projects—films produced by Spielberg, by Tom Hanks, by major streamers. It still feels surreal.”

VFX Supervisor and Storyteller

Today, Akam splits his time between supervising visual effects and pushing toward his dream of directing. His work includes everything from photoreal set extensions and car crash sequences to subtle compositing and CG integrations.

“To me, good VFX should feel invisible. If it breaks the story, it fails. But if it enhances it—emotionally, visually—that’s the magic.”

Akam has also served as a jury member for the Duhok International Film Festival, specifically in the Kurdish feature category—bringing both his technical expertise and his passion for storytelling back to his roots.

Giving Back to Kurdish Cinema

Despite his Hollywood résumé, Akam hasn’t turned his back on where it all started.

“I rarely see high-end VFX, color grading, or cinematic technique used in Kurdish cinema. Not because there’s no talent—there’s tons—but because there’s no access. That’s why I want to give back. Bring what I’ve learned here back home.”

He’s also produced films with longtime friend and collaborator Apo Bazidi, a filmmaker he credits as a major supporter.

Still a Student of Cinema

Even with years of professional experience, Akam doesn’t see himself as finished. Not yet.

“I always say I want to learn every piece of the puzzle. Every department. Because when I finally step fully into directing, I want to speak the full language of cinema. Not just the dialogue—but the camera, the rhythm, the light.”

Rahim “Mr. Kurd” Rashidi is a media fellow of the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC-based think-and-do tank.

Why I believe Washington, DC is still the modern world’s Capital

When I visited the US for the first time ever in my life in 1993 as a young officer for training at Fort Bliss, TX, among Americans and international officers, I was touched by the culture and civilization of a diverse nation, particularly when I met my host family, who were a World War Two veterans’ family. Through this family, I saw the ideal American strong society, which reflects the values of the USA.

Democracy, Individual Freedoms and Rights
Fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press—these values are the cornerstone of American society’s strength.

Along with technological advancement and economic growth, the U.S. is known for its cultural diversity, with people from various ethnic, religious, and cultural backgrounds contributing to its identity as a melting pot.

American values—liberty, equality, and the pursuit of happiness—are central to the American ethos. The U.S. global influence and leadership play a significant role in global politics, economics, and diplomacy. Also, the U.S. military and strategic influence maintain a strong military presence and strategic alliances around the globe.

These pillars collectively shape the identity and functioning of the modern American nation. To be honest, I found this spirit when I attended the GIIS last conference, met with leaders, ambassadors, diplomats, politicians, media, fellows from around the globe—all came to Washington DC, hoping and knowing that their voices will be heard and their thoughts will be considered. Thanks to the GIIS leadership for these achievements.

MG Mahmoud Hassanin (Egypt Army – Retired) is a distinguished fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC-based think-and-do tank.

The active shooter incident in Midtown Manhattan on July 29, 2025 by Shane Tamura has put a magnifying glass on Mamdani’s defund the police policy and, at a broader level, the continuing erosion of support for law enforcement in America. Since George Floyd’s death after his arrest on May 26, 2020 in Minneapolis, MN, the nation’s far left leaders used his death to supercharge their historical narrative of police brutality and law enforcement is inherently racist. They are committed to use this as one of their political tools. Many left wing politicians have seized on this as an opportunity to advocate and in some instances, condone the anti-police movement. Worse, law enforcement has been defunded, vilified and forced to work with fewer resources. Unfortunately, violent demonstrations in many major cities amounting to billions of dollars in damage have resulted.

With this backdrop, law enforcement at both the local and federal levels struggle for support from law makers and the public. The men and women in BLUE in this country are now forced to justify their once lauded public service as a vital pillar of the nation’s communities against the left’s misplaced and short-sighted ideology seeking to placate an uneducated constituency.

This recent active shooter incident in New York City, once again, brings light to the critical importance of a fully supporting the men and women of the New York City Police Department. Despite Trump’s re-election and the GOP taking the House and Senate, the anti-police and anti-ICE headwinds remain strong.

Democrat nominee for New York City Mayor, Zohran Mamdani’s policy of defunding the NYPD and reducing its ranks is not just misguided, it’s reckless. In fact, it’s such a bad idea that even the NYC Sanitation Department would toss it out with trash. Where is the common sense in stripping away the very institution responsible for maintaining public safety and supporting those officers working the streets?

Policing is inherently local. In a city as complex and vibrant as New York, the NYPD is the backbone of our quality of life, economic vitality, and community stability. Without it, the city risks descending into chaos. Mamdani wants social workers to fill the NYPD. Social workers have a vital role, but they are not equipped to respond to active shooter situations or violent crimes. Expecting them to replace trained officers in high-risk scenarios is not just unrealistic, it’s dangerous. Mamdani wants to do away with Strategic Response Group (SRG), the very unit that responded to the active shooter incident. SRG specializes in civil unrest, riot/protest control, active shooter among other policing duties. Why is Mamdani so against SRG? Is it because these police are trained in the use of long guns? Wear protective gear on their person that is used to protect them against criminals that use guns against police? Doesn’t Mamdani realize that SRG units and patrol officers tend to be younger in time on the job and eventually end up as detectives in a numbered squad, Special Victims Unit, Homicide, etc.

These policies, rooted in ideological extremism, ignore the reality of life on the streets. Criminals don’t care about laws or consequences. They prey on the vulnerable. Weakening the NYPD only emboldens them. Mamdani’s approach would continue to turn New Yorkers into prey, leaving them defenseless in the face of rising violence. Mamdani speaks about utopia, just as Karl Marx spoke and wrote about the state being equal for all. Except the perpetrators are not equal and deserve their due in the justice system.

Let’s be clear: elections have consequences. If voters continue to support candidates who push anti-police agendas, they must also accept the outcomes—more crime, less safety, and a diminished quality of life. Just look at the results in districts like AOC’s in Queens. Are these policies truly working for the people on the ground?

It’s time for common sense to prevail. New York City needs strong, courageous officers, not fewer of them. It’s the voter’s responsibility and accountability to demand and support the men and women in BLUE. Politicians are sound bites and appeasers to either gain or retain power. Mamdani is neither a politician nor a person for the people. His policies speak for themselves.

The deeper problem with the Mamdani movement is the left’s leaders are strategizing ways to leverage his momentum to regain power—not only in New York but in other blue sates and beyond. This urgent threat is not confined to New York–look at Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Marc Black is a Senior Law Enforcement Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy. He is a retired Detective Investigator from the New York City Police Department (NYPD), where he built a distinguished career spanning counterterrorism, arson and explosion investigations, computer crimes, and intelligence.

J. Lawrence Cunningham is a Senior Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy. He is a retired United States Secret Service Agent, where his 20-year career encompassed supervisory roles in all aspects of Secret Service jurisdiction.

(This article originally appeared in the Kurdistan Chronicle at March: A Defining Month for the Kurds)

March always holds a great significance for the Kurdish people, as it commemorates historic agreements, political shifts, and events of deep cultural importance. This year is no different, but it is amplified by numerous political developments that are reshaping the outlook for Kurds.

Perhaps the most groundbreaking development is the recent agreement between Damascus and the administration in Western Kurdistan (northern Syria), also known as Rojava. For the first time since Syria’s inception, Kurdish rights have been officially recognized. While this milestone has been met with widespread optimism, questions remain: will the Syrian regime under Ahmad al-Sharaa genuinely uphold these rights in a post-Assad future?

Meanwhile, in Türkiye, the peace process has taken a dramatic turn. On February 27, Abdullah Ocalan, the imprisoned PKK leader, called on the Kurdistan Workers’ Party to disarm and dissolve. His message has sparked cautious optimism among officials in Turkiye and the international community.

As these events evolve, the Kurdistan Region remains committed to working toward peace and dialogue with both nations. Recent meetings held by President Masoud Barzani with Syrian Democratic Forces Commander Mazloum Abdi and a delegation from Turkiye have reinforced the call for dialogue and reconciliation. As regional tensions fluctuate, the Kurdish leadership remains committed to fostering peace through negotiation and supporting talks between Kurds, Turkiye, and the emerging Syrian administration.

In Iraq, political and economic disputes are intensifying. The dispute over Kurdish oil exports has drawn international attention, with U.S. officials urging Baghdad to strike a balance between sovereignty and economic pragmatism. If Iraq intends to maintain strong bilateral relations with the United States, it must navigate these tensions carefully and limit external influence.

Another dramatic event occurred on March 14, when a U.S. airstrike executed with Iraqi and Kurdish support eliminated ISIS’s second-in-command, Abdullah Makki Muslih al-Rifai, also known as Abu Khadijah. U.S. President Donald Trump took to Truth Social, declaring, “PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH,” while commending U.S., Iraqi, and Kurdish forces for the joint operation.

Against the backdrop of these transformative events, this issue of Kurdistan Chronicle explores a range of topics – art, mythology, music, craftmanship, refugee support, sports, and the enduring legacies of influential Kurdish and American leaders – the entire spectrum of the rich cultural life of the Kurdish people is on display.

Key March events in Kurdish history

March 1: Kurds honor the legacy of General Mustafa Barzani, the father of the Kurdish revolution and a central figure in modern Kurdish politics. Barzani passed away on this day in 1979 in Washington D.C.

March 5: The 1991 uprising against Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist regime began on this day in Ranya. Spreading rapidly, the peshmerga and hundreds of thousands of Kurdish men and women reclaimed nearly all major cities, paving the way for the Kurdistan Region’s first democratic elections in 1992 and the establishment of the Kurdistan Regional Government.

March 11: This day marks the Iraqi-Kurdish Autonomy Agreement of 1970, also known as the March Accord, when Baghdad formally recognized the political and cultural rights of the Kurdish people for the first time.

March 14: This date commemorates the 122nd birthday of General Mustafa Barzani, a key architect of the modern Kurdish struggle for liberation, democracy, and self-determination.

March 16: In a single attack using chemical weapons, the Ba’athist regime killed 5,000 innocent Kurdish men, women, and children in what is known as the 1988 Halabja massacre. This atrocity was part of the Anfal Campaign, which took the lives of 182,000 Kurdish people.

March 20: The 1991 uprisings culminated in the liberation of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, a defining moment in the Kurdish revolutionary movement.

March 21: Newroz! The Kurdish New Year brings joy, color, and tradition, as families gather to participate in vibrant festivities and rituals. Coinciding with the vernal equinox, it is a public holiday in the Kurdistan Region observed over three days.

Nahro Zagros is a senior fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy and the Editor-in-Chief of Kurdistan Chronicle.

Some people get emotional when delivering closing remarks at a security conference, but I assure you, I will not be one of them.

At the Munich Security Conference last week, Christoph Heusgen, the event chair, was so shaken by JD Vance’s speech that he was moved to tears. And he wasn’t alone. The audience reacted with shock, disbelief, and unease. Why? Because JD Vance’s words forced them to face a reality they have ignored for decades.

Vice-President Vance stated: “The threat that I worry the most about vis-a-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values. Values shared with the United States of America.”

Vance was speaking about our Western values—freedom, sovereignty, and prosperity.

External threats exist, and we must take them seriously. We spoke about that today. But before we can resist these dangers, we must first address the internal threats—those who reject their own nations, dismantle our free markets, erode traditional families, and push for open borders, inviting radical ideologies that threaten our way of life. They cripple our energy independence, suffocate economies, and advocate absurdities, like the notion that men can bear children. These are the same people who claim

the EU was founded for peace yet panic when President Trump speaks of ending war in Europe.

The Trump administration’s message is clear: The U.S. wants to cooperate with Europe, but Europe must first clean up its own mess.

That message is to us. Our mess is the left-liberal bureaucracy—the overregulated EU dismantling our energy and food systems, crippling our economies, and flooding Europe with unchecked migration.

The Trump administration is willing to work with us, but not with EU bureaucrats who created this chaos. As JD Vance said: “If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you.”

We, we must be strong. Conservatives often underestimate the left’s deeply entrenched power. Winning elections is not enough. It’s just the beginning, and time is short.

Consider our colleagues of Poland’s Law and Justice party. They held power for eight years but failed to uproot leftist influence. Now, the left liberals have returned stronger than ever. We saw this in Brazil after Bolsonaro, in the U.S. after Trump’s first term, and even in Hungary before Orbán secured his grip. But he learned, fought back, and took decisive action.

As the saying goes: You have to lose to know how to win.

So, let me be clear and I’m not holding back: When we return to power – each of us – we must dismantle the corrupt left-liberal network. We must defund their institutions and militant NGOs, expose their corruption, replace national broadcast leadership, secure free speech, promote our cultural heritage, control our borders, reclaim education, cancel harmful international treaties, restore reliable and affordable energy, and cut through EU bureaucracy.

This is exactly what President Trump is doing now. He has built a team of exceptional individuals, learning that time is limited and the left’s influence runs deep. We must be equally prepared and act decisively when our moment arrives. Leftist corruption must be uprooted completely. It must be eradicated, root and branch.

Beyond governance, we must protect our farmers—the stewards of our land—who provide natural, healthy food. As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wisely said: “We can have a thousand wishes, but if you are ill, you have only one wish left.”

We, as conservatives, understand this. Our modern Western culture has distanced itself too much from nature. That is why the Make America Healthy Again movement is as crucial as Make America Great Again.

And the same applies to Europe. We also have people of the MAHA movement here today and they are working to bring MAHA to Europe later this year. Alongside Make Europe Great Again, let us also Make Europe Healthy Again. A sound mind resides in a healthy body, and a healthy nation depends on the well-being of its people.

It is up to us to restore true democracy by making ‘We the People’ the focus of governance. And ‘by us’, I mean patriots—those who love their countries, cherish our continent and honor our cultural heritage. Those who respect the achievements of our ancestors and want to pass on peace and prosperity to future generations. Good governance can only come from a place of deep national love. It must come from the heart.

We must secure our freedom, economy, and security. Only then will Europe be a strong partner for the U.S. in this new era of MAGA. This is how we Make Europe Great Again.

Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the Gold Institute for International Strategies and as the former Vice President of New Direction and the ECR, I sincerely thank you for your engagement today. Staying connected and supporting each other is essential.

And, as promised—I am not crying. We are at a pivotal moment in history, and I am filled with optimism. The future is bright, and I cannot stop smiling. Let’s enjoy lunch, then get to work reclaiming our nations and our future.

Thank you very much.

Hon. Rob Roos is a Distinguished Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington D.C.-based foreign policy and defense think tank.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In the wake of President Trump’s decisive win of the White House and the successful GOP wins of the House and Senate, the political arena in Washington has shifted from preventing a Trump win to sabotaging his “Promises Made, Promises Kept” agenda. Ranking Democrats, donors, governors and mayors in many blue states are launching concerted offensives to thwart the Trump agenda as much as possible as outlined in The New York Times:[1] As of this writing, leading Democrats are working hard to “Trump proof” earlier liberal initiatives and delay the confirmation of numerous, key Trump cabinet positions and dilute the 2nd Trump administration’s agenda.[2] [3] Senator Tom Cotton described it as follows: “What this is really about is trying to drag out all of these nominations to play procedural games,”[4]

Looking forward to President Trump’s second term, the following concerns with suggested remedies are set forth in this article.

1. The benefits of robust integrated security preparation for official events to include the State of the Union and beyond;

2. Improving the Secret Service, its performance and future viability as the nation’s elite protective federal agency; and

3. Reforming the deep state to prevent sabotaging the current and future U.S. Presidents and implementing reforms identified by several Inspectors General reports.

The Need for Effective, Integrated Security Planning for the State of the Union (Joint Session of Congress) and Future Official Events

In an effort to provide context to factors that may fuel potential protests and unrest with upcoming events to include the Joint Session of Congress (scheduled for March 4, 2025) and beyond, the following is set forth.

Key in the security planning process is and will be trusting the Intelligence Community (IC). The Trump administration is in the process of installing its IC leader picks. It is expected the security planning processes and critically, the integrated representation among the law enforcement jurisdictions will be effective. (We have seen this play out for both the 2024 election certification and the 2025 Inauguration.)

Concern over providing security for presidential events moving forward is based on the recent history of intelligence failures.[5] [6] For example the intelligence provided by the FBI and the DHS Office of Intelligence Analysis (I&A) to Capitol Police Chief Sund and the U.S. Park Police (USPP) prior to January 6, 2021 was incomplete and omitted threats targeting the election certification.

The Capitol Police (USCP), DC Metropolitan Police (DCMP), the USPP, the U.S. Secret Service and the public all deserve accurate and complete information from these agencies with respect to anticipated crowd size, crowd composition and planned protests for major events. Scalable security planning requires this for every U.S. President. If existing intelligence warrants it, a National Special Security Event (NSSE) should be declared by DHS.[7]

Moving forward in 2025 the Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies are collectively facing a disturbing quandary of mistrust across the board…discriminating fact from disinformation is becoming increasingly challenging as of this writing. The need for integrated, robust and effective operational planning with involved law enforcement jurisdictions is a serious concern.[8] Further, the critical and immediate need for the FBI and I&A to be transparent, diligent and forthcoming with ALL relevant intelligence (real time) impacting the Trump administration cannot be overstated.

These concerns during the current Trump administration are legitimate. The lack of the IC’s integrated planning with law enforcement is well documented in Chief Sund’s book, Courage Under Fire, Under Siege and Outnumbered 58-1 On January 6th. Notably, among other revelations, Sund’s book details: “An exposé of critical intelligence and military failures surrounding January 6 and the subsequent attempts to cover them up”[9]

Steps need to be taken immediately to ensure transparency of all agencies’ official preparations and actions.

What Can be Done Immediately?

Looking forward to the State of the Union, the USCP, Secret Service and FBI, the Senate leadership, the House of Representatives leadership and the Senate and House Sergeants at Arms need to support the following unified and unequivocal actions and message:

· There will be ZERO TOLERANCE for any disruption during the State of the Union Address and beyond;

· This official position needs to be unanimous and declared applicable nationwide;

· Prepare pre-recorded safety and security messages for dissemination to the public;

· For the Metropolitan DC area—The DCNG, the DC Mayor, the D.C. Metropolitan Police (DCMP), the Arlington Police Department (APD) and USPP will partner with the USCP and the Secret Service and craft Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) to devise integrated security plan(s);

· Establish a clear, chain-of-command communications security assets approval process among all concerned prior to any major events;

· Provide dedicated and tested communication links to the National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) to facilitate immediate intelligence and incident reporting from all law enforcement sectors, local, state and federal; and

· Review prior event after-action reports, identify missteps and establish consensus for corrections among concerned law enforcement agencies.

The State of the Secret Service – Can it be Saved?

A serious concern that January 6, 2021 brought into focus, and more recently with the two assassination attempts of President-elect Trump in July and September of 2024, the competence of the Secret Service. Directly connected is its relationship with the IC and the Biden Administration. Equally troubling is the lack of protective resources, i.e. experienced protective agents, counter-sniper teams, technical security teams, counter-surveillance and intelligence teams and worse—weak leadership—have profoundly hampered the Secret Service mission. In addition, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policy initiatives, excessive demands to staff 35 protective details (for a variety of government officials), lack of mandated training, diluted hiring practices and very low morale have exacerbated the agency’s problems.

Today’s Secret Service finds itself in the midst of a cauldron of divisive issues that has been boiling in recent years. Given this, it is critical to identify strategies and plans to improve its protective competence and get ahead of any post-election potential unrest with growing domestic and foreign threat levels. This may prove to be a herculean task since successful mitigation is predicated on open and coordinated bipartisan support. This may be a naïve goal given the division in the nation’s populous, even now, post-election. It appears the basis of the contention up to the election and now, despite the clear Trump election victory, was to beat Trump. Now many Democrat leaders are vowing to sabotage the Trump administration’s proposed initiatives.

These factors and others continue to affect the effective protective operations of the Secret Service.

Considering these circumstances and alarmingly, two assassination attempts, the identification of Iranian assassination plots coupled with the recent operational failures of the Secret Service to implement basic protective security measures—their mission capability will require profound changes.

Reports continue among the Trump detail security agents, whistleblowers and former President Trump and now President Trump, the FBI has selectively and slowly released assassination plot and other threat information to the Secret Service. This has created distrust between the FBI and the Secret Service. On October 26, 2024, Business & Politics (BPR) reported “the DHS Office of General (OIG) admitted to Senator Grassley the DHS has a troubling history of obstruction, which Grassley cited as a “major red flag” for oversight.” Violations of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) are also being reported.[10] Other disturbing whistleblower reports allege “Acting Secret Service Director Rowe ‘blocked’ OIG auditors from reviewing former President Donald Trump’s security protocols.”[11]

Most disturbing, there is evidence of mistrust within the Secret Service ranks. For its mission to survive, the leadership must be overhauled, top to bottom. It will require a thorough assessment to redefine its mission and test its capability in the face of the emerging threats from enemy states. This cannot be accomplished in-house.

Following the Capitol protests in 2020, USCP Chief Sund implemented a pro-active intelligence gathering approach but received no threat intelligence by the FBI, Secret Service, DHS and DCMP. Sund stated “there was no indication that a well-coordinated, armed assault on the Capitol might occur on January 6.” This assessment was based on intelligence or the lack thereof provided to Sund. On January 4th and January 5th, Sund hosted two intelligence meetings with the USCP Intelligence and Inter-Agency Coordination Division and with a dozen of the top law enforcement and military officials from Washington, D.C., including the FBI, U.S. Secret Service and the National Guard.[12]

Sund stated: “During both meetings, no entity, including the FBI, provided any intelligence indicating that there would be a coordinated violent attack on the United States Capitol by thousands of well-equipped armed insurrectionists.”

In the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General’s (DHSIG’s) Final Report: The Secret Service’s Preparation for, and Response to, the Events of January 6, 2021 dated July 13, 2024, by Joseph V. Cuffari, Ph.D., the Inspector General reported intelligence failures and policy related operational failures.[13] Six recommendations were made to improve preparedness between the Secret Service and the USCP. A few have been met.

The burning question—with this backdrop, how can the Congress and law enforcement officials adequately rely on intelligence agency reporting, the current administration’s support (or the lack thereof) and media reporting to prepare for potential disruptions in 2025? To effectively prepare for the State of the Union, the Secret Service should establish specific and stringent MOUs with the FBI and the I&A to ensure they share timely and thorough intelligence impacting their protectees and NSSE’s in the future. This was not done prior to January 6, 2021. For example, security planning for NSSE events in DC should include close collaboration with military counterparts. This will ensure the DCNG and the DCMP are able to more seamlessly expedite crowd control responses. Critically, an agreed upon communications (tested) protocol among these agencies is required.

It has been observed by many law enforcement authorities the Secret Service is operating under a flawed threat model, i.e. a 1960’s era lone assassination threat. Today’s Secret Service has not fully embraced emerging technologies. The agency has not studied terrorist threat methodologies to see its benefit in varying environments.

The Secret Service published its <a href=”https://www.secretservice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/2023-01/usss-ntac-maps-2016-2020.pdf”> Secret Service Threat Assessment Centers Mass Attacks in Public Places Guidance in January 2023 through its National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC). This guidance focuses primarily on behavioral threat assessment metrics based on meta-data gleaned from 173 shooting attacks. It appears the current protective training model does not fully incorporate this guidance and is based more on reactive threat responses rather than proactive threat identification. Very little, if any study and/or training focuses on terrorist pre-attack behaviors i.e. recognizing and mitigating Islamic radicalization, attack planning (target selection, probing, testing), the purchase of precursor bomb making materials and countering multi-coordinated attacks.

Matthew Crooks clearly defeated the Secret Service at its own game. How is this possible? Are the Secret Service advance procedures too canned, too predictable? Strategic planning organizations in the public and private sector, especially in high threat environments, employ Red Team planning. At a basic level this means considering the adversary’s perspective and attack plan. Protectors should simulate attacks as an adversary would and fortify against them with security planning. In other words, wear two hats—your “good guy hat and the bad guy hat.” This is fairly obvious to seasoned military planners and strategists, However, since this strategy appears to be absent from the security planning where two assassination attempts occurred in Pennsylvania and Florida in 2024, it requires review. In simple terms…advance planners need to ask themselves: If I were a shooter or bomber, how would I identify the security plan’s vulnerabilities? What weakness would I exploit? Security planners need to ask what are we doing to fix them? This needs to be an evolving, on-going process. The Army does this on a continuing basis.

There is no evidence the Secret Service conducts any substantive Red Team exercises. The irony is Crooks, the would-be assassin who shot at Trump in Butler, PA and Ryan Routh, who attempted an assassination from a sniper position along a fence line at the Trump International Golf Course at West Palm Beach, FL, conducted better pre-attack planning than the Secret Service’s protective (counterattack) advance security team. Routh’s ability to get within easy shooting range, and remain virtually undetected for12-hours, exposed many other security operational weaknesses. To be clear both assassination attempts, one an actual AK shooting and one pre-empted, were catastrophic failures. This is a jolting and tragic wake-up call. Crooks’ and Routh’s budgets were probably less than $500 respectively. The Secret Service Presidential Campaigns and NSSE budget is reported to be ~$73.3 million from the Office and Management and Data. Clearly the security failures are not due to a lack of money.

What if the attacks at Butler or West Palm Beach had been planned by well-trained terrorists using multiple, simultaneous attack methods as witnessed in the series of coordinated Islamist terrorist attacks on Friday, 13 November 2015 in Paris, France? The Secret Service and the IC at large should be acutely focused on the possibility of diversionary, multitargeted attack scenario planning prior to any major event. Attack methods used by terrorists seen in many asymmetrical attacks seen recently worldwide should be planned for. Other salient examples include Mumbai (2009), Brussels (2016) and Barcelona (2017). DHS has published planning guidance to identify and prevent Complex Coordinated Terrorist Attacks (2018). Would the Secret Service be able to detect an attack plan like these let alone respond to them?

Since the 9/11 attacks billions of tax dollars have been invested in defense strategy revisions, police, military and emergency responder training, communications upgrades and field exercises to better equip all concerned to address evolving threats. The National Response Framework (2019) defines five core capacities to guide the training of the response community: prevent, protect, mitigate, respond, recover. The purpose is to “better integrate government and local response efforts.” Simply stated, all security partners need to focus more on prevention and work as a cohesive team. It appears these capacities were not incorporated in the security plan at Butler, PA or West Palm Beach, FL.

This guidance needs to be incorporated and operationally reinforced into all joint security efforts in the field; not only in training.

When operationally required, agents from other DHS agencies selected to support Secret Service protective details should be required to meet the same protective training metrics required of Secret Service agents. The required training hours should be increased as outlined in the Secret Service Fiscal Years 2021-2025 Human Capital Strategic Plan.

The Secret Service needs to redefine its protective mission. The current policies and procedures are based on dated threat models. The old threat models guiding the Secret Service culture are myopic and limit creative thinking. More effective proactive strategies, policies and training that match evolving attack methods are needed:

· Move the Secret Service back to the U.S. Treasury Department;

· Re-examine basic security procedures;

· Recognize and respond to lone shooter profile behaviors;

· Incorporate Red Team planning and training;

· Review lone shooter and coordinated terrorist attack methodologies;

· Develop security advance training to include preventive and deterrent attack strategies;

· Require the IC to proactively and thoroughly brief the Secret Service PID and protective details with ongoing and timely protectee threat intelligence;

· Develop specific integration protocols with public safety counterparts;

· Require a Secret Service supervisor partnered with the local jurisdiction law enforcement supervisor to review the security advance Incident Action Plans (IAPs) and visit each site to be visited prior to the protectee’s arrival.

· Conduct post event hot washes and train to correct missteps;

· Partner with elite military forces, i.e. Delta and Seal teams to revise a range of protective measures and training;

· Reinstate annual physical medical screening with a coronary emphasis;

· Reinstate mandatory quarterly physical fitness testing for all gun carrying personnel;

· Develop scalable protective training based on emerging attack methodologies with a terrorist focus; and

· Specifically study and create protective training scenarios that identify terrorist simultaneous attack planning targeting routes, site access/egress locations, command posts, agent and law enforcement personnel staging areas and respective equipment.

Equally troubling, the recommendations set forth by the 435-page U.S. Secret Service: An Agency in Crisis from December 2014 (after serious security failures prompted this inquiry) as of this writing, have yet to be fully implemented. Conspicuously absent among them remains—the failure of protective detail agents to complete consistent training—“at least 12% of work hours by fiscal year 2025.” According to Jason Chaffetz, the agency has woefully failed to achieve this training target. He says the Secret Service has been on notice since 2015 to implement effective changes, namely training and accountability to prevent the failures. Many key recommendations have not been met.[14]

The collective observations and recommendations outlined above are further delineated, along with others, in the FINAL REPORT OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS completed by the Task Force on the Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump, dated December 5, 2024. This report was issued by Chairman Mike Kelly (R-PA) and Jason Crow (D-CO).[15] These recommendations should be prioritized with elite military forces. Establish scalable protective survey plans that can effectively adapt to changing locales and environments.

The world of team sports provides a compelling metaphor for how games are won. Team members are assigned positions based on ability and experience. They rehearse their plays incessantly until they get it right. Success in the protective security arena requires the same focus.

If the Secret Service team expects to win their zero-fail mission, they will need to rebuild a foundation of trust—first. Leadership deficits, disparate experience levels, inconsistent training, dated technology and other security advance omissions are fixable. Restoring trust among their fellow agents and with their brothers and sisters in blue and critically with their prized asset—the protectee—poses their biggest challenge. Winning is impossible without trust.

Is the Country Being Effectively Protected by its Intelligence Agencies?

To fully answer this, a hard look at the intelligence agencies and their successes and failures need to be critically examined in 2025. There have been more than 70 successful terrorist interdictions since 9/11. Unfortunately there has been an increase of serious failures in the last eight years, many preventable, in the homeland that dilute these successes. Many observers and media outlets are reporting partisan politics has rendered the agencies responsible for investigating and preventing many attacks in the past four years less proactive and less effective. Congressional committees and Inspectors General reports conducted in response to whistleblower testimony and media reporting show the FBI reallocated its resources from its primary mission to protect the nation from domestic and international terrorism. Their focus has shifted from cyber-threats, organized crime, violent crimes, human trafficking etc. to lesser crimes with a political bent. This shift in focus by the FBI along with collaboration with DHS has added to the rise of Domestic Terrorism.[16] According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) there has been a 357% increase in domestic terrorism from 2013 – 2023.[17]

After the 9/11 attacks on September 11, 2001, a candid review of the nation’s intelligence failures—contributing causes, i.e. agency information sharing dysfunction and the “siloed” structure of the IC; namely the CIA, FBI, NIA, DIA and the NSA was reviewed. The 9/11 Commission Report, released on July 22, 2004 examined these failures in detail.[18] Notably, the consensus finding was and unfortunately remains today—the intelligence agencies lack imagination and do not effectively share domestic and foreign threat information, particularly with a terrorist nexus. Bureaucratic and administrative restrictions delay the release of “sanitized” threat information that is in large part, not immediately useful by its consumers. Among the 9/11 Commission’s many recommendations—create a DHS in an effort to centralize 22 different federal agencies into one department. The intent was to unify security operations to be more responsive and less siloed in its handling of, sharing and responding to threat information to the homeland.

Unfortunately, this has not happened. DHS has been widely criticized for being stymied by bureaucratic dysfunction. Many have observed the amalgamation of the 22 agencies, in many cases, has had the opposite effect…these agencies, many of which with a more than a 100-year history, were not fully on board to “play in one sandbox” and share their tools risking the loss of their respective agency eminence.[19] As a result some argue many agencies hold onto information to be able to control investigations, justify funding, etc. Several studies show the goal of more effective information sharing has not been achieved despite the creation of several Presidential Directives enacted post 9/11 and the creation of more than 80 Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs).[20]

The numerous recent intelligence failures we are seeing and continue to experience is alarming. The conclusions of many Inspectors General reports and House Committee Hearings have revealed the key intelligence agencies, CIA, FBI and others are not fully effective protecting Americans. It has been proven these agencies have been weaponized against conservatives and directly at Donald Trump and his family. This leads us to only one conclusion —our IC is broken. This is supported by the footnoted documents referenced in this writing. Among the many glaring facts: 51 former intelligence officials declared the Hunter Biden laptop, disinformation—later proven to be false. Further, the CIA admitted many of the 51 signatories were paid CIA contractors.[21] [22]

Several FBI, IRS and Secret Service whistleblowers including former FBI agents Richard Stout and Nicole Parker (and many others) have publicly called out the credibility of the FBI; specifically the leadership who have not prioritized the core mission of the FBI.[23] On December 9, 2024, Senator Grassley sent a letter to FBI Director Wray citing as many as 60 examples of the FBI’s blatant failures to uphold the rule of law and obstruct the work of the Congress. The letter stated, “the FBI has shown an outright distain for congressional oversight during your tenure.”[24] Instead, recent FBI Directors, Comey and Wray chose to violate their oaths denying fair and due process rights to several hundreds of citizens and Brady rule violations for political purposes. Whistleblower testimony corroborates the FBI leadership, at many levels, were aware of this but continued this blatant dereliction of duty anyway.

It has been empirically shown the FBI and the DOJ, under the Biden Administration, have implemented an ongoing two-tier system of justice strategy targeting Republicans at large, prominent conservatives and Donald Trump while ignoring instances of clear federal statute violations (with undeniable probable cause) by the Democrats and leftists. “These include pay-to-play schemes by the Bidens and the Clintons.”[25] Not the least of which are the 18 instances of arson and vandalism targeting pregnancy resource and other faith-based centers by the group Jane’s Revenge which the FBI has not addressed.[26]

Basically, the FBI has shifted its focus and resources from counter-intelligence, established terrorist threats, China hacking our nation’s IT infrastructure, sex trafficking of minors and organized crime to targeting Catholics, declaring parents attending school board meetings ”domestic terrorists,” investigating thousands of January 6th attendees and protesters and arresting pro-life demonstrators. Among the most egregious investigations and warrant executions was the unprecedented search of former President Trump’s residence, staging evidence and doctoring photos in August 2022 to justify prosecutions.[27]

Equally egregious, FBI failures identified by Senator Grassley included serious threats posed by foreign actors treated with tepid urgency if at all. For example, the FBI did not thoroughly vet Afghan evacuees under the Operations Allies Welcome (OAW), at least 50 of which were later flagged with “potentially security concerns.” This and the “open border” policy of the Biden administration, the dilution of ICE resources, restricting ICE’s arrest and deportation enforcement purview, defunding the police and weak enforcement of crimes committed by a high number of migrants entering the U.S. illegally has increased the nation’s vulnerability.[28] On June 25, 2024, DHS identified more than 400 crossed the U.S. border with an ISIS-affiliated network.[29]

Another disturbing example of the egregious failures and unlawful government oversight is documented in Senator Ron Wyden’s (D-ORE.) recent release of documents confirming the NSA and the FBI are unlawfully purchasing Americans’ internet browsing records and personal data.[30]

Restoring faith in America’s intelligence agencies to prevent what we have witnessed for at least the last eight (8) years will require significant reforms.[31] Essentially, there is a call for more transparency and bi-partisan oversight across the board.[32] Various national polls reflect more than 60% of Americans do not trust the government—especially the FBI.[33]

The GAO found the greatest number of domestic terrorism attacks are committed by either racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, (this includes homegrown violent extremism) many of whom have been radicalized since 2010.[34] A few notable examples include:

· May 3, 2024 – Two Jordanian foreign nationals attempted to force their way onto Marine Base Quantico. Both were in the country unlawfully;

· May 9, 2024 – Trevor Bickford of Maine received a 27-year prison sentence for attempting to kill police officers in Times Square in 2022. He claimed he wanted “to wage Jihad and kill as many targets as possible;” and

· June 9, 2024 – 8 Tajikistan nationals were arrested in New York, Philadelphia and Los Angeles with ties to ISIS plotting terrorist attacks in the U.S.

Recent intelligence failures are compounded by disjointed inter-agency information sharing, fewer proactive responses to threat intelligence, poor monitoring of social media posts and not responding to credible law enforcement reporting. A key policy failure is the open U.S. border and restricting the Border Patrol’s ability to identify illegal crossings and account for “gotaways.” Collectively, these intelligence failures have led to increases in a wide range of crimes as follows:

· A resurgence of terrorist attacks;

· Human trafficking;

· Drug trafficking;

· Attacks targeting law enforcement officers and their equipment;

· Homegrown violent extremism;

· Lone wolf attacks at mass gatherings;

· Hate crimes;

· Attacks on churches;

· Active school shooter attacks;

· Attacks on family planning centers; and

· Cyber-attacks/Ransomware attacks.

Fixing this will require honest, bipartisan commitment. The IC, above all, will need to be accountable to their staffs and the American people. The proposed remedies (some of which cited below) are required to ensure the respective intelligence agencies are transparent with the appropriate federal and local law enforcement agencies. This is needed to prevent a repeat of the abuses identified earlier that targeted a variety of individuals and groups by the Biden administration.

· Establish a special bipartisan committee with full access to all intelligence and threats to ensure proportional decisions and actions to protect the homeland are made above politics and reviewed before being implemented;

· Ensure the investigations conducted by the intelligence agencies are strictly within their jurisdictional purviews;

· Assess the effectiveness of the collaborative sharing information practices and formal agreements between the FBI and DHS. A 2023 GAO study shows threat information is not shared effectively by them and is not immediately useful. This GAO report identified a key reason for this serious information sharing dysfunction:[35]

“FBI officials told us they did not use the data DHS collects on domestic terrorism incidents because they weren’t aware DHS was collecting it. DHS officials in turn told us they didn’t share their incident data with their FBI counterparts because they weren’t asked for it.”

· Verify that any unmasking follow CIA & FBI rules. The names of many U.S. citizens were improperly released instead of or with foreign targets;[36]

· Enact strict verification processes to prevent using circular reporting by “creating” false and damaging information, leaking it to the press and then opening investigations based on that. It has been established the FBI under Director Comey and other FBI officials engaged in this practice; and

· Enact strict adherence to verification processes to ensure the basis of any Section 702 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application requests are factual. Rampant abuse of the FISA process by Director Comey and other FBI officials (from 2016 – 2017 and beyond) has been confirmed by the DOJ IG.[37]

On December 9, 2019, Attorney General William Barr stated the DOJ IG determined the evidence put forth to the FISA Court to secure warrants to surveil the Trump campaign and his administration “were not factual, omitted consistently exculpatory information.” AG Barr further stated: “ The malfeasance and misfeasance detailed in the Inspector General’s report reflects a clear abuse of the FISA process;”[38] [39]

Looking Forward

As we begin 2025 and we assess the state of our government, the state of our safety, the state of our security, our sovereignty and most important, America’s pre-eminence on the planet; now is a great opportunity to work to rejuvenate the bedrock principles that make us the sterling example of freedom and strength. It is possible to reignite the nation’s status as the “Shining City on a Hill” as President Reagan described it.

It will take an honest commitment for the new Trump administration to set things right. In the last several years many of our agency heads and politicians put egos and politics ahead of the nation’s guiding principles. How many of them were boy scouts and forgot the first point of the scout law?: “A scout is trustworthy.” How many attended military academies and committed to the credo?: “A cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate anyone the does.” How many swore allegiance to the United States and their Oath of Office (5 US Code Sec. 3331)?: “I do solemnly swear I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…I take this obligation freely without purpose of evasion…”

If there was ever a time in the history of our nation when accountability, honest introspection and reform is critically needed…it is NOW!

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/16/us/politics/democrats-anti-trump-battle-plan.html

[2] https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/20/democrats-trump-foes-governors-attorneys-general-interest-groups-00190177

[3] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/presidential/3238783/shell-shocked-democrats-struggle-mount-resistance-trump/

[4] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-nominees-confirmation-delay-senate-democrats/

[5] https://www.peters.senate.gov/newsroom/in-the-news/peters-report-details-failures-ahead-of-jan-6-attack-calls-for-changes

[6] https://www.peters.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/peters-report-finds-significant-intelligence-failures-by-fbi-and-dhs-in-lead-up-to-january-6th-capitol-attack

[7] https://www.secretservice.gov/protection/events/credentialing

[8] This basic requirement was not included or thoroughly implemented per USSS protective operational SOPs prior to two assassination attempts targeting Trump.

[9] https://www.blackstonepublishing.com/blogs/news/former-capital-police-chief-steven-a-sund-set-to-publish-a-new-book-about-the-attack-on-january-6-with-explosive-never-before-revealed-information

[10] https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/10/26/whistleblowers-claim-secret-service-employees-working-with-trump-were-made-to-sign-ndas-1497932/

[11] https://nypost.com/2024/10/09/us-news/secret-service-blocked-watchdog-to-hide-inconsistent-security-protocols-at-trump-events-whistleblower/

[12] https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/capitol-police-chief-steven-sund-entire-intelligence-community/story?id=75729882

[13] https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/dept.-of-homeland-security-oig-releases-report-on-secret-service-s-response-to-jan.-6-attack-on-the-u.s.-capitol

[14] https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Oversight-USSS-Report.pdf

[15] https://taskforce.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/july13taskforce.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/12-5-2024-Final-Report-Redacted.pdf

[16] https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-104720-highlights.pdf

[17] https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-104720

[18] https://9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Exec.pdf

[19] https://www.thoughtco.com/department-of-homeland-security-4156795

[20] https://www.congress.gov/117/meeting/house/114425/witnesses/HHRG-117-JU08-Wstate-JonesS-20220217.pdf

[21] https://www.newsweek.com/hunter-biden-laptop-jim-jordan-facebook-disinformation-twitter-1767369

[22] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cia-admits-some-signatories-of-hunter-biden-laptop-letter-were-paid-contractors/ar-BB1oVNjs

[23] https://ijr.com/richard-stout-how-to-reform-our-politically-weaponized-fbi-and-restore-public-trust/

[24] Letter from Chairman Charles Grassley, Se. Comm. on Fin., to Director Wray (Dec. 9, 2024), https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/grassley_to_fbi_-_failures.pdf

[25] https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/3671392-nearly-half-of-the-country-now-has-serious-doubts-about-the-fbi-heres-why/

[26] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/zero-arrests-16-janes-revenge-attacks-pro-life-organizations

[27] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-judiciary-committee-investigates-alteration-evidence-seized-fbi-trump-classified-records-probe

[28] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2024/10/02/dhs-2025-homeland-threat-assessment-indicates-threat-domestic-and-foreign-terrorism

[29] https://homeland.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/CHS-10.3.24-Terror-Threat-Snapshot.pdf

[30] Senator Ron Wyden (D-ORE.) recent report by Ars Technica states the NSA has admiied to buying records

[31] https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/the-intelligence-community-is-broken-heres-how-we-fix-it

[32] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/courage-strength-optimism/3224584/how-trump-can-intelligently-reform-the-intelligence-community/

[33] https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/3671392-nearly-half-of-the-country-now-has-serious-doubts-about-the-fbi-heres-why/

[34] https://www.gao.gov/blog/rising-threat-domestic-terrorism-u.s.-and-federal-efforts-combat-it

[35] https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-104720-highlights.pdf

[36] Lt. General Flynn and other Trump administration officials were improperly unmasked during 2016 – 2017.

[37] Section 702 authorizes targeted foreign intelligence information collection related to terrorism. U.S. persons may not be targeted and their names indiscriminately used without a specific nexus to terrorism.

[38] https://clayhiggins.house.gov/2019/12/09/higgins-ig-report-confirms-obama-era-fbi-abused-fisa-process/

[39] https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/4012650-fbi-misused-surveillance-tool-fisa-section-702/