The Strategic Implications of Kamala Harris' Inadequacy
Vice President Kamala Harris's recent interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier was notably problematic for two reasons.
Firstly, while discussing foreign national security threats to America, Harris only mentioned Iran. She neglected to mention the devastating war in Ukraine, where over a million people have died, and the looming threat of nuclear war. Harris failed to address her administration’s substantial military and civilian aid to Ukraine and policy actions against Russia, which represents the most significant military threat in Europe since World War Two. Even more concerning was her failure to acknowledge the existential threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
Secondly, her responses to key questions were a mix of confusion, anger, and deception, revealing a candidate who is ill-suited to be the president of the United States. The fact that she is the Democratic candidate and could potentially become president is alarming for America’s allies and a welcome development for America’s enemies.
During the interview, Harris had the chance to discuss her analysis of threats to America. While Iran is indeed a regional danger and a threat to the U.S. and its allies in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, it is insignificant compared to the existential threat of the CCP. Iran and Russia would be far less concerning if the CCP were not freely supporting these aggressive nations. The PRC's grave and fundamental threat is evident in its hyper-aggressive policies against the American people, U.S. allies like Japan and the Philippines, and partners like India and Taiwan.
The CCP’s threatening military posture was displayed during Exercise Joint Sword 2024B, launched on October 14. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forces encircled Taiwan to coerce its new leader, President Lai Ching-te, into a position of subservience to the PRC. This exercise revealed three aspects of the growing PRC threat. Firstly, it demonstrated the increasing capabilities of the PRC. Secondly, it displayed the ever-increasing penetrations of Taiwanese air and sea space in an attempt to normalize these violations and mask the actual invasion when it comes. Lastly, it marked the first participation of the Chinese Coast Guard in the encirclement of Taiwan.
With respect to the increased capabilities of the PLA Navy, their first aircraft carrier, Chinese Navy Ship (CNS) Liaoning /CV-16, conducted 90 fixed-wing take-offs and recoveries and 50 more from their embarked helicopters during the exercise. This is a significant strategic trendline that presidential candidate Harris demonstrated no awareness or strategy to counter.
Regarding PLA incursions into Taiwan’s air and sea space, exercise Joint Sword 2024B marks another significant point in the PRC’s dramatic transformation of the military status quo in the cross-strait environment. The Biden-Harris administration has made no mention of this hyper-aggressive behavior by Beijing or taken any actions to rectify it.
The Joint Sword 2024B exercise was unique in demonstrating the use of non-PLA ships from the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) in this PLA-led exercise. These actions demonstrate that the CCP’s strategy to bring Taiwan under its control will use the entirety of the PRC’s assets—a whole of government effort. These facts at sea demonstrate that the PRC’s 2019 declaration of a “People’s War” against the United States is not just propaganda but is advancing in tangible ways.
Americans need to understand the scope and scale of the CCP’s grand strategy as evidenced by the PLA Navy and the CCG’s demonstrated actions during exercise Joint Sword 2024B. The evidence is undeniable: the CCP intends for the PRC to become the dominant naval force, not just in Asia but across the globe.
This reality is set against a Biden-Harris administration that continues to downsize the size and capabilities of the U.S. Navy.
So, when Bret Baier asks candidate Harris what America’s number one foreign adversary is and there is no mention of the PRC, Americans know this candidate is not competent to assume the office of the Presidency. Americans need to pay attention because U.S. national security is on a knife’s edge—to the U.S., the CCP is a hyper-aggressive regime that is determined to realize its grand strategic objective of dominance. Yet Harris displays no strategic gravitas. She shows no evidence of the seriousness of the situation or of an understanding that deterrence of the CCP’s hyper-aggression is on her shoulders—let alone having a plan to address this threat.
Deterrence of the CCP is everything. If it fails, this country will be at war with the PRC. Harris appears oblivious to the demands and requirements of deterrence. Accordingly, before the PRC blockades or invades Taiwan or launches an attack against the Philippines in the South China Sea, Americans must have a president sitting behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office who has the knowledge, experience, and courage to prepare our nation for the demands of deterrence of the CCP’s aggression. It must have a president who signals in stark and no uncertain terms to the CCP that their aggression is certain to fail—and so they had better not try it in the first place. A president who not only can talk tough but has the wherewithal to rebuild the U.S. deterrent. The catechism of deterrence is straightforward: weakness invites aggression; strength deters it. Americans must elect a president who understands this catechism and so defends our nation from all threats—most especially from the existential threat of the PRC.
Bottom Line
The implications of Kamala Harris's inadequacy in addressing the threats posed by the CCP and the PRC are far-reaching. Her lack of strategic understanding and preparedness could potentially put the U.S. at risk. The question remains: how will this affect the future of U.S. foreign policy and national security? What are your thoughts on this matter? Don't forget to share this article with your friends. You can also sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is available every day at 6pm.
The Strategic Implications of Kamala Harris' Inadequacy
Vice President Kamala Harris's recent interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier was notably problematic for two reasons.
Firstly, while discussing foreign national security threats to America, Harris only mentioned Iran. She neglected to mention the devastating war in Ukraine, where over a million people have died, and the looming threat of nuclear war. Harris failed to address her administration’s substantial military and civilian aid to Ukraine and policy actions against Russia, which represents the most significant military threat in Europe since World War Two. Even more concerning was her failure to acknowledge the existential threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
Secondly, her responses to key questions were a mix of confusion, anger, and deception, revealing a candidate who is ill-suited to be the president of the United States. The fact that she is the Democratic candidate and could potentially become president is alarming for America’s allies and a welcome development for America’s enemies.
During the interview, Harris had the chance to discuss her analysis of threats to America. While Iran is indeed a regional danger and a threat to the U.S. and its allies in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, it is insignificant compared to the existential threat of the CCP. Iran and Russia would be far less concerning if the CCP were not freely supporting these aggressive nations. The PRC's grave and fundamental threat is evident in its hyper-aggressive policies against the American people, U.S. allies like Japan and the Philippines, and partners like India and Taiwan.
The CCP’s threatening military posture was displayed during Exercise Joint Sword 2024B, launched on October 14. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forces encircled Taiwan to coerce its new leader, President Lai Ching-te, into a position of subservience to the PRC. This exercise revealed three aspects of the growing PRC threat. Firstly, it demonstrated the increasing capabilities of the PRC. Secondly, it displayed the ever-increasing penetrations of Taiwanese air and sea space in an attempt to normalize these violations and mask the actual invasion when it comes. Lastly, it marked the first participation of the Chinese Coast Guard in the encirclement of Taiwan.
With respect to the increased capabilities of the PLA Navy, their first aircraft carrier, Chinese Navy Ship (CNS) Liaoning /CV-16, conducted 90 fixed-wing take-offs and recoveries and 50 more from their embarked helicopters during the exercise. This is a significant strategic trendline that presidential candidate Harris demonstrated no awareness or strategy to counter.
Regarding PLA incursions into Taiwan’s air and sea space, exercise Joint Sword 2024B marks another significant point in the PRC’s dramatic transformation of the military status quo in the cross-strait environment. The Biden-Harris administration has made no mention of this hyper-aggressive behavior by Beijing or taken any actions to rectify it.
The Joint Sword 2024B exercise was unique in demonstrating the use of non-PLA ships from the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) in this PLA-led exercise. These actions demonstrate that the CCP’s strategy to bring Taiwan under its control will use the entirety of the PRC’s assets—a whole of government effort. These facts at sea demonstrate that the PRC’s 2019 declaration of a “People’s War” against the United States is not just propaganda but is advancing in tangible ways.
Americans need to understand the scope and scale of the CCP’s grand strategy as evidenced by the PLA Navy and the CCG’s demonstrated actions during exercise Joint Sword 2024B. The evidence is undeniable: the CCP intends for the PRC to become the dominant naval force, not just in Asia but across the globe.
This reality is set against a Biden-Harris administration that continues to downsize the size and capabilities of the U.S. Navy.
So, when Bret Baier asks candidate Harris what America’s number one foreign adversary is and there is no mention of the PRC, Americans know this candidate is not competent to assume the office of the Presidency. Americans need to pay attention because U.S. national security is on a knife’s edge—to the U.S., the CCP is a hyper-aggressive regime that is determined to realize its grand strategic objective of dominance. Yet Harris displays no strategic gravitas. She shows no evidence of the seriousness of the situation or of an understanding that deterrence of the CCP’s hyper-aggression is on her shoulders—let alone having a plan to address this threat.
Deterrence of the CCP is everything. If it fails, this country will be at war with the PRC. Harris appears oblivious to the demands and requirements of deterrence. Accordingly, before the PRC blockades or invades Taiwan or launches an attack against the Philippines in the South China Sea, Americans must have a president sitting behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office who has the knowledge, experience, and courage to prepare our nation for the demands of deterrence of the CCP’s aggression. It must have a president who signals in stark and no uncertain terms to the CCP that their aggression is certain to fail—and so they had better not try it in the first place. A president who not only can talk tough but has the wherewithal to rebuild the U.S. deterrent. The catechism of deterrence is straightforward: weakness invites aggression; strength deters it. Americans must elect a president who understands this catechism and so defends our nation from all threats—most especially from the existential threat of the PRC.
Bottom Line
The implications of Kamala Harris's inadequacy in addressing the threats posed by the CCP and the PRC are far-reaching. Her lack of strategic understanding and preparedness could potentially put the U.S. at risk. The question remains: how will this affect the future of U.S. foreign policy and national security? What are your thoughts on this matter? Don't forget to share this article with your friends. You can also sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is available every day at 6pm.
