The hottest Defense Policy Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top U.S. Politics Topics

Monopoly Round-Up: Manipulating the Stock Market Is Trump's War Strategy

BIG by Matt Stoller • 11344 implied HN points • 23 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The administration is actively propping up stock prices as part of its war strategy, timing strikes and public statements to calm investors so political and financial support holds.
  2. Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz is creating real global supply shocks — big jumps in oil and shortages of things like helium and fertilizer — that are already disrupting flights, hospitals, and manufacturing.
  3. Markets have so far underreacted but are losing faith; short-term manipulation can nudge prices, but it can’t substitute for actually winning on the ground, and the conflict exposes the fragility of the US-centered global order.

The Arrogance of Ignorance.

Breaking the News • 8093 implied HN points • 08 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Good strategy means thinking several moves ahead and being ready to change plans faster than your opponent; if leaders don’t ask “How does this end?” they can cause needless disaster.
  2. You shouldn’t choose wars of choice without exhausting alternatives and imagining what could go wrong; many problems have no military solution, so diplomacy and clear, systematic decision rules must come first.
  3. Modern fighting often favors cheap, numerous technologies over a few expensive systems, and a public insulated from combat plus easy political posturing makes it too easy to send others into long, costly wars.

Monopoly Round-Up: The Epstein Class Launches a War

BIG by Matt Stoller • 35524 implied HN points • 02 Mar 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. A U.S.- and Israeli-led strike on Iran has escalated into a volatile regional conflict of drone and missile strikes that could disrupt oil markets, strain military munitions, and cause wider economic and human costs.
  2. Wealthy Gulf rulers, Western banks, tech firms, and media investors form a close transnational elite that funds big deals and helps shape foreign policy, while regimes outside that network—like Iran—are treated as expendable.
  3. There is a growing split between this elite class and the public: elites take short-term, risky actions assuming others will handle the fallout, while soldiers, ordinary people, and markets bear the consequences, even as monopoly and antitrust battles reshape the economy.

The Pentagon Threatens Anthropic

Astral Codex Ten • 38542 implied HN points • 25 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The Pentagon tried to strip Anthropic's contract limits and demand its AI be available for “all lawful purposes,” threatening actions like the Defense Production Act or a “supply chain risk” designation that could effectively destroy the company.
  2. Anthropic pushed back, refusing to allow use for mass domestic surveillance or no-human-in-the-loop weapons, and has won backing from other AI firms and critics who see this as a stand for civil liberties and safety norms.
  3. The conflict shows a dangerous precedent: using national-security powers to strong-arm domestic tech firms would chill investment and vendor cooperation, so likely outcomes include contract cancellation, replacing vendors, and calls for legal or policy checks on such government leverage.

"All Lawful Use": Much More Than You Wanted To Know

Astral Codex Ten • 28838 implied HN points • 01 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Saying systems can be used for “all lawful use” is not a real safeguard because existing laws and internal defense policies have big loopholes and can be reinterpreted or changed.
  2. AI removes the scale and cost limits that once made mass domestic surveillance impractical, so governments can lawfully buy or incidentally collect data and then use AI to analyze and profile large populations.
  3. Autonomous-weapon rules mostly live in vague, changeable defense policies, so allowing only “lawful” uses can still permit weapons with little human judgment; companies should avoid contracts that could force them to build systems without strong safeguards.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

30 seconds to midnight? 15?

Marcus on AI • 17943 implied HN points • 25 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The U.S. government is pushing to use AI everywhere and is pressuring companies to grant unrestricted access for surveillance and military uses.
  2. Current generative AI models are unreliable and prone to hallucinations. Simulations show they often recommend extreme actions like nuclear strikes, so they can't be trusted for life-or-death decisions.
  3. Embedding these jagged, unreliable LLMs into critical systems without strict safeguards could lead to catastrophe, so resisting unrestricted deployment is urgently important.

America, and probably the world, stands on a precipice.

Marcus on AI • 13477 implied HN points • 26 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The Pentagon is pressuring an AI company for full access to its software, which could enable mass surveillance and autonomous weapons — possibly even systems controlling nuclear launches — without humans in the loop.
  2. The move looks like an attempt to bypass Congress and force a rapid corporate policy change under threat, setting a dangerous precedent where a single official can decide nation‑level AI uses.
  3. Decisions about AI of this magnitude need public debate and congressional oversight, not unilateral action; citizens should contact their Senators and Representatives now to demand oversight and legal safeguards against autonomous weapons and mass surveillance.

Anthropic and the Department of War

Don't Worry About the Vase • 6630 implied HN points • 25 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The Pentagon is demanding unfettered access to Anthropic’s Claude and threatening a supply‑chain ban or use of the Defense Production Act, while Anthropic refuses to drop two firm red lines: no mass domestic surveillance and no fully autonomous lethal weapons without a human in the loop.
  2. Those threats are internally contradictory and dangerous — branding Anthropic a supply‑chain risk or quasi‑nationalizing the lab would badly damage trust, harm national security readiness, and set a worrying precedent for government power over private tech.
  3. There are easy better paths: either keep the current terms and keep cooperating, or amicably unwind the contract and switch vendors; forcing models to obey all orders would reduce model quality, create emergent misalignment risks, and undermine the AI ecosystem and democratic norms.

The US War Machine Is Run By Deranged Armageddon Cultists

Caitlin’s Newsletter • 2649 implied HN points • 05 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Senior US officials are using aggressive, macho war rhetoric and promising relentless strikes on Iran, openly celebrating overwhelming military force.
  2. Evangelical religious influence has seeped into the military and government, with leaders framing the conflict as divinely sanctioned and even apocalyptic.
  3. The US imperial system is portrayed as dangerously hypocritical and tyrannical, led by zealots who shouldn't be trusted with nuclear power, and the piece argues this system must be dismantled for humanity's sake.

Anthropic and the DoW: Anthropic Responds

Don't Worry About the Vase • 3942 implied HN points • 27 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Anthropic refused the Pentagon's demand to allow "any lawful use" because it will not enable mass domestic surveillance or deployment of fully autonomous lethal weapons, and it insists on keeping those guardrails while still offering to support national security work.
  2. The Department of War's threats to label Anthropic a supply-chain risk or invoke the Defense Production Act were widely criticized as contradictory and heavy-handed, and many experts, lawmakers, and tech employees warned this coercion could chill future government–industry cooperation.
  3. Swapping out Anthropic would take months and create operational risk, since frontier LLMs aren’t reliable for lethal automation; the preferred fixes are continued negotiation, narrow targeted measures, or an orderly wind-down rather than escalatory legal action.

Secretary of War Tweets That Anthropic is Now a Supply Chain Risk

Don't Worry About the Vase • 3136 implied HN points • 02 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. A Defense official tried to brand Anthropic a supply-chain risk and ban partners from working with it, a move that looks legally questionable and could seriously damage the company, markets, and national-security supply chains.
  2. The real fight was over mass domestic surveillance and use of AI with big commercial datasets and autonomous weapons — Anthropic insisted on contractual red lines, while the Pentagon pushed for “all lawful use.”
  3. OpenAI cut a fast deal that leans on a technical “safety stack” and trust in the military’s legal view rather than strong contract limits, which might calm things short-term but leaves weak legal protections and a risky precedent that employees and the public should scrutinize.

If Iran Kills US Troops, The Blame Rests Solely On The US And Israel

Caitlin’s Newsletter • 2086 implied HN points • 26 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Some U.S. officials reportedly want Israel to strike Iran first so an Iranian retaliation against U.S. assets would create political cover for a U.S. war.
  2. Government leaders and mainstream media are pushing misleading or false claims about Iran’s intentions and capabilities to manufacture public support for military action.
  3. Because the U.S. and Israel have pursued sanctions, military deployments, covert actions, and attacks that escalate tensions, any Iranian retaliation that kills U.S. or Israeli troops would be the consequence of those provocations and thus their responsibility.

Marco Rubio’s Minor Diplomatic Miracle

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 2559 implied HN points • 16 Feb 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. He gave a blunt, high-stakes critique of European complacency and questioned long-standing assumptions about the continent’s security.
  2. Even while challenging those sacred cows, he won over senior European leaders and received a standing ovation at the Munich Security Conference.
  3. The speech acted like an intervention — a stern warning that Europe risks squandering its security if it doesn’t change course.

Yeesh, Who Would Have Thought That Allies Actually Mattered?

Phillips’s Newsletter • 271 implied HN points • 16 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Trump is speeding the U.S.’s decline by deliberately weakening core pillars like social cohesion, political institutions, and the military’s ability to think.
  2. Alliances are a central source of American global power and are essential for winning wars, so damaging the U.S.-led alliance system severely weakens the country’s position.
  3. The administration only just seemed to realize alliances matter, but after actively trying to undermine them the damage may already be hard to undo.

The Rot Is Real And There Is More To It

Phillips’s Newsletter • 637 implied HN points • 06 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Endemic corruption and the replacement of competent officers with loyalists and fanatics have hollowed out decision-making, morale, and expertise across the US military and diplomatic corps.
  2. The Iran bombing has exposed unprecedented operational failures — including large friendly‑fire losses, poor industrial/logistical preparation, and a confused articulation of strategic goals despite months of warning.
  3. Those failures carry dangerous consequences: likely catastrophic civilian harm (including a struck girls' school), the US being used to advance other countries' interests, and serious damage to alliance diplomacy and credibility.

How Hubris Created an 'Invincible' Military

God's Spies by Thomas Neuburger • 100 implied HN points • 20 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The U.S. military’s procurement is driven by contractors and profit, producing costly systems that can be ineffective in real asymmetric conflicts.
  2. Millennium Challenge 2002 showed that low-tech, unconventional tactics can overwhelm a high-tech, networked force, but the exercise was manipulated to avoid confronting that truth.
  3. Hubris and corruption among leaders have left the armed forces ill-prepared for wars like those with Iran, creating real danger for service members.

March 15, 2026

Letters from an American • 31 implied HN points • 16 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The president appears to have launched and escalated a war without a clear endgame or serious planning. He claims Iran’s military was destroyed while also asking other countries for help and saying he was surprised by Iran’s responses.
  2. Iran can claim victory simply by surviving and can leverage control of the Strait of Hormuz to pressure the world through oil disruptions. The U.S. remains tied to global oil markets because its refineries and the types of oil it produces mean it can’t easily use all the oil it makes.
  3. The administration is pushing to reshape and punish the media, including threats to broadcasters and praise for friendly ownership, which undermines press freedom. Mixed messages and misleading claims from officials show internal turmoil and widespread misinformation.

MAGA’s new excuse for Iran war: Israel made us do it

Aaron Mate • 209 implied HN points • 03 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Top Republican leaders argued the US struck Iran preemptively because Israel was going to attack and a US strike was needed to prevent Iranian retaliation against American forces.
  2. The president publicly contradicted that claim, saying he acted on his own judgment that Iran would attack first rather than being forced by Israel.
  3. Independent reporting indicates the US and Israel had planned attacks on Iran for months, suggesting the strikes were part of a coordinated push for regime change rather than a purely defensive move.

German Dysfunction

Diane Francis • 1079 implied HN points • 05 Aug 24
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Germany, despite being the richest and largest economy in Europe, has been slow to take charge in defending against Russian aggression.
  2. Recent military budget cuts indicate a lack of commitment to support Ukraine effectively, raising concerns about Germany's leadership role in Europe.
  3. Historical factors like post-war guilt and strong business ties to Russia influence Germany's cautious stance towards military involvement.

What Is Iranian Air Power Strategy?

Phillips’s Newsletter • 143 implied HN points • 05 Mar 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Airpower strategy is basically about targeting — by seeing what a state attacks you can infer its strategic aims.
  2. Airpower expands the battlefield across air, sea and space, letting strikes reach far from front lines and cause wide-ranging effects.
  3. Iran seems to emphasize indirect, diversionary air attacks (like drones and long-range strikes) to force opponents to waste resources on defense and repairs rather than only destroying specific targets.

The US/Israel Bombing of Iran--What We Are Seeing From An Air Power Perspective

Phillips’s Newsletter • 160 implied HN points • 03 Mar 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Modern air operations have revealed both the strengths and the limits of air power, showing where strikes can be decisive and where they fall short.
  2. Iran is actively fighting back with its own air campaign, which complicates the battlespace and changes how attacks and defenses play out.
  3. Political leaders have offered shifting and sometimes contradictory justifications for the war, leaving the strategic purpose unclear and suggesting mixed or domestic motives.

Niall Ferguson: The Truth About Trump's National Security Strategy

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 2198 implied HN points • 07 Dec 25
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. A national security strategy is a written roadmap and not automatically a binding doctrine, so it shouldn’t be treated as the final word on policy.
  2. The document criticizes European allies for low defense spending and economic decline, warning their societies face serious risks.
  3. It frames U.S. policy around preserving American primacy, prioritizing national strength and openly calling out allies’ shortcomings.

The Mad Stamp Collector

Thinking about... • 828 implied HN points • 11 Jan 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. A possessive, aggressive approach to friends destroys trust and ends helpful cooperation.
  2. Existing alliances and agreements already give access and security when needed; asking and cooperating works far better than trying to seize things.
  3. Trying to claim or bully allied territory can break alliances, weaken national security, and hand advantage to rival powers.

The information space around military AI is being weaponized against us

Weaponized • 83 implied HN points • 27 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Focusing the debate on whether a human stays “in the loop” narrows the issue and hides the bigger question of whether advanced AI should be embedded into military decision-making at all and who should control or oversee it.
  2. Media and political framing are substituting simpler questions for harder governance issues, which concentrates power in the executive branch and a few private AI firms while sidelining Congress and public oversight.
  3. Integrating AI into defense systems dramatically expands surveillance and inference capabilities in ways that threaten civil liberties, and existing laws don’t address unexplainable AI inferences or the need for new safeguards before deployment.

OSD 366: More on the government as a prohibited person

Open Source Defense • 45 implied HN points • 28 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Militaries will exclude suppliers — and even deeply nested parts of the supply chain — they think could be compromised, because clever attacks can hide in hardware or software layers.
  2. There’s a real tension between legitimate government limits on its own procurement and civilians’ right to choose tools, which becomes acute when those tools are important for civilian defense.
  3. AI is pushing most software from a low-control category into a high-control one, so many civilian technologies may soon face stronger government interest and could either make civilian defense much more powerful or much more restricted.

Boomer Communism Is Bankrupting America

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 649 implied HN points • 22 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. A political bargain has turned into “Total Boomer Luxury Communism,” where retirees — including wealthy ones — receive large government benefits that drive up national debt.
  2. Rather than shrinking government since the 1980s, both parties expanded entitlement spending, which is weakening the economy, eroding the defense industrial base, and harming young people’s prospects.
  3. If entitlements aren’t radically reformed, the country risks becoming dominated by retirees and facing broad decline, yet this dynamic is largely overlooked in public debate.

A Ukrainian Victory Strategy

Phillips’s Newsletter • 169 implied HN points • 10 Feb 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Ukrainians are actively thinking through a strategic, nuanced plan for how to achieve victory.
  2. Some Western reporting, including recent Wall Street Journal pieces, misrepresents or misunderstands that strategy and promotes misleading narratives like claims about sending the youngest people to the front.
  3. There is a substantive Ukrainian strategic discussion underway that is more complex than many Western observers appreciate.

Who Is Detaching Whom?

Phillips’s Newsletter • 119 implied HN points • 17 Feb 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. The biggest mistake in US foreign policy is treating American military power as proof of overall competence or wisdom.
  2. Decades of US military dominance led allies, especially in Europe, to defer intellectually and stop thinking for themselves.
  3. Military strength gave the US undeserved credibility in non-military areas, producing bad judgments and a gap between perceived and actual competence.

Richard Danzig on AI and Cyber

ChinaTalk • 266 implied HN points • 16 Jan 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Act now: the defense establishment must stop being passive and quickly build real AI expertise, assimilative capacity, and closer partnerships with frontier tech companies to seize a short-lived first-mover advantage in cyber and AI instead of waiting for some distant AGI fix.
  2. Rewire the organization: large, siloed institutions need cultural and structural change so cyber and AI are not underweighted—create dedicated career paths, pool resources for general-purpose systems, and pair bold civilian leaders with open-minded military leaders to drive reform.
  3. Manage co-evolving risks and power: AI is a fast, uneven general-purpose technology that will reshape offense, defense, markets, and human roles, so governments must build capability, governance, and safeguards to limit private dominance, prevent accidents, and avoid dangerous overreliance on machines.

Killing Narco Speedboat Survivors Is a War Crime

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 755 implied HN points • 30 Nov 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Two men reportedly survived an initial strike on a narco speedboat but were then killed in a follow-up attack, and killing survivors at sea would be unlawful and could amount to a war crime.
  2. The story moved from a smaller outlet to a major paper with fuller details, and the Defense Department called it fabricated but did not specifically deny the reported particulars, leaving the account contested.
  3. This raises urgent legal and ethical questions about the use of force and accountability; claims that lawyers approved the strikes do not resolve the need for a transparent investigation.

Deterring a Taiwan Invasion

ChinaTalk • 2861 implied HN points • 07 Jul 25
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Rapidly increasing troop numbers can deter invasions. Just like Japan raised its defenses quickly, Taiwan should boost its military readiness to make any attack seem costly.
  2. Using the natural terrain for protection is crucial. Taiwan can use its mountains for hiding and sheltering military assets to stand strong against potential attacks.
  3. Focusing on asymmetric warfare, like drones, is essential. Taiwan should invest in quick-to-deploy technologies that don't require a lot of time or resources to develop.

Lessons of the Ukraine War

David Friedman’s Substack • 467 implied HN points • 29 Nov 25
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Ukraine proved to be much stronger than expected, surprising many who thought Russia would easily win.
  2. Russia also showed unexpected resilience, maintaining its economy and military strength despite ongoing sanctions and war costs.
  3. Drones became key weapons in the conflict, showing that advanced technology from NATO countries wasn't as decisive as thought.

Chartbook 389: Europe's zombie armies. Or how to spend $3.1 trillion and have precious little to show for it.

Chartbook • 2246 implied HN points • 08 Jun 25
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. European countries have spent $3.1 trillion on defense over a decade, but they seem to have little effectiveness to show for it. This raises questions on how well the money has been utilized.
  2. Despite having many soldiers, the European military forces are fragmented and not effectively organized, which dilutes their combat power and efficiency.
  3. The focus on salaries and personnel has led to underinvestment in essential military equipment and capabilities, leaving Europe unprepared for modern defense challenges.

Annual Review 2025: What I Got Wrong

Phillips’s Newsletter • 278 implied HN points • 26 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. Don't assume leaders will be constrained by their base; Trump showed he will act on his own judgment, even joining attacks he previously seemed unlikely to support.
  2. Treat public shifts in rhetoric about Russia with skepticism — friendly signals can be deliberate feints, and Trump has stayed aligned with Putin rather than genuinely turning against him.
  3. Rhetoric from European governments isn't enough; unless the UK, France, and others provide tangible support like money or weapons, don't expect them to take decisive, sustained action.

America's Digital Fortress Is Finally Being Built

Who is Robert Malone • 13 implied HN points • 07 Mar 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The strategy shifts U.S. cyber policy from passive defense to active offense, promising to impose real costs on attackers through cyber operations, sanctions, and other consequences.
  2. It favors practical, industry-friendly measures over heavy compliance, aiming to modernize federal networks with zero-trust and post-quantum cryptography, harden critical infrastructure, and partner with the private sector.
  3. It elevates AI and technological superiority and commits to building a strong cyber workforce, backing AI-powered autonomous defenses to fight at machine speed and keep the U.S. ahead of rivals.

In nuclear race with Russia, Trump goes back to a Cold War future

Aaron Mate • 75 implied HN points • 06 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The New START treaty expired after the U.S. declined a one‑year extension, removing the last legal limits on U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals.
  2. There are reports of an informal six‑month tacit observance and a resumption of high‑level military talks, but those steps do not replace formal arms control.
  3. Letting New START lapse and threatening a new buildup risks triggering a renewed arms race with Russia and China and raises global security dangers.

The Trillion Dollar War Machine (w/ William D. Hartung) | The Chris Hedges Report

The Chris Hedges Report • 163 implied HN points • 01 Jan 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The military-industrial complex now channels massive public money to private defense firms and uses lobbying and secret deals to keep itself growing.
  2. Big Tech has merged with the defense sector, promoting automated warfare, widespread surveillance, and the blurring of public and corporate roles for profit and control.
  3. Recent political shifts have empowered this trillion-dollar war machine to keep expanding, which risks democracy, public welfare, and national safety as profit motives trump oversight.

Why The Constant Failure To Understand War? The US Made It Look Too Easy

Phillips’s Newsletter • 165 implied HN points • 02 Jan 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. Analysts in the US and much of the West keep misreading what actually matters in modern war, repeatedly getting big predictions—like breakthroughs or collapse from manpower shortages—wrong.
  2. That misunderstanding fuels simplistic policy advice (for example, calls to mass-draft) that ignores local debate and the changing balance between ranged and land warfare.
  3. Because the US made war look easy during its hegemonic era, strategic thinking weakened, breeding arrogance, bad decisions, and political shifts with real costs for allies.

Secret U.S. Army Lab Shipped Live Anthrax to 194 Facilities Worldwide for Over a Decade

Who is Robert Malone • 11 implied HN points • 05 Mar 26
🌍 World Politics Defense Policy
  1. A U.S. Army lab repeatedly failed to inactivate anthrax and ended up shipping live spores to nearly 200 labs over more than a decade, revealing major biosafety and quality-control breakdowns.
  2. The facility’s large production scale, advanced capabilities, and its ties to the 2001 anthrax investigation raise real dual-use concerns and unanswered questions about whether oversight and stated defensive needs matched what was produced.
  3. An AI-driven, six-layer verification approach could help spot warning signs and distinguish defensive work from misuse, but it will need transparency, independent oversight, and broad international cooperation to be effective.

Alex Karp: We Need a New Manhattan Project

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 1585 implied HN points • 22 Feb 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Defense Policy
  1. The author believes the tech industry should use its power to create advanced weapons to maintain peace, similar to the historic Manhattan Project. This could involve collaboration between the government and tech companies.
  2. They highlight that America's military strength has helped maintain world peace for nearly a century, and losing that superiority could create dangers for the future.
  3. The article suggests there's a growing belief against using military deterrence, which could lead to instability, so it's urgent for the U.S. and its allies to act and reinforce their military capabilities.