American Security Project

The American Security Project hosted a public event on nuclear reactors and their strategic and tactical uses by the military. Congressman Conor Lamb (D-PA) provided introductory remarks. Caroline Cochran, COO of advanced nuclear company Oklo, joined a panel including ASP President BGen Stephen Cheney and ASP COO Andrew Holland.

In his introductory remarks, Rep. Lamb discussed the importance of nuclear energy. He noted the first commercial nuclear reactor in the United States was in his district at Shippingport. He discussed Pennsylvania’s long history in energy production. He highlighted how nuclear energy can create a new industry, that would create jobs and provide affordable, clean energy. Nuclear energy provides 40 percent of the state’s energy.

Presently though, he pointed out nuclear energy is facing challenges. The plant at Three Mile Island has closed, and the Beaver Valley plant is at risk. If nuclear power plants close, natural gas will replace them.  Rep. Lamb said there’s a better way forward. He discussed the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act, which he cosponsors, as a means of moving toward the future.

ASP COO Andrew Holland discussed how nuclear and advanced nuclear energy are having something of a moment in Congress. He also mentioned how nuclear technology is changing, and he noted that tomorrow’s nuclear power will be different from the past. His discussion focused on a recently published report, “Perspective – Micro Nuclear Reactors” he wrote for the American Security Project on micro nuclear reactors and their potential role in meeting the military’s energy needs.

Holland portrayed energy as a force multiplier for the military. He said energy should be viewed as an “offset” in the parlance of the Pentagon. He observed the military is increasingly moving toward electric energy, but he pointed out this energy needs to come from somewhere. The military, however, is continuing to generate this electricity like it has in the past. He stated only nuclear energy has the potential to meet the needs of the military.

ASP President BGen Stephen Cheney responded to these comments by noting he viewed energy as an Achilles heel. During his service, he recalled, his number one concern was how he would be able to refuel. He pointed out carting around fossil fuels to military forces is a huge vulnerability. Soldiers are constantly put in danger to move this fuel around. In contrast to ground forces, nuclear power allows the Navy to go 20 years before it needs to refuel.

He also highlighted how small modular nuclear reactors could improve things. Using these reactors, bases could reduce their carbon footprint and their reliance on local power grids. While the designs for these reactors exist, the funding for them lags. Like Holland, he mentioned that as things lean toward electric, nuclear power provides a way to power them.

Holland then discussed two different aspects of the energy problem the military faces. On the one hand, the military has a need for energy security that allows it assured access to reliable energy. On the other hand, the military also needs to have energy resilience. He mentioned how micro nuclear reactors capable of being moved in shipping containers are a good answer to these problems.

BGen Cheney discussed energy security in relation to the recent blackouts related to the wildfires in California. He noted other bases are in areas at risk for fires and mentioned that reliance on local power grids would leave these bases vulnerable. He mentioned micro reactors would enable bases to move away from relying on local power grids to operate. He stated we need small and reliable reactors to move away from this dependency.

Oklo cofounder Caroline Cochran drew attention to the fact other countries are already operating micro nuclear reactors. She noted that in places like Siberia, micro nuclear reactors already provide energy to remote areas. In Alaska, however, reliance on fossil fuels is creating a situation where the journey to deliver fuel ends up burning more fuel than is delivered. In other areas, not even this option is available. She argued this energy poverty demonstrates there is a market and a need for micro nuclear reactors.

She mentioned that even in developed areas nuclear energy could provide cheaper and greener energy. She drew attention to the longevity of the fuel used by the reactors, which can last decades. She also addressed concerns about the safety of reactors by stating the inherent physical characteristics of the fuel her company uses keep it safe. In a time when we are realizing everything produces waste, she pointed out very limit waste is involved in reactors she discussed. The energy density of nuclear fuel used in the reactors is two million times denser than fossil fuels.

The post Event Recap: Battlefields of the Future: The Next Generation of Nuclear Reactors appeared first on American Security Project.

[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPbXRHIQKkE[/embedyt]

On October 3, the American Security Project hosted a public event on climate and security in Southeast Asia. Distinguished guests Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, USN (Ret.), Ambassador Robert O. Blake, Jr., and Ashley Westerman joined us for a panel discussion on how climate change is affecting security in the region. ASP Climate Security Program Manager Esther Babson moderated the discussion.

Vice Admiral Gunn identified three stresses on nations in Southeast Asia. First, the population in the region is expecting to continue growing. This is a stress on resources. Scarcer resources, as a result of climate change, means more competition and potentially a security issue. Second, the increasing population has rising expectations. The region has rebounded from the Asian financial crisis and people want economic growth to continue. Much of this growth has been fueled by fossil fuels, which was Admiral Gunn’s third stressor. As economies in Southeast Asia have grown, so too have their energy demands. This creates a dilemma: countries who are very vulnerable to rising sea levels and other effects of climate change, are also contributing to the emissions that are causing rising temperatures and sea levels.

Admiral Gunn also noted the flow of rivers stemming from the Himalayas, to include the Mekong, Yangtze, and Yellow rivers, is another area of regional security significance. These rivers are critical to the communities downstream. As of late, these rivers have experienced dramatically different flows, partially due to snow melt, but also damming by countries up river.

Ambassador Blake opened his remarks with a vignette from his time as U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia. He said that the U.S. Pacific Combatant Command Commander would regularly visit Indonesia, and when he did, he would make time to answer questions from the local press. One time the press asked him what he believed was the largest threat in the region. He answered, climate change.

Indonesia is vulnerable to the threats of climate change, but it is also the world’s fifth largest emitter. The country has made progress growing its economy. Much of that growth, however, has been fueled by carbon. Specifically, 50 percent of its growth in carbon emissions has been a result of deforestation and coal, which is affecting human health and contributing to sea level rise.

Ambassador Blake did, however, highlight positive steps Indonesia is taking to combat climate change. At the Paris conference on climate change, the country committed to a 29 percent reduction in emissions by 2030 and a 23 percent increase in renewables by 2025.

There are several structural impediments to Indonesia meeting their targets, Ambassador Blake argued. One, it is a huge country. Two, law enforcement is not up to par and corruption is a problem. Three, the government has not enforced current laws penalizing those that set fires for agriculture cultivation. In closing, Ambassador Blake noted that Indonesia will not make their targets, but they are trying.

Ashley Westerman explained that Southeast Asia is in a quandary. The countries in the region need to develop, but those developments are not climate friendly. There is a reliance on coal, which China gladly exports as it tries to green its economy at home. In fact, Westerman noted that the IMF reported that carbon emissions in Southeast Asia were higher than anywhere else in the world from 1990 to 2010. She argued that the connection between climate change and security is a strong one. If sea levels rise and destroy agricultural land and livelihoods, people will need to find new land and a new job. Armed terrorist groups make tactical decisions based on food security. Finally, extreme weather events cause people to move. Many will move to cities, adding additional pressures and potentially clashing with established populations. In summary, Westerman offered that conflict in the region can be traced back to pressures on people caused by climate change. If the world wants to mitigate the security risk, something must be done about climate change.

Ending on a positive note, Esther Babson asked the panelist if they see any positive developments on combating the threats of climate change. Admiral Gunn said that the human ingenuity being applied to solve the problems of today is remarkable and brings him hope. Ambassador Blake agreed and added that the role of the private sector in driving innovation is also key; Amazon has pledged to have net zero emissions by 2040. Finally, Westerman echoed Admiral Gunn’s and Ambassador Blake’s optimism about innovation. She added that Bangladesh recently gave all its rivers the same rights as humans to protect them against polluters and environmental degradation. While the law has not yet been tested, she posited that it is an interesting case for how governments may handle climate change.

The post Event Recap: Climate and Security in Southeast Asia appeared first on American Security Project.

[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnIlaJds3OM[/embedyt]

The American Security Project hosted a public event on the future of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Distinguished guests Eric Farnsworth and Ed Gerwin joined us for a panel discussion of the USMCA and the implications of free trade on national security. Congressman Henry Cuellar (D-TX), provided introductory remarks before the panel. ASP COO Andrew Holland moderated the discussion.

In his introductory remarks, Congressman Cuellar first spoke broadly about the importance of trade and commerce, which he noted are an instrumental part of great civilizations. He emphasized how trade policy should focus on the interests of the country, and how it shouldn’t be subject to the partisan interests of Democrats or Republicans. Echoing Holland’s introduction, he stated trade’s importance isn’t only economic. It strengthens relationships between countries by facilitating conversations. He also highlighted the way trade facilitates the interests of the United States. Trade serves the United States’ best interests by helping create strong, prosperous, and stable neighbors. While he acknowledged some people forget the merits of trade, he stated the environment seems to be changing. Labor groups don’t seem as opposed to concluding a trade deal, and he is optimistic USMCA could pass in November or December.

Congressman Cuellar then addressed the topic of the USMCA in greater depth. Out of the options available to the United States, he talked about the agreement is the best path forward. While the repeal of the North American Free Trade Agreement would damage relations with Mexico and disrupt the important trade between the two countries, the existing NAFTA agreement is becoming dated. The USMCA provides an opportunity to maintain and modernize the United States’ relationship with its neighbors. He identified how a new agreement would allow issues like labor reform, enforcement, the environment, and pharmaceutical matters to be better addressed. He pointed to Nancy Pelosi’s decision to set up a task force as a sign things are moving in the right direction.

Eric Farnsworth took the opportunity to highlight how much the world has changed since NAFTA was first negotiated. Today email is ubiquitous, but he recounted how it was relatively novel in the early 1990s. In addition to the dramatic changes in technology, he mentioned how much things have changed between the United States and Mexico. Before NAFTA, the level of trust between the countries was low and the security situation was borderline hostile. Following NAFTA, the relationship matured. High-level intelligence is being shared, and now the countries can work jointly to secure the border. Although these changes can not be solely attributed to NAFTA, he used them to point out the significant change that can be wrought by trade.

Ed Gerwin identified two of the key benefits of the USMCA. Firstly, the agreement retains the central core of NAFTA. Like Eric Farnsworth, he noted how NAFTA had served as an important vehicle driving real change. The agreement has allowed the United States, Canada, and Mexico to build things together, with the creation of automotive and medical goods facilitated by the ability to move components freely between borders. 33 states hold Canada as their top trading partner, while 7 states hold Mexico in the same position. The second benefit is the USMCA allows for us to modernize NAFTA. It presents the opportunity to make labor and environment provisions part of the core agreement. Some of the most important changes relate to the digital world. The agreement would enable digital trade to be treated like physical trade. Cooperation would also lead to advancements in cyber security and privacy.

Turning to the future, the panel considered the United States’ next steps. Adopting the USMCA would allow the United States to “clear the deck,” and work on future trade policy. The panel agreed that it was important for the United States to work on the WTO. Eric Farnsworth identified Brazil and the United Kingdom as countries where important trade agreements could be made, but stressed it was better to conduct multilateral trade negotiations than bilateral ones. Ed Gerwin stressed importance of the domestic implications of trade. He discussed the need for greater education about the impacts of trade, programs to insulate the workforce from harm, and working to diminish negative perceptions about trade.

Related News: 

Cuellar: USMCA vote depends on Mexico budget for labor enforcement

What to Know in Washington: Ukraine Scandal Grows Into Threat.

The post Event Recap: The Future of USMCA appeared first on American Security Project.

The American Security Project hosted a public event on bilateral relations between the United States and Cuba. Joining the American Security Project were authors Michael J. Kelly, JD, Erika Moreno, PhD, Richard Witmer, PhD, Jonathan C. Benjamin-Alvarado, PhD to discuss the United States, Cuba, and the relationship between the two countries, subjects they recently addressed in their new book. In addition to the panel of authors, the event featured opening remarks from Ambassador Jeffrey Delaurentis. American Security Project’s COO Andrew Holland also joined these distinguished guests to moderate the discussion.

Before the panel, American Security Project CEO Brigadier General Stephen A. Cheney (Ret.) provided a brief introduction. In his remarks, he mentioned how the American Security Project’s interest in the area of US-Cuban relations dates to the December 17th, 2014 return of Alan Gross from Cuba. He recounted how the American Security Project’s involvement of in the area has expanded greatly in the following years, through efforts like its Cuba Engagement program and organizing the visit of a delegation of retired senior military leaders to Havana. He highlighted the ASP’s emphasis on the importance of dialogue and trade in US-Cuban Relations.

Following these remarks, Ambassador DeLaurentis introduced the discussion. Ambassador DeLaurentis discussed how in recent years there have been very minimal relations between the United States and Cuba. He also pointed out how the subject of US-Cuban relations is not only a foreign policy issue, but also a domestic one. He emphasized how relations between the two countries are not confined solely to the political realm, and how they are instead a very personal issue for many people. While he acknowledged the subject was one where “reasonable people disagree,” in his closing he addressed there is a potential for things to change in the countries’ relationship. Although he stated that the prognosis for a good short-term relationship between the two countries is “negative,” he also stated we could look back to the previous thaw in relations to picture what improved relations might look like. He explained US-Cuban relations as a “process,” and highlighted the importance of the type of work the panel has been doing in moving the process forward.

Professor Kelly discussed the genesis of the project. He remarked that there are a range of policy choices that need to be made in D.C., in Havana, and in both countries. He mentioned how the book was an effort to survey the policy options available, and to put these options out in a book for the issue to be addressed in the upcoming US elections. He portrayed the book as an effort to shape the framework of bilateral relations, so that the US could move to “take relations out of the freezer.” The book is an effort to identify the pathways the United States could follow to pursue improved relations.

Dr. Benjamin-Alvarado addressed the transformational nature of the changes that have been occurring in Cuba since the 1990s. While the Obama effort to step back from Cold War tensions between the United States and Cuba signified a generational change in American policy toward Cuba, Dr. Benjamin-Alvarado emphasized how a similar change could also occur in Cuba as a new generation of Cuban leaders charts the course of relations between the two countries. He also expressed his optimism about the situation on the ground in Cuba. While noting there have been significant gains, he also pointed out the much work remains to be done.

Dr. Moreno pointed out that when considering the relationship between the United States and Cuba we should remember that there are many forms of diplomacy. While we typically focus on official political diplomacy, it is important to consider how economic and more personal campaigns can also serve as forms of diplomacy. She noted that change can happen without official interactions, but the pace of this change will be slow.

Dr. Witmer addressed changes occurring in American electorate. While it had previously been taken for granted that the votes of south Florida electorate would be dominated by the issue of US-Cuban relations. He highlighted how generational change has begun to shift that. He pointed out that for many voters of the newer generations the US-Cuban issue is just one among the many of other issues that are important to these voters. He pointed out how diplomacy at the grass-roots level has begun to bubble up and change perceptions about the issue of relations between the two countries. He remarked that while many assume that a second Trump term would represent a continuation of his most recent policies toward Cuba, it is possible that there could be a pivot in the approach Trump would take in a second term. He noted that Trump’s approach toward North Korea had dramatically changed and said a similar change could potentially occur.

The post Event Recap: The Cuba-U.S. Bilateral Relationship: New Pathways and Policy Choices appeared first on American Security Project.

Major General Muniruzzaman, American Security Project’s CEO General Cheney, and COO Andrew Holland came together to discuss the real-time crisis of the internationally unrecognized climate-related displaced population at an ASP event Migration and Security in the Age of Climate Change.

Sea level rise, extreme weather events and disasters, erratic drought and flooding, and water scarcity is expected to displace millions. As a result, there will be permanent, internal and external migration. Farm communities that depend on the fertility of their crops are hit the hardest by extreme drought and flooding caused by climate change. Out of desperation, these “climate refugees” migrate into the cities for food and work which has triggered food riots and instability for nations who are not prepared to handle the influx.

Refugee’s fleeing from persecution and conflict are granted certain rights under international law: right to asylum, right of return, right of nonrefoulement, and the right of family reunification. Unfortunately, no legally-binding term exists for refugees impacted by climate; therefore they are not afforded any rights. The underlying complexities that come from climate change impacts make defining whether a migrant is a “climate refugee” very difficult. Andrew Holland and General Muniruzzaman contended that there should be an international standard to recognize climate refugees. They suggested that international law should extend climate refugees the same status as political refugees or create a new regime that addresses this specifically.

General Muniruzzaman opened his comments by outlining that “climate change is the future of migration”; and is currently impacting national and global security. Muniruzzaman is especially concerned with the effects that sea level rise will have on our mega-cities which contain 56% of the global population and are located within 37 miles of the coast. Flooding of these cities will induce the largest climate migration; possibly in history. Mumbai, New York, London, and many other cities that are central hubs for global communication and financial transactions are located on these coastlines. A shut-down of these cities for as little as seven days will send global shockwaves. Ports to which countries depend on for trade, food, and security provisions will be directly affected as well. Areas currently dealing with climate displacement include northern Africa, Syria, and the Pacific islands—which are expected to disappear by 2050 completely. Within his own country of Bangladesh, one meter of sea-level rise in the southern region will put 20% of the country underwater. As a result, at least twenty-five million people will be displaced. There is not enough territory for the state to absorb this transition; therefore many of the population will be forced to migrate externally. This is concerning because the world has not been able to accommodate the few thousand Syrian refugees fleeing to Europe. Therefore, the fate of millions of people attempting to relocate is unknown.

The lag of action to address these climate concerns are derived from the denial that resonates within regional and international powers, “The failure to recognize climate refugees is due to the fact that no nation wants to take on the obligation that comes with an internationally accepted status for these migrants.” He warned that the cost of this denial will be substantial if nations do not accept the reality that exponential climate-related migration is inevitable. States must educate themselves of the realities of climate impacts on human security instead of building divisions; only then will we find solutions to this crisis.

American Security Project’s General Cheney expanded on the importance of preparing for the security risks that come with these inevitable climate impacts and stressed impacts that sea level rise and extreme weather events will have on military bases. Norfolk and other low-lying coastal bases will either have to relocate or construct reinforcing infrastructure (e.g., seawalls) to remain operational. Like Muniruzzaman, he is deeply concerned with the consequences of not acknowledging and finding solutions for climate refugees promptly.

In conclusion, transboundary climate migration is inevitable; and require global and domestic solutions. Globally we must recognize these climate-related migrants and raise awareness. Nationally, governments must accept and understand the problem so that they can find a practical solution.

The post Event Recap: Migration and Security in the Age of Climate Change appeared first on American Security Project.

On Thursday, October 18th ASP hosted a panel discussion on the implications of Guyana’s recent discovery of oil. The panel included ASP’s Andrew Holland; Vice Admiral Kevin Green, USN (Ret); Sonya Boodoo from Rystad Energy, and Lisa Viscidi from the Inter-American Dialogue.

Boodoo began with a with a presentation which underscored the vastness of Guyana’s new-found oil reserves. She estimated that Guyana has 3.6 billion barrels of removable oil. Its production will scale upwards in the coming decades, reaching 800 thousand barrels per day by the 2030’s. The government of Guyana is set to reap substantial benefits from the oil boom, as it could receive over $25 billion per year by the 2030’s. The total government income from extraction could range from $57 billion (assuming the price of oil at $50 per barrel) to $172 billion (assuming $90 a barrel).

Holland continued by expanding on some of the economic and geopolitical issues that the oil boom could cause for Guyana. He brought up the risk of Guyana falling victim to the resource curse, where nations which discover resources fail to diversify the economy. He also discussed the border disagreement that Venezuela renewed with Guyana after the discovery of oil. Venezuela claims almost 2/3 of all of Guyana’s land. In response, Guyana has set up two military bases along its border with its border with Venezuela. The dispute has been referred to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Although the government of Venezuela has refused to take part in the process, the government of Guyana is attempting to find a judgment by the court to finally end the dispute. Holland closed saying, “with good policy and a little bit of luck Guyana will be able to stand on its own as an equal and chose its own path in international affairs without regard to where its imports of energy come from.”

Vice Admiral Green expanded on the US’ role in the Caribbean, saying that the US wants “stable progress” in the region. He said however great power competition is currently taking place in the region, and China and Russia are not acting in the best interests of Caribbean member states. “The challenge these nations poise has diplomatic, economic and to be sure military implications as well.”

Viscidi then gave her thoughts on the economic implications of Guyana’s discovery. She opened by praising Guyana for its expected creation of a sovereign wealth fund to manage the economic windfall that comes from the oil revenue. She then outlined Guyana’s sustainable development strategy which is aimed at diversifying its economy by investing in green energy. This is important as the oil industry itself is not expected to produce many jobs, estimates currently peg the total number of jobs as 600 jobs now with the potential of rising to 1,000. She then went on to caution against the building of an oil refinery as they require a high upfront cost, operate at low profit margins and are prone to corruption. Regarding the people of Guyana, she said that they ultimately stand to benefit, explaining that since “Guyana is a country where many people don’t have access to electricity… because of the discovery there is now a chance that they are going to build a natural gas plant which will provide electricity to many more people.”

The panelists covered the many opportunities and challenges presented by the discovery. As Guyana prepares to receive large amounts of revenue from its oil reserves the choices it makes now will determine whether it thrives as a prosperous nation or falls victim to the resource curse and languishes. So far, Guyana has indicated that it understands the challenge, but it must implement the policies needed.

The post Event Recap: Guyana Building Sustainable Security appeared first on American Security Project.

On this episode of Flashpoint, Andrew Holland sits down with ASP CEO BGen Stephen Cheney, USMC (Ret), and BG Stephen Xenakis, MD, to discuss the impact of obesity on our nation’s ability to meet its military recruiting goals. This year, Cheney and Xenakis released a report outlining the challenges of the obesity epidemic and several suggestions with which it can be addressed.

The post “Flashpoint” with BGen Stephen Cheney and BG Stephen Xenakis appeared first on American Security Project.

This week on Flashpoint, Andrew Holland sits down with Mark Fitzpatrick of IISS to discuss the evolving threat of nuclear weapons. Holland and Fitzpatrick explore issues including North Korea, the Iran Deal, and Russia’s latest modernization efforts.

The post “Flashpoint” with Mark Fitzpatrick appeared first on American Security Project.

ASP’s new Flashpoint Podcast, hosted by Andrew Holland, discusses tomorrow’s headlines today. In this first episode of Flashpoint, ASP’s CEO BGen Stephen A. Cheney, USMC (Ret), gives a history of ASP and explores major issues the United States faces around the world. Focusing on climate change, nuclear non-proliferation, and the value of diplomacy.

The post “Flashpoint” with BGen Stephen Cheney appeared first on American Security Project.

ASP’s CEO BGen Stephen A. Cheney, USMC (Ret) and BG Stephen Xenakis, USA (Ret) discussed the findings of their report, Obesity and National Security: Meeting the Recruiting Challenge, on Thursday, September 6, 2018. Express Scripts Chief Innovation Officer Dr. Glenn Stettin was an additional panelist who discussed the private industry’s role regarding the topic.

Cheney began by describing how recruiters struggle to find able and ready young men and women to enlist. A main culprit? Obesity. Many youth applicants cannot meet the strength test requirements. Cheney stated roughly 70% of young Americans aged 18-24 are unqualified for service in the military for a variety of reasons, including the physical demands of boot camp and beyond. This leaves recruiters with a small pool of just 30% to find new recruits. Within recent years the number of new recruits expected to join nearly doubled to 86,000 people per year. In return, this puts even more stress on recruiters. Thinking towards the future, Cheney believes a solution to the problem is to involve young adults in more physical activity. This may include expanding and strengthening the JROTC program nationwide to promote physical fitness and implementing nutritional programs in schools to encourage healthy eating habits.

Xenakis continued to describe how this is not just a military readiness problem, but also a public health concern.  “For the country at large, the military is a microcosm of our communities and what we do here and what we see here really informs us of what’s going on across the board.” The health of the recruiting pool reflects what is happening in schools, communities, families, and neighborhoods. It’s a direct reflection of the common health of America. During his career in military medicine, Xenakis has seen firsthand how well soldiers preform when they feel healthy. He found service members who feel healthier are more disciplined, committed, and better at their jobs.

Stettin also believed obesity to be a public health issue. Representing the private industry, Stettin weighed in on the calorie counting issue. He explained how easy it can be to drink empty calories from soda and sugary drinks without acknowledging the consequences. While craving sweets is a normal human behavior, Stettin stressed the importance of a healthy diet and daily exercise. Stettin discussed a solution to meet the recruiting challenge. In addition to promoting physical activity and healthy eating to young Americans today, Stettin mentioned a practical approach to expand the recruiting pool would be to involve as many people as possible. “If we want to have a large and secure pool of people from whom to recruit, we should consider everybody who loves this country who otherwise meets the standard.” Regardless of background, if the applicant is willing, able, and ready they should be allowed to enlist and serve.

The panelists recognized the serious consequences obesity has on military readiness and America’s general health. Obesity is a dynamic, indiscriminate problem that needs to be addressed. This includes educating young adults and children about healthy living habits and encouraging all qualified individuals to serve. As Cheney said, “If you can’t man the force, we can’t deploy them, we can’t defend ourselves and that’s a very simple equation.”

The post Event Recap: Obesity and National Security appeared first on American Security Project.