WSJ EDITORIAL: Ukraine's drone attack is a 'wake-up call' to U.S. about potential vulnerability

Will an increase in defense spending enable the U.S. to close 
the gap in the drone market? (WSJ video snapshot)

Ukraine's recent drone strike battering of some 40 Russian aircraft, sitting unprotected deep inside that country's borders, serves as a warning to the U.S. about the vulnerability of American military bases and the homeland, writes The Wall Street Journal editorial board.

At least 77 U.S. military installations are strategically placed in rural towns and more are in cities with less than 40,000 residents. The editorial suggests that rural communities may want to pay particular attention to military discussions about international drone warfare, domestic missile protections and U.S. drone production problems.

"The details about Ukraine’s daring operation are few, but Kyiv managed to sneak cheap drones across the border and use them to destroy costly Russian military assets," the editorial states. "The bang for Ukraine’s buck was considerable. You don’t have to be a fan of thrillers to imagine a similar scenario in the United States."

In light Ukraine's drone attack success, President Trump’s Golden Dome missile-defense shield idea doesn't sound so outlandish, the WSJ board concluded. "The headlines are preoccupied with space-based interceptors. But the U.S. is exposed to many threats besides ballistic missiles — from drones and spy blimps to cruise missiles launched off submarines."

In 2023, the bipartisan Strategic Posture Commission "warned that the U.S. needs better integrated air and missile defenses against 'coercive attacks' from Russia and China, and such an attack could come from conventional weapons," writes the board. "In a crisis over the Taiwan Strait, Xi Jinping might threaten the Commander in Chief: Stay out of the Western Pacific or you never know what might happen to your pricey F-22s in Alaska."

The editorial cites a January report from Thomas Shugart and Timothy Walton at the Hudson Institute that criticized Air Force plans to protect new B-21 bombers with what they referred to as "sunshades." The report points out that a lack of structural protection "could leave aircraft 'exposed to threats, including lethal' unmanned aerial vehicles," the board adds.

Beyond the tragedy of Sept. 11, Americans are used to wars "fought far from home. . . but everyone in the U.S. will be on the front lines of the next conflict," the editorial states. "Political leaders could be doing much more to educate the country about this vulnerability, rather than boasting that the U.S. military is the best it has ever been. It isn’t."

Watch the entire WSJ video on China's drone dominance, here.

Leaders and economists worry over what Trump's planned tariffs might do to business profits and consumer wallets

Businesses and U.S. economists are worried about how tariffs
could impact profits and American budgets. (Adobe Stock photo)

World leaders and CEOs are working to convince President-elect Donald Trump to reconsider his hard-line plans for tariffs against the country's biggest trade partners, which could "disrupt global trade and pummel profits," report Andrew Ross Sorkin, Ravi Mattu, Bernhard Warner, Sarah Kessler, Michael J. de la Merced, Lauren Hirsch and Tariq Panja of The New York Times. They "feel they’re making little headway in warning him of the consequences." Meanwhile, if Trump makes good on his threatened levies, U.S. consumers will likely pay higher prices.

Trump's first tariff announcements targeted Canada, Mexico and China. He said "he would impose 25% levies on Canada and Mexico, if they didn’t tighten their borders and stem the flow of illegal migration to the U.S.," The Times reports. "In subsequent social media posts, he went after BRICS countries," which include Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, and other emerging markets.

Even though many Americans list high inflation, particularly on groceries and household staples, as a primary concern, "Trump conceded that he 'can’t guarantee tariffs won’t hit consumers hard," the Times reports. "That’s a concern among economists and big companies such as Walmart and Costco, who fear that levies could lead to price rises."

An estimate from The Budget Lab at Yale "found that the cost to consumers from Trump’s proposed tariffs could reach as much as $1,200 in lost purchasing power on average based on 2023 incomes, assuming retaliatory duties on U.S. exports are put into place," reports Rob Wile of NBC News. "While Trump has insisted other countries end up paying the cost of tariffs, most economists agree those costs wind up getting passed on to shoppers."

The National Retail Federation warned about "the impact of tariffs to everyday households," Wile writes. "Some Trump allies suggested the president-elect doesn’t actually plan to follow through with the proposed tariffs. . . . Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, conceded, 'Tariffs will hurt the American consumer, that’s true. But they also make for good negotiation tools.'"

Hackers who claim to be the 'Cyber Army of Russia Reborn' disrupt a water tower system in rural Texas

The FBI has been investigating the hack in Muleshoe, Tex.
(City of Muleshoe, Texas photo via CNN)

While the number of computer hacks on American businesses by foreign actors has steadily increased, a hack in Muleshoe, Texas, in January might be the "first disruption of U.S. water system by Russia," reports Ellen Nakashima of The Washington Post. A Muleshoe citizen drove past the town's water tower, saw it was overflowing and alerted the police. "Authorities soon determined the system that controlled the city's water supply had been hacked. . . . Thousands of gallons of water had flowed into the street and drain pipes."

The hackers, who identified themselves as the Cyber Army of Russia Reborn, "Posted a video online of the town's water-control systems showing how they reset the controls," Nakashima writes. Using the messaging platform Telegram, the hackers posted a caption that read, "We're starting another raid on the USA." The hackers proceeded to explain how they were going to target U.S. infrastructure.

Location of Muleshoe, Tex., pop
5,200 (Wikipedia map)

Experts from the cyber security firm Mandiant believe "that the water tank overflow in a Texas panhandle town may well be linked to one of the most infamous Russian government hacking groups," Nakashima reports. "If confirmed, analysts say it would mark a worrisome escalation by Moscow in its attempts to disrupt critical U.S. infrastructure by targeting one of its weakest sectors: water utilities."

The notorious Russian hacking group, nicknamed "Sandworm, has achieved notoriety for briefly turning out the lights in parts of Ukraine at least three different times; hacking the Olympics Opening Games in South Korea in 2018; and launching NotPetya, one of the most damaging cyberattacks ever that cost businesses worldwide tens of billions of dollars," Nakashima explains.

Muleshoe's city manager, Ramon Sanchez, told Nakashima, "You don't think that's going to happen to you. It's always going to happen to the other guy." Nakashima reports, "Sanchez said the hackers brute-forced the password for the system's control system interface, which was run by a vendor. That password hadn't been changed in more than a decade."

States look to restrict foreign ownership of agricultural land; many of the concerns involve China and Russia

A farm tractor rolls along outside a Silver City, Mississippi
neighborhood. (Photo by Rogelio V. Solis, AP)

Amid national food security and political concerns, many states are restricting or prohibiting some countries from purchasing farmland. Andy Gipson, Mississippi's commissioner of agriculture and commerce, feels "the growing trend of foreign ownership could threaten what he views as the state's most valuable asset: the land that grows its forests, rice and cotton," reports Kevin Hardy of Stateline. "Gipson has spent recent months studying the growing amount of his state's farmland being bought up by foreign interests."

Gipson hopes Mississippi "will join a growing group of states seeking to ban or further restrict foreign ownership of farmland," Hardy writes. "Lawmakers are targeting nations considered hostile to U.S. interests, such as China and Russia, and looking for new enforcement measures. Many see Arkansas as leading the latter push; officials there invoked a new law in October that bans certain foreign owners and ordered a Chinese seed company to divest its land."

The issue of foreign farmland ownership has been around for centuries, Hardy reports, but it was "reinvigorated after Chinese firms purchased land near military installments in North Dakota and Texas, said Micah Brown, an attorney at the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas who tracks the issue. . . . Brown said lawmakers in 36 states proposed some sort of legislation on the issue this year, ranging from caps to bans to targets on certain countries, with measures passing in about a dozen of them. More bills are expected in upcoming sessions."

In opening a U.S. Senate hearing in September, Michigan Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow "acknowledged that the nation's food system is an integral component of national security," Hardy adds. "With more foreign entities buying up land, she said, the issue deserves scrutiny. But she offered a warning: 'We must also be cautious of our history of barring immigrants from owning land in our country and ensure efforts to protect our national and economic security do not encourage discrimination," she said.'"

Overall, foreigners hold a small percentage of U.S. agriculture land, totaling around 40 million acres at the end of 2021, according to the Department of Agriculture. "Canadian investors own the largest share of that acreage, followed by investors from the United Kingdom and Europe. Foreign ownership represents only about 3.1% of all privately held U.S. agricultural land," Hardy notes. "But the number is quickly rising: Foreign ownership has increased more than 50% in the past decade, Brown said. But USDA data shows Chinese ownership is still relatively rare: Chinese interests own less than 1% of the nation's foreign-held agricultural acreage.

"Federal law currently does not regulate foreign ownership land beyond requiring foreign buyers to register with the USDA. But there is bipartisan interest in Congress in tighter restrictions and reporting on foreign ownership."

Senate adds amendment to defense bill to restrict China, Russia, North Korea and Iran from purchasing U.S. land

In another sign of U.S. tensions with competing countries, the U.S. Senate "voted overwhelmingly to prohibit China, Russia, North Korea and Iran from purchasing U.S. agricultural land and agricultural businesses," reports the Food and Environment Reporting Network. "The language was added to a military spending bill that was sure to pass the Senate and then be reconciled with a House version."

The amendment by Sen. Mark Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, "would instruct the powerful Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an interdepartmental panel led by the Treasury Department, to prohibit such purchases," Ag Insider reports. "The Russian invasion of Ukraine and a heightened Sino-U.S. rivalry have fueled concern about foreign ownership of U.S. assets."

Despite concerns, Chinese and Russian interests do not own much American soil. Ag Insider reports, "Foreign entities own 40.8 million acres of U.S. agricultural land, or 3.1% of the privately owned land in the nation, according to USDA data. Half of the foreign-owned land is forests. Canada accounts for one-third of the foreign-owned land. . . . China owns 347,000 acres at latest count."