Logo

American Security Council Foundation

Back to main site

Alan W. Dowd is a Senior Fellow with the American Security Council Foundation, where he writes on the full range of topics relating to national defense, foreign policy and international security. Dowd’s commentaries and essays have appeared in Policy Review, Parameters, Military Officer, The American Legion Magazine, The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, The Claremont Review of Books, World Politics Review, The Wall Street Journal Europe, The Jerusalem Post, The Financial Times Deutschland, The Washington Times, The Baltimore Sun, The Washington Examiner, The Detroit News, The Sacramento Bee, The Vancouver Sun, The National Post, The Landing Zone, Current, The World & I, The American Enterprise, Fraser Forum, American Outlook, The American and the online editions of Weekly Standard, National Review and American Interest. Beyond his work in opinion journalism, Dowd has served as an adjunct professor and university lecturer; congressional aide; and administrator, researcher and writer at leading think tanks, including the Hudson Institute, Sagamore Institute and Fraser Institute. An award-winning writer, Dowd has been interviewed by Fox News Channel, Cox News Service, The Washington Times, The National Post, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and numerous radio programs across North America. In addition, his work has been quoted by and/or reprinted in The Guardian, CBS News, BBC News and the Council on Foreign Relations. Dowd holds degrees from Butler University and Indiana University. Follow him at twitter.com/alanwdowd.

ASCF News

Scott Tilley is a Senior Fellow at the American Security Council Foundation, where he writes the “Technical Power” column, focusing on the societal and national security implications of advanced technology in cybersecurity, space, and foreign relations.

He is an emeritus professor at the Florida Institute of Technology. Previously, he was with the University of California, Riverside, Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute, and IBM. His research and teaching were in the areas of computer science, software & systems engineering, educational technology, the design of communication, and business information systems.

He is president and founder of the Center for Technology & Society, president and co-founder of Big Data Florida, past president of INCOSE Space Coast, and a Space Coast Writers’ Guild Fellow.

He has authored over 150 academic papers and has published 28 books (technical and non-technical), most recently Systems Analysis & Design (Cengage, 2020), SPACE (Anthology Alliance, 2019), and Technical Justice (CTS Press, 2019). He wrote the “Technology Today” column for FLORIDA TODAY from 2010 to 2018.

He is a popular public speaker, having delivered numerous keynote presentations and “Tech Talks” for a general audience. Recent examples include the role of big data in the space program, a four-part series on machine learning, and a four-part series on fake news.

He holds a Ph.D. in computer science from the University of Victoria (1995).

Contact him at stilley@cts.today.

Pollak: Joe Biden Got Nothing in Geneva Summit with Russia’s Vladimir Putin

Thursday, June 17, 2021

Categories: ASCF News Emerging Threats

Comments: 0

Source: https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2021/06/16/pollak-joe-biden-got-nothing-in-geneva-summit-with-russia-vladimir-putin/

Denis Balibouse / Pool / AFP / Getty

President Joe Biden gave Russian President Vladimir Putin almost everything he could have wanted at their Geneva summit. He elevated Putin above other leaders, including American allies; and failed to force any real concessions on Russian policy.

The degree to which the summit was a disaster became evident when Putin emerged for his press conference — alone with a forum all to himself.

The Biden team did not want to appear with Putin at a joint conference after the meeting– both because Biden would look frail next to Putin, and because of the media dogma that President Donald Trump had somehow done something terrible by behaving cordially when appearing alongside Putin in Helsinki, Finland, in 2018.

Putin fielded softball questions from Russian news agencies, but he also welcomed hostile questions from the U.S. media. (In fact, Putin, an enemy of press freedom, was more polite than Biden would be, and took far tougher questions.)

The opportunity to defend his own position, and to attack the United States, without fear of contradiction was a massive gift to the Russian president. He used the old Soviet tactic of pointing to American problems as a way of deflecting from questions about human rights and political opposition.

He did so without fear of contradiction: when he cited the Black Lives Matter movement as an example of human rights abuses in the U.S., he knew no American journalist would object.

Biden tried to use his own press conference to make all kinds of claims about tough talk to the Russian president during their two-hour meeting. (Biden claimed, falsely, that a meeting of that length was unprecedented between two heads of state: in fact, Trump met with Putin for two hours in 2017.)

It was impossible to verify Biden’s claims without Putin there to respond — and Biden has a history of exaggerating his own bravery when citing conversations with foreign leaders.

Reporters pressed the two leaders, separately, to reveal what commitments, if any, Putin had made to change Russia’s aggressive behavior. But there were none.

Putin walks away from Geneva with no significant response to cyberattacks; with the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which Trump had opposed; and with no real pushback against his aggression in Ukraine. Notably, Biden met with Putin before meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — meeting TBA.

The response of the American media echoed Biden’s posture of appeasement. CNN, which had raised the alarm when Trump and Putin appeared to get along with one another, gushed about Biden’s “optimistic” tone at the summit, and how wonderful it was that Biden and Putin seemed to have had a friendly conversation.

At one point, the two leaders were so cozy that the White House had to walk back an apparent nod by Biden when he was asked if he trusted Putin.

Biden seemed unwilling to use any leverage against Putin — a fact that even the American media noted, with one journalist desperately asking whether the administration might consider using the U.S. military to stop cyberattacks. Biden’s strategy toward Putin seems to be that he can be convinced to behave more responsibly if he is told that he needs a better global image if he wants to be taken seriously by the media and American investors.

What Biden does not get — and what President Barack Obama did not get, and then-Secretary of State John Kerry did not get — is that Putin does not care. Putin cares about oil, and guns, and currency, and power. He plays by what Kerry once complained — after the Russian invasion of Crimea — are “19th century” rules. Biden does not know how to do the same.

During the 2020 campaign, Biden claimed that Trump was “unwilling to take on Putin.” But Putin leaves Geneva a winner, and Joe Biden got nothing.

Comments RSS feed for comments on this page

There are no comments yet. Be the first to add a comment by using the form below.