4 ms·

Anyone else just slightly concerned that the phrasing of the bill essentially identifies both Russia and China as enemies? This just doesn't seem to make much

• cmurf 10y ago
  I'm not concerned, and I think it makes complete sense. That they are geopolitical adversaries in more ways than our interests are aligned doesn't make it undiplomatic to recognize and confront their information warfare - which is itself the actual instance of undiplomatic behavior.
• tptacek 10y ago
  See edit below If it's the same as the House bill, the citations to Russia and China occur only in the "Sense of Congress" section (which isn't legally binding) and include only: (1) foreign governments, including the Governments of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China, use disinformation and other propaganda tools to undermine the national security objectives of the United States and key allies and partners; (2) the Russian Federation, in particular, has conducted sophisticated and large-scale disinformation campaigns that have sought to have a destabilizing effect on United States allies and interests; (3) in the last decade disinformation has increasingly become a key feature of the Government of the Russian Federation’s pursuit of political, economic, and military objectives in Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, the Balkans, and throughout Central and Eastern Europe; I would dispute that this constitutes an identification of Russia as an "enemy". Edit Further: my understanding now is that this was an amendment on the 2017 NDAA. I read the text of the 2017 NDAA (or, at least, searched it for all clauses pertaining to "Russia" and "propaganda") and it's not the same bill, nor does it call out Russia or China.