Personnel problems also are said to be evident within the Rocket Force. Recruiting and retaining educated and skilled nuclear warhead managers is “an ongoing challenge” for the PLA, the report said. The Pentagon has said China’s rapid warhead expansion grew stockpiles from about 250 warheads to more than 600 today. The PLA is expected to field up to 1,500 warheads in coming years. From 2016 to 2021, the number of Chinese missile brigades increased by about 35% with the majority of new units including nuclear or dual-capable nuclear-conventional missiles, the report said. Despite the rapid warhead growth, there has been no corresponding increase in nuclear support units. “It is thus worth asking if a system that was designed in a simpler and smaller-scale time of minimal deterrence doctrine is able to handle this workload - in some cases double the workload of only a few years earlier - or whether such a system would be increasingly stressed, perhaps even to the point of breaking down if prolonged high demands were placed on it in a crisis,” the report said. The Rocket Force is in charge of one of the world’s largest missile arsenals. The stockpile includes short, medium, intermediate and intercontinental ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles and new hypersonic missiles. Based on Chinese writings, the study noted the difficulties of assessing PLA nuclear weapons controls because of secrecy. For example, the PLA rarely uses the term “warhead” in public writings or discussion, favoring euphemisms such as “special equipment,” or “national treasure,” that can have multiple meanings in Chinese. The problem of analyzing nuclear weapons also has been made more difficult by a recent crackdown by Chinese authorities on open sources of information over the past two years, the report said. Communist China is continuing its large-scale expansion of nuclear forces that are viewed as a “breakout” of past limited nuclear power, according to expert Brendan S. Mulvaney.

Additionally, infrastructure around the facility is limited; only a single narrow road leads into and out of it. The report states that “blocking these roads could seriously delay operations.” The warhead system is also highly centralized, requiring frequent transport of warheads by road or rail over long distances. These limitations increase “opportunities for accidents or wartime interdiction,” the report stated. Noting three new land-based intercontinental ballistic missile fields recently built in northern China, the report said opportunities to block the movement of warheads to those ICBMs could increase in the coming years. Other vulnerabilities of the nuclear warheads system include disorganized and lax storage facilities and procedures that were highlighted by reported health issues among Rocket Force personnel. “While it does appear that the PLARF has made significant progress here, it is unclear if these problems have been completely solved,” the report said using the acronym for the Rocket Force. The warhead management system also uses outdated computer systems at some facilities that could be attacked during computer warfare strikes. The military is working on what are called “left of launch” attacks, including cyberattacks that would disable missile control systems before missiles are launched. The report said, “Heavy use of foreign equipment in certain areas of nuclear management indicates a possible technology chokepoint, particularly for more sophisticated equipment like remote-controlled robotics needed to deal with radioactive materials and clear obstacles.” China’s nuclear warhead system also relies on American, Swedish, German and French hazmat suits, face masks, oxygen tanks and radiation sensors, including equipment made by Honeywell, DuPont and 3M, the report revealed.

The People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force stores and maintains a rapidly expanding arsenal of nuclear warheads for missiles at mountain facilities in China that are vulnerable to strikes or disruption by the U.S. military, according to a report by a military think tank. The report, based on public data on one of China’s most important strategic secrets, reveals new details on how the PLA stores, tests, guards and transports strategic and tactical warheads from a central facility located in the Qinling Mountains, some 1,200 miles southwest of Beijing. The study, “Dancer’s at the Knife’s Edge: PLA Rocket Force Nuclear Warhead Management,” was published March 9 by the Air Force’s China Aerospace Studies Institute. The report is a rare, semiofficial U.S. military assessment of China’s system for handling nuclear warheads ? a weapons stockpile that U.S. officials say China has rapidly expanded over the past 11 years. The main headquarters for warhead storage is in Baoji ? the Rocket Force’s Base 67, a central warhead storage facility called Hongchuan. According to the report, Hongchuan is in charge of moving warheads by rail or road ? sometimes by aircraft ? to six other bases and then on individual missile brigades around the country during a crisis or conflict. The report highlights information valuable for Pentagon war planners who would be charged with conducting preemptive strikes on nuclear warhead facilities based on China’s current policy of not mating warheads to missiles until ordered. Among the potential weaknesses in the Rocket Force’s management of the warheads is that the weapons are stored at a single facility. “While the facility is hardened and well-guarded against attack, it is a case of highly concentrated risk,” the report said.

Voice of America is a U.S. government-funded international broadcaster that has delivered news to audiences worldwide since World War II, when it began telling stories about American democracy to people living under Nazi Germany. Today the outlet operates alongside sister services including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia and Radio Marti under the U.S. Agency for Global Media, or USAGM. Together, those networks reach an estimated 427 million people each week across dozens of languages. Congress appropriated about $260 million for VOA operations in the current fiscal year. By law, the VOA Charter requires the organization to provide accurate, balanced and independent journalism rather than serve as a government propaganda arm. President Donald Trump has moved aggressively in his second term to dismantle or fundamentally reshape the outlet and its parent agency, arguing that VOA and similar broadcasters promote a liberal editorial bias. The administration moved quickly after Trump returned to office in early 2025. Beginning March 15, most VOA employees were placed on administrative leave, effectively silencing much of the broadcaster’s programming and social media output. In June, layoff notices were sent to 639 employees at VOA and USAGM. Lake said roughly 1,400 employees ? about 85% of the agency’s workforce ? had lost their jobs as part of the cuts. Other changes followed as the agency scaled back operations. The sweeping changes triggered multiple lawsuits from VOA journalists and employees who argued the administration was unlawfully dismantling a congressionally funded news organization. The legal fight over the fate of Voice of America remains ongoing.

The danger of American betrayal (or at least failure to act decisively as with Iran) extends north and south from Taiwan. To the south, the Philippines, though buttressed by American aid and advice, cannot stave off Chinese aggression in the South China Sea, where the Chinese are expanding bases on small islands and atolls. Across the South China Sea, the communist rulers in Hanoi ? more than half a century since “North” Vietnam conquered the American-backed Saigon regime ? now need American arms, including patrol boats, to defend against the Chinese. China has taken over oil and natural gas deposits in nearby waters. Would Mr. Trump arm and equip them in a showdown? Why would Mr. Trump possess such warm feelings toward Mr. Kim, who is responsible for far more deaths of his own people than the cruel Iranian ayatollahs? Could Iran’s nuclear program, far from producing a nuclear warhead after American bombers obliterated deep underground sites in June, be more dangerous than that of North Korea, estimated to have produced 100 or so nukes? Possibly the least secure in Asia are the Japanese. Mr. Trump gets along fine with Ms. Takaichi, but he will be visiting Beijing soon, kowtowing before Mr. Xi, who presents a far greater threat to America than an Iranian regime on the verge of collapse. Japanese and Koreans with whom I have spoken question whether Mr. Trump would defend them despite the presence of 55,000 American troops in Japan and 28,500 in Korea. They fear that he may withdraw most of these troops. Mr. Trump must place top priority on defense against China and North Korea while cutting short the Iranian adventure now that he has done away with the ayatollah and many of his henchmen.

Bombing Iran was the easy part. No one doubts the overwhelming power of American forces in the Middle East, including two aircraft carriers. We can be sure that the Israelis, with American-made fighters, can overwhelm Iranian missiles and planes, including long-outdated U.S. fighters acquired before the fall of the Shah of Iran and the rise of the Islamic regime in 1979. The hard part is showing the same resolve and courage in defending beleaguered regimes and people elsewhere. If President Trump sounded tough in going after Iran’s bloodthirsty dictatorship, he has shown anything but the same resolve in his willingness to defend other governments and people. Among the most obvious is Ukraine, where American leaders have been hesitant to provide all that is needed to turn the tide and drive the Russians back across the borders into their own territory. Mr. Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign claims of his ability to talk Russian President Vladimir Putin into settling his differences with Ukraine in a day have gone for naught. In Asia, our president’s fear of plunging into wars against enemies that might prove superior to Iran is pathetically clear. Probably the most obvious target is Taiwan, the independent island province of China that Chinese leaders have been vowing to seize ever since the victory of Mao’s Red Army in 1949. Mr. Trump has authorized the sale of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons to Taiwan, but is he ready to deploy warplanes, naval vessels and ground forces? What if Mr. Xi were to take Mr. Trump’s deployment of air power against Iran as a lesson that China might emulate, especially with U.S. forces tied up in the Middle East? Would Mr. Trump be willing or able to fight two or three wars on different sides of the globe? Would he heed the urgent requests of Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te with the same alacrity with which he responded to the requests of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu?

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has upgraded a voluntary frozen blueberry recall to its most serious classification, warning that potential listeria contamination could pose life-threatening risks to vulnerable populations. Oregon Potato Company, a family-owned business based in Salem, Oregon, initiated the recall on Feb. 12, covering 55,689 pounds of individually quick-frozen (IQF) blueberries produced by Willamette Valley Fruit Company. The FDA elevated the action to a Class I recall on Tuesday ? its highest risk designation, reserved for situations where exposure to a product “could cause serious adverse health consequences or death.” The blueberries were distributed through business-to-business supply chains and were not sold directly to consumers in retail stores. They reached customers across four U.S. states ? Michigan, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin ? as well as throughout Canada. Oregon Potato Company has since told media that all of the affected fruit has been located and accounted for, and the company is working with its customers and the FDA on returning or destroying the product. Listeria monocytogenes is a bacterium commonly found in soil, water and food-processing environments that can survive and grow even under refrigeration. It causes listeriosis, a potentially serious foodborne illness. Mild cases can produce symptoms including fever, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea lasting up to three days. More severe, invasive forms of the illness can cause confusion, loss of balance and convulsions. While healthy adults rarely become seriously ill, the disease poses heightened dangers for pregnant women, newborns, older adults and individuals with weakened immune systems, for whom it can be fatal. The FDA advises anyone experiencing symptoms to consult a healthcare provider immediately. The recall remains ongoing.

“Ultimately, the federal transit program has become an unsustainable financial burden that has not met its objectives. Federal transit funding should be discontinued,” Unleash Prosperity’s report concludes. In its place, the authors suggest sending responsibility for transit decisions to state and local governments, where it belongs. It makes no sense to have the feds continue to micromanage inner-city services. The Constitution granted Congress authority to establish roads to make sure the mail arrives on time. In the Eisenhower era, this concept was expanded so that everyone in the country chipped in to pave rural states such as Wyoming and Montana in return for the benefit of being able to convey goods from coast to coast. Bus rides in Boston are of no use to the taxpayers in Peoria who are footing the bill, but there are smarter ways to achieve transit’s stated objectives. The Energy Department looked at a program in Innisfil, a small town in Ontario, that provided vouchers to needy residents so they could go where they want, when they want, with Uber. That subsidy proved cheaper and less polluting than running empty buses along fixed routes. Locals loved the new ability to get to the office or other appointments on time. The municipality appreciated an initiative that didn’t require huge up-front capital expenditures to buy things such as buses and hire drivers. Liberals pine for trolleys, but not out of pure nostalgia. They celebrate transit because it promotes reliance on government. Ontario’s experiment demonstrates that antiquated thinking can be discarded in favor of solutions that promote independence. What might seem popular to the denizens of a deep-blue city won’t go over well in a red suburb. Let states decide for themselves where their transportation dollars should go.

Since 2020, Uncle Sam has blown more than $100 billion on trolleys, streetcars, buses and subways. This cash infusion has done nothing to increase the willingness of Americans to sit next to complete strangers in progressively dangerous metal tubes. In a new study, Unleash Prosperity recounts the failure of the mass transit boondoggle to deliver commensurate value for this investment. Since 1920, the share of Americans embracing communal transportation modes has dropped by 90%. That’s as it should be. Free people prefer personal transportation because it lets them go wherever they please, unconstrained by bureaucratic timetables. Even in dense areas such as Manhattan, the new report shows, transit is a losing proposition. The legendary traffic snarls aren’t enough to give subway riders an edge over drivers. On average, it takes an extra 22 minutes each way to get to work in the Big Apple by subway than it does to make the same journey by car. In the country’s top 50 urban centers, automobiles place 58 times more job opportunities within a half hour’s reach compared with what’s available by trolley, light rail or bus. The economic gurus at Unleash Prosperity point out that the supposed congestion relief and pollution reduction that come from enlarging transit networks pay off only when ridership rises. That’s not happening because low-income individuals are becoming more mobile, and that’s also as it should be. In the 1960s, 1 out of 5 households were carless. That figure has slid to 8.5%, which means the less well-off are just as likely to drive to their occupations as any other tax bracket. Because cars are an equalizing force in society, public policy should stop diverting scarce resources to prop up alternatives that foster dependence.

China’s Arctic ambition is no longer a curiosity. It is a disciplined campaign ? economic, scientific, diplomatic and informational ? aimed at building durable leverage in a region that matters to U.S. homeland defense and NATO’s ability to reinforce Europe. The question for Washington is not whether China will become an Arctic power (Beijing has already decided it will), but whether the United States and its allies will deny China the quiet “dual-use” footholds that have become a hallmark of the CCP’s global playbook. Start with Beijing’s own words. In January 2018, China released its first official Arctic white paper and introduced one of the most audacious branding moves in modern geopolitics: describing itself as a “near-Arctic state.” The label is not a geographic fact; it is a political claim, an argument that China’s interests justify participation in governance and privileged access to resources far from its shores. The goal for China, roughly 900 miles south of the Arctic Circle, is to become a “polar great power” by 2030. The purpose is familiar: Normalize Chinese presence now so influence and control feel inevitable later. The danger today is the accelerating Russia-China rapprochement that has begun to pull China ? an unmistakably non-Arctic power and the primary enabler of global conflicts in Ukraine, Tehran, the Gaza Strip and Caracas ? into the region’s strategic bloodstream. In a crisis, the Arctic is not merely about ships and ports; it is about trajectories. Polar routes are the most direct pathways for long-range strike systems. As adversaries coordinate, the threat expands.