Whenever a leader like French President Emmanuel Macron tries to raise it, all hell breaks loose. Progressives tell us how working longer may be fine for the Acela class doing corporate deals and sitting in front of computers, but cleaning ladies can’t be on their knees into their 70s. The Japanese faced the problems of an aging population and declining workforce sooner and have sustained per-capita incomes by accepting immigrants from poorer nations, working smarter - redesigning physical tasks so that older workers could do them - and flexing their superior acumen with robotics. Those could beat the cleaning ladies’ arthritis too. For the inexorably increasing share of workers in front of computer screens, problems with focus, memory and processing speed ? some form of mental decline - caused by early-stage dementia is the challenge to working longer. Until now, treatments have focused on removing plaque from the brain after dementia begins. But medical researchers are closing in on the equivalent of statins, which often cut off heart disease before it can develop, for the brain. We could take these medications in our 50s to keep us working at near top level well into our 70s. In modern societies based on intellectual as opposed to physical labor, children cost too much to raise and educate. Once women start pursuing careersm, one-child and childless marriages are becoming more prevalent. Schools and universities simply take too long and use too many resources to educate the young. We need to bring forward vocational and professional training to start earlier in schools. By extending the working life at each end, we can manage an aging population and prosper quite effectively.

Panic about apocalyptic trends and alchemists solutions plague civilization because the people who like to alarm us - tunnel-visioned academics and pundits - are captive to thinking about the world 25 or 50 years hence in terms of the technologies and social arrangements now or aspirations that fit their political agendas. Until the early 19th century, economic growth was largely determined by population growth - the productivity gained by the wheel, three-part plough, etc., were gradual and absorbed into paying for the monuments and follies of religion and autocracy - cathedrals, palaces and armies. Only with the Age of Invention, Industrial Revolution and widespread development of modern capitalism and banking to hold money accountable for its uses did we see economic growth per capita take off and the emergence of a large empowered middle class - first in the West and now increasingly elsewhere. At once, accelerating technological advancement and labor force growth determined economic growth, and nowadays we don’t need an ever-expanding or steady global population to live well and confront climate change, pandemics and the machinations of dictators. The global headcount now stands at 8 billion and will peak above 10 billion late in this century. To raise the half of humanity living in poverty with the requisite goods and energy use and avert raising sea levels enough to sink Australia, two things appear certain: People have to work longer, and a smaller population consuming fewer resources would help. The male retirement age, as defined by full government benefits in China, the U.S. and Europe, ranges between 60 and 67.

China shocked the world with news that its population fell in 2022, For the first time since the Maoist famines, deaths outnumbered births and the headcount slipped by 850,000 to a mere 1.41 trillion. Analysts reactions range from a remembrance of how overpopulation fears in the West pressured Beijing into a one-child policy in 1979 to pronouncements that China’s economic decline has arrived. Pundits lament that China will endure worker shortages, financial stress to support more older adults, and higher capital costs as resources are diverted to mitigate those challenges, but don’t wait for China’s collapse to eliminate it from the race for global supremacy. The demographic clock is ticking for the West too. Birthrates are too low to sustain populations just about everywhere in advanced industrialized countries, and skilled workers are already scarce. Western governments face the challenges ― currently a crisis in the United Kingdom ― of financing investment in infrastructure and technology, maintaining living standards for working populations and paying pensions without running up unsustainable deficits. That’s the crust of the debt ceiling problem here. Through a similar contraption ― the Stability and Growth Pact ― the European Union intended to limit deficit spending and cap accumulated national debts, but those limits are routinely violated and raised there too. Cookbook progressive remedies ― from subsidies to have babies to government-financed and industry-mandated child care ― haven’t and won’t halt this inexorable disappearance of humanity.

Models of comparative advantage teach that international trade among nations should increase as commercial barriers are reduced - the World Trade Organization and other international institutions enabled that - but then plateau below complete specialization. Even before Mr. Trump’s and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s nationalism emerged, the accelerated expansion of global commerce ended. Markets are inclined to overshoot, so a modest pullback was inevitable. China has seized outsized market share from textiles to solar panels and threatens to become an export juggernaut in electric vehicles through protectionist industrial policies. Autocrats blunder Russia into stalemate in Ukraine and China into the jaws of America’s export embargoes on technology with military applications and machinery for advanced chipmaking. Like 1930s dictators, Mr. Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin invested in armies instead of social infrastructure. Shortages of hospital beds and medicines in the face of COVID-19 bear witness to Mr. Xi’s obsessions. With Russia and China as members and headed by advocates of enhanced market access for developing nations without comparable commitments for liberalization, the WTO has become an obstacle for progress. Now the West needs to build a new trade system - for example, one with the Trans-Pacific Partnership as its hub - to ensure their industrial policies generate mutual benefit and confront the demonic threats to prosperity and civilization posed by Russia and China.

So, if we understand Mr. Kim’s focus on ballistic missiles and recognize the regime’s rapid technological advancements, that should lead us to the conclusion that we must embolden and expand our homeland missile defense systems. This effort should include continuing to fully fund Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System modernizations and the development and deployment of a much more capable Next Generation Interceptor, a top priority for the Missile Defense Agency. Furthermore, fostering international collaboration with like-minded allies on missile defense is crucial. The threat posed by North Korean ballistic missiles is not confined to the region; it has far-reaching implications for global security. Allied nations must come together to share intelligence, technologies and best practices in developing and deploying missile defense systems. A united front will enhance the overall effectiveness of these defenses and send a clear message that the international community is resolute in its commitment to pushing back against the North Korean regime. Some critics argue that investing in missile defense is an expensive endeavor with uncertain returns. But the potential costs of inaction far outweigh the financial commitments required for developing and maintaining a robust missile defense shield. As the United States weighs its role in the world, continuing to support action in multiple theaters and reorienting its national security against nation-state threats, our nation’s leaders must remember that North Korea is capitalizing on the distraction of other countries’ conflicts to advance their nuclear ambitions. We must be prepared.

While the world’s eyes are focused on Israel and Ukraine and the United States considers its role in assisting our allies, we cannot lose sight of the entirety of the threat landscape that the United States faces. Specifically, our government must not be so distracted that it fails to prepare for the threat North Korea poses as it continues to ramp up its weapons development ? a process that has included more than 100 missile launches since the start of 2022. Just last month, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un launched two new ballistic missiles, and national security adviser Jake Sullivan indicated that the U.S. and its allies in the region expect North Korea to increase weapons demonstrations and threats in 2024, possibly including the country’s seventh nuclear test. The persistent missile tests conducted by Pyongyang, coupled with the deranged intentions of the country’s dictator, pose a direct threat not only to the stability of the Korean Peninsula but also to global security and the U.S. homeland. Mr. Kim has demonstrated time and again an obsession with missile capability and consistently disregards international norms with his antics and frequent test launches. These provocations can no longer be brushed aside as posturing by the murderous regime, given that a nuclear-armed North Korea capable of striking targets far beyond its borders is a more than worrisome reality. Recent tests by the North Koreans have shown advancements in both intermediate-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles, which raises the alarm for nations within striking distance. That includes the United States, its territories, and military installations across the region.

It is likely that North Korea is confident that it has a tested ICBM that can target the whole of the U.S., with the ability to miniaturize a nuclear warhead to be mated to any of these ICBMs. In short, North Korea believes it is a nuclear threat to the U.S., as it has been for the past decade to our allies South Korea and Japan. We are now dealing with a North Korea that is building more nuclear weapons, with a new light-water reactor at their Yongbyon nuclear site soon to be activated and ballistic missiles capable of targeting the U.S. It’s a North Korea that refuses to talk to the U.S. and views the U.S. and South Korea as enemies, while aligned with Russia, China and Iran ― the axis of authoritarian states. The U.S. strategy since the failed Hanoi Summit in February 2019 between then-President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un has been to “contain and deter” North Korea while trying to get China to persuade North Korea to return to negotiations and refrain from a seventh nuclear test. So far, China hasn’t helped with North Korea, given the tension with the U.S. And given Russia’s and China’s unwillingness to support any U.N. Security Council resolution sanctioning North Korea for its ballistic missile ― and satellite ― launches and its blatant willingness to trade with and support North Korea, it’s proving difficult to contain a belligerent North Korea that is building more nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them. Although the likelihood of North Korea giving up its nuclear weapons is nil, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t persist with efforts to get North Korea back to negotiations. A proactive strategy for attempting to reengage with North Korea is advisable.

Concurrently, the U.S. has been working closely with South Korea and Japan on enhanced extended nuclear deterrence, with meetings of the nuclear consultative group to share real-time information on North Korea. On Sept. 13, Mr. Kim Jong Un met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Russia’s Far East. Previously, Mr. Putin disclosed to the media that Russia would help with North Korea’s efforts to launch a satellite. This past August, North Korea failed in its second attempt to put a satellite in orbit. But on Nov. 21, possibly with the help of Russia, North Korea successfully placed its first reconnaissance satellite in orbit in defiance of international condemnation from the U.S. and others. In return, North Korea reportedly recently delivered more than 1,000 containers of military equipment and munitions to Russia for its war in Ukraine while continuing to provide artillery shells and rockets to Russia in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions. Recent media reports of North Korea providing Hamas with the F-7 rocket-propelled grenade weapons for use against armored vehicles are of concern. Indeed, given North Korea’s long-term strategic relationship with Iran, Hamas, a proxy of Iran, may be benefiting from that relationship. And on Jan. 1, Mr. Kim and Chinese leader Xi Jinping exchanged New Year’s messages, with both pledging to deepen ties in a “year of China-DPRK friendship.” So, the axis of authoritarian states - Russia, China, Iran and North Korea - is alive and active, displaying to the world that they are aligned against all liberal democracies that are sickened by and opposed to Russia’s invasion of a sovereign Ukraine and Hamas’ horrific Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel.

As the country moves past COVID-19 and the emergency powers that local, federal and state governments created, one begins to wonder if the dystopian worlds created in books such as “1984” and “Anthem” are becoming a reality. The events of the past few years have seemingly mirrored the worlds many thought were based solely on the imagination of authors like Ayn Rand and George Orwell. A closer look, however, reveals connections between the fearful fictional societies that plagued our adolescence and the stark realities of today. In “Anthem,” Rand introduces readers to a society ruled by a collective mentality. The pronoun “I” is never used. While that may sound far-fetched, there are people who think a “One World Order” is entirely possible. While it has finally come out that COVID-19 most probably originated in a lab, some wonder if the lab leak was a “planned crisis” or a test run to see how the public responds to a global crisis. According to George Orwell, harnessing people’s thoughts and limiting speech is also mandatory. In “1984,” we see a world where Big Brother surveils everyone’s actions. To help control thought, Orwell introduced the virtues of newspeak, with the sole purpose of “cutting the language down to the bone and narrow the range of thought.” There have always been conspiracy theorists. But COVID-19 lockdowns, the inability to question anything about the pandemic, and the repercussions many were subject to when they went against the status quo have taught people to look at the government’s role in our lives in a different light.

Iron Beam, the first deployable directed-energy weapon, is a major advance in defensive technology that could deter Israel’s enemies, such as Iran and the Palestinians. The United States has been trying to develop laser-based anti-missile systems for decades. The YAL-1, a huge chemical laser carried by a Boeing 747, was tested successfully against tactical ballistic missiles but the program was canceled a decade ago. The Navy has successfully tested a ship-borne totally electrical laser against a drone. It reportedly can kill incoming missiles as well. The Air Force and Army both continue to develop directed-energy weapons. The biggest problem with laser-based weapons is their power requirements and recycling time between firings. The public is used to the “Star Wars” kind of beam weapons which, in fiction, recycle instantly. The YAL-1 and Navy lasers’ recycling times are classified, but they are probably measured by minutes, not seconds. If the Iron Beam system can recycle much faster, it will give the Israelis a tremendous advantage against drone, mortar, artillery and rocket attacks. The real question is to what extent Iron Beam will affect the balances of power between Israel and the terrorist networks and Iran. It is probably not the game-changer but it could provide - if enough are produced and deployed - a significant edge in a future conflict. Israel’s threat against Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Iran’s other leaders will make them fearful for some time. Combined with Iron Dome, David’s Sling and Iron Beam, they may yet deter Iran at least until it produces nuclear weapons. At that point, Iran will never again be susceptible of deterrence.