China has 10-year plan to rewrite the Bible, the Quran and other religious texts to conform to communist dogma. “Scholars” in China are refashioning the Old and New Testaments into communist-friendly versions that will reflect the theology of Mao Zedong and Mr. Xi rather than the Holy Spirit of God, under whose hand the Bible was written by 44 authors over a period of 1,500 years. As Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin wrote on FoxNews.com, a Chinese university textbook relates the account in John’s Gospel when Jesus saves an adulterous woman from stoning by a mob. In the real version, Jesus says, “He who is without sin cast the first stone” and he tells the woman to “go and sin no more.” In the new, improved version, Jesus stones her to death himself. “Across Henan province, local officials forced Protestant churches to replace the Ten Commandments with Xi Jinping quotes.” China is preparing to flood its people with false scriptures. It wouldn’t be the first time. Between 1966 and 1971, more than 1 billion copies of Mao’s “Little Red Book of Communism” were printed. Wielded by fanatical Red Guards, the book fueled the murder of millions of people in China during the Cultural Revolution. Today, even with periodic crackdowns and murders of church leaders, Christianity continues to grow. China’s estimated 100 million Christians seem to be getting under the thin skin of Mr. Xi, as are any faiths that stand in the way of his communist agenda. U.N. human rights experts report credible evidence that organs are being harvested from “Falun Gong practitioners, Uyghurs, Tibetans, Muslims and Christians.”

Is France now paying a heavy price for admitting so many radical Islamists into the country? As Sorbonne University professor Bernard Rougier has written: “Since the 1970s, France has welcomed an ever-increasing number of immigrants from the Muslim world. Only a tiny minority have assimilated into French society. The others live as they lived in their countries of origin.” Radical imams came from the Muslim world and allege that France is guilty of having colonized their countries, that Muslims should continue to live according to the law of Islam and that, in the imams’ view, France should pay for its crimes. Criminal gangs formed and began ruling Muslim neighborhoods. French political leaders closed their eyes. Meanwhile, these Muslim neighborhoods have grown, and crime from them increased.” Some politicians have tried to appease the radicals by sending more money to Muslim neighborhoods after riots by mostly young people who believe they have no future. To no avail. Rioting has now spread to Muslim areas of Belgium and Switzerland. Again, none of this should come as a surprise. As the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi predicted: “We have 50 million Muslims in Europe. There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe - without swords, without guns, without conquest - will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.” We saw what happens when the Brotherhood takes control of Egypt from 2012 to 2013. Then-President Mohamed Morsi defied the rule of law and granted himself near absolute power. Whilel Muslims are not all terrorists, nor do all share the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood, the rioting in France, Belgium and Switzerland shows the influence of the growing radical wing of Islam.

The most important national security question facing the United States at the moment and probably for the next few decades is what should be done about China. Given the importance of the issue, it would be helpful if President Biden could decide which side he favors in this contest. Recently, he correctly identified China’s communist strongman, Xi Jinping, as a dictator. Despite that, he continues to press for policies that subsidize electric vehicles and would eventually outlaw the sale of gasoline-powered automobiles. Such an approach will increase and make permanent American dependence on China, in large measure, because the communist regime in Beijing owns, controls or processes about 80% of the critical minerals necessary for batteries and other components of electric vehicles. One of the most important (and rare) minerals needed for the construction of the batteries with which Mr. Biden wants to power his brave new world is cobalt. Cobalt is essential to small batteries in cellphones and large utility-scale batteries, and, of course, batteries that power electric vehicles. The problem is that most of the cobalt in the world is mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo, mostly by families, including children. A family of five can mine enough cobalt in a week for one electric vehicle, typically by wading in a pool of toxic liquid that includes the presence of heavy metals. For that, the parent and their children earn about $15. Chinese companies own and operate almost all of these mines. It will come as no surprise that American companies - Apple, Google, Tesla - are participants in this particular supply chain. Mr. Biden needs to decide who he believes should win our contest with the murderous communist regime in Beijing.

A first-use preemptive nuclear policy requires exquisite intelligence to monitor and know your real or potential adversary. North Korea’s recent failure to put a reconnaissance satellite in orbit is further proof that Pyongyang’s intelligence capabilities are not at a level to ensure that they do not misinterpret an event. It’s this scenario that should keep us awake at night. We’re talking about the potential use of nuclear weapons, whether strategic or tactical ― they’re nuclear weapons with catastrophic consequences. In 2003, China, at the request of the U.S., got North Korea to attend the Six Party Talks hosted by China. The Talks did result in a September 2005 Joint Statement that committed North Korea to complete and verifiable dismantlement of all its nuclear weapons and ongoing nuclear facilities. China was able to get North Korea to join the Six Party Talks because China is North Korea’s only ally and a neighbor that provides North Korea with over 90% of its trade and crude oil and petroleum requirements. In short, North Korea is tethered to China politically and economically. The tension in U.S.-China relations prevented China from helping with North Korea. This is unfortunate because it’s also in China’s interest to ensure that there’s peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia. Indeed, convincing North Korea to denuclearize also is in China’s interest if they don’t want a nuclear arms race in the region, with South Korea and Japan. Failure to get North Korea to halt its missile and nuclear escalation will eventually lead to greater instability on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia. It’s an issue that China should help resolve.

It should be obvious that North Korea’s recent launch of three Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) in 2023 is a message not only to the U.S. but to China and the rest of the region. North Korea will continue with its ballistic missile launches and, eventually, with its seventh nuclear test, knowing there are no consequences, convinced that a strong nuclear arsenal will ensure the survival of the Kim Jong Un regime and Kim dynasty. Understandably, there is concern in Seoul, Tokyo, and Washington with North Korea’s July 12th successful launch of a solid fuel ICBM (Hwasong-18) with a range of 15,000 kilometers (9320 miles), capable of targeting the entire U.S. This was the third successful ICBM launch in 2023, preceded by an April solid fuel ICBM (Hwasong-18) and a March liquid fuel road-mobile ICBM (Hwasong-17). On July 10, Kim Yo-jong, the sister of Kim Jong Un and his likely successor accused the U.S. of reconnaissance flights that entered North Korea’s Exclusive Economic Zone, threatening “shocking” consequences if the U.S. continues reconnaissance activities in the region. North Korea’s Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) previously had criticized the planned deployment of U.S. strategic assets to South Korea as “nuclear blackmail” against North Korea and a grave threat to regional and global stability. Given North Korea’s recently announced nuclear doctrine of the preemptive use of nuclear weapons in response to an imminent or perceived to be an imminent threat to the leadership or command and control, there should be a concern that North Korea may intentionally or accidentally provoke conflict in the Korean Peninsula.

The life or death of hundreds of Koreans will soon be up to Xi Jinping. Credible rumors suggest that the North Korea/China border will open soon and that China’s first export to North Korea will be the children, women and men detained in China that fled North Korea. This border has been shut down since January 22 2020 when Kim Jong Un, fearing the COVID-19 pandemic, was one of the first national leaders to close their borders. As a result, China has not been able to carry out its illegal and inhumane policy of forcefully repatriating North Koreans back to North Korea to face almost certain torture, detention, and possible execution since leaving the country without permission is a crime punishable by death in North Korea. The estimate given by humanitarian organizations, and confirmed by the United Nations Special Rapporteur, is that up to 2000 North Korean children, women, and men are in prison in China right now and that at least half were attempting to get to South Korea. That group is in extreme danger if forcefully repatriated because these families escaped at one of the most difficult times, which means they had to have the resources and the financing for their escape. That means they were either Korean Worker’s Party members or had family in South Korea that paid for their rescue - “crimes” in North Korea that would subject them to torture and public execution. Xi should consider that whatever momentary influence he will gain with Kim Jong Un by forcing these citizens back to suffer will certainly not be worth the lifetime of hatred that Koreans will have towards Xi for this brutal act.

About Ukraine, he wrote in “Foundations” that “Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, or no ethnic exclusiveness.” “Its certain territorial ambitions represent an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics.” In 2005, Mr. Putin said, “First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] century.” He has since done his best to restore a Russian empire. But Mr. Dugin’s “Foundations” says that if Ukraine is not retaken, Mr. Putin may as well not bother with the rest. Mr. Dugin’s description of Russia’s ― Eurasia’s ― goal is the same as Mr. Putin’s: to restore Russian hegemony over eastern Europe and more. He wrote, “Moscow’s objective of wresting control of Europe from the USA (NATO), contributing to its unity strengthening integrative connections with central Europe under the sign of a basic external political axis of Berlin-Moscow.” Wherever Mr. Putin goes from here is, after the Prigozhin attempted coup, will not deviate much from the Duginist theories. He is weakened, but not substantially. Mr. Putin is faced with a continued stalemate in Ukraine. He has, by his other statements and actions, made the war in Ukraine personally existential. His reign cannot continue without conquest of Ukraine. That leaves him only two options. Mr. Putin can continue the war at its present level as long as the Russian economy can sustain it. Or he could use tactical nuclear weapons to accelerate his objective to conquest of that nation.

Meanwhile, the long-awaited Ukrainian counteroffensive is stalled, and most of Russia’s top generals, including Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, are back in business. Mr. Putin has been weakened, but not substantially. What will he do next? To figure that out, we have to first understand a bit about Alexander Dugin, a radical Russian political theorist whose works have evidently influenced Mr. Putin more than any other’s. Mr. Dugin has been called “Putin’s philosopher,” which is probably about right. Mr. Putin’s actions parallel Mr. Dugin’s writings too closely for it to be coincidental. Much has been written about Mr. Dugin, but translations of his books and articles into English are scarce. I found a partial translation of his 1997 “Foundations of Geopolitics.” Mr. Putin’s latest foreign policy concept paper, issued in March, says that Russia is “a unique country-civilization and a vast Eurasian and Euro-Pacific power.” That is the primary concept explained in Mr. Dugin’s “The Foundations of Geopolitics.” Mr. Dugin‘s neofascist views and antisemitism are quite clear, as is his view of Russia’s future. In “Foundations,” he wrote of a “New Empire” dominated by “Eurasians,” i.e., Russians. “This New Empire, the Eurasian Empire, will have completely differentiated structures within which consisting of separate parts of varying degrees of interdependence and integration.” He wrote that the New Empire will not be the Russian empire or the Soviet empire, but something greater. According to Mr. Dugin, “Greater Russia, for example, can be considered like a separate people or even ‘country’ within the framework of the Russian Empire together with Ukrainians, Belorussians, possibly the Serbs, and so on.” He believes in the Slavic peoples’ superiority.

The June 23-25 attempted coup against Russian President Vladimir Putin by Wagner Group creator and commander Yevgeny Prigozhin - a former close Putin ally - raised some important questions. Why was it ended so suddenly? How much was Mr. Putin weakened? Most importantly, what should we expect Mr. Putin to do next? The end of the coup attempt came so suddenly that some analysts say the whole exercise was “maskirovka,” a Russian word for deception, intended to benefit Mr. Putin. It wasn’t, because it made Mr. Putin look weak. Mr. Putin has, for years, carefully crafted his tough-guy image. Mr. Putin was splitting wood, bare-chested. That image was shattered when, in the face of the coup attempt, Mr. Putin fled Moscow for St. Petersburg while Mr. Prigozhin’s troops were advancing on Moscow without opposition. There are many theories why Mr. Prigozhin ended the coup so suddenly and readily accepted exile in Belarus. One theory, which seems most likely, begins with the condemnation of the coup by Russia’s Security Service, the FSB, almost immediately after it began. The FSB probably told Mr. Prigozhin that it would kill his wife and children, uncles, aunts and cousins and all of their kids if he continued. He would have naturally chosen to quit. The coup attempt failed, Mr. Putin is absorbing Wagner troops into the Russian army and Mr. Prighozin is in exile. But Mr. Prigozhin’s Wagner recruiting station in Murmansk, according to a report in The Barents Observer, a Norway-based online news outlet, is still operating.

Mr. Prigozhin said his complaint was not with Mr. Putin but with the dictator’s advisers, in particular Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu and Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov. He accused both of incompetence, corruption, and bombing Wagner troops. Also provoking his fury: In June, the Kremlin instructed all “volunteer formations” to sign contracts with the Ministry of Defense by July 1. That would have meant surrendering power to Mr. Shoigu. From Rostov, Mr. Prigozhin sent thousands of Wagner troops streaming north toward Moscow, plowing through roadblocks and blasting out of the sky Russian military aircraft attempting to impede the column. Then, just 125 miles from the capital, Mr. Prigozhin suddenly aborted the mission, accepting a deal that Alexander Lukashenko, the Belarusian dictator, claimed to have brokered. Mr. Putin reassured Wagner fighters that he was not angry with them, only with those who had misled them. He indicated that they were free to sign up with the regular Russian army, go home, or decamp to Belarus. That’s where Mr. Prigozhin flew in his private jet. Is he safe there from Mr. Putin’s prosecutors and assassins? Will he now serve Mr. Lukashenko as a military commander or caterer? If Wagner is disbanded, will its forces in Syria, Africa and elsewhere take orders from Mr. Shoigu? And what will happen when Wagnerians occupying Ukrainian territory are integrated with Russian troops whose morale, never high, must be declining further?