THE FUTURE OF CRIME: The Drone Era, Part I

/1 Comment/in , /by

Drones have taken over the hobbyist world by storm.

Drone tech has been driven by a strange confluence of improvements in miniaturization (nano-technology), increased transistor density, and materials science.

While the majority of drone applications appear to be in more traditional ventures such as aerial photography and exploration, a little-discussed aspect relates to how drones could be leveraged for criminal activities.

Likewise, for firms focused on security, there will be a growing need to create drone countermeasures.

What am I talking about?

Imagine a jewelry store in a high-end mall. Foot traffic is heavy. An off-duty police officer provides a visible security presence.

But a police officer and alert employees are no match for a drone.

Equipped with a tiny, high-def camera and painted to match the color scheme of the store, the drone is designed to surveil the store from outside. When an opportune time arises — say, when a tray of diamond engagement rings is left unattended, the attacker sends in the drone.

Using a small hook the drone rips through the air and grabs a couple of the juicier rings and exfiltrates them lickety-split.

Countermeasures?

Electronic countermeasures could be employed to suppress remote-control frequencies.

A much simpler — but not too classy — method might be “Magic Mesh”, the screen “door” that opens and closes using magnets as seen on TV!.

This would prevent a tiny drone from insertion and exfiltration without exquisite timing.

With that said, I have a range of ideas regarding criminal activities that could be accomplished using drones and robots. I’ll share them from time to time.

It’s important for law enforcement and physical security firms to think about the ramifications of these technology advances. A significant business opportunity lies in the countermeasures. (For more from the author of “THE FUTURE OF CRIME: The Drone Era, Part I” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Terminally Ill Man Set to Undergo World’s First Head Transplant Says Doc Announcing Plans Soon

/0 Comments/in , /by

In Russia, 30-year-old Valery Spiridonov will be flying to the United States to meet the doctor who plans to perform the world’s first head transplant on him. During the operation, Italian surgeon, Dr. Sergio Canavero, intends to completely remove Spiridonov’s head and reattached it to a healthy body . . .

Now, Spiridonov says Canavero will be announcing the plans soon:

Today, the 31-year-old is wheelchair reliant due to a muscle-wasting disease, announced his neurosurgeon would explain how the plan was progressing in September.

Mr Spiridonov says he is ready to put his trust in controversial surgeon Dr Sergio Canavero who claims he can cut off his head and attach it to a healthy body.

Neither the exact date or location have been chosen yet, but the world first procedure is aimed to take place in December 2017.
And speaking at a press conference, he said his Italian surgeon – dubbed Dr Frankenstein – will reveal more soon.

(Read more from “Terminally Ill Man Set to Undergo World’s First Head Transplant Says Doc Announcing Plans Soon” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

NIH Proposes Funding Human-Animal Hybrids

/0 Comments/in , /by

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is proposing a new rule that would lift the ban on federally funding experiments on human stem cells that splice them with animal embryos to create human-animal hybrids.

The federal government put a moratorium on funding the creation of such hybrids, known as chimeras, back in September 2015. The proposed rule would lift that ban for two specific types of hybrid-creation research.

Christian journalist Rod Dreher points out that the head of NIH is (widely proclaimed) evangelical Francis Collins. Dreher’s take: “Christian-run agency embraces pig-man.”

“On his watch, the NIH is going to create living creatures that are part human, part animal,” Dreher says.

As The New York Times so gently put it, “The idea of human cells developing inside an animal embryo and forming, in effect, a human-animal chimera, has alarmed some people.”

Indeed.

Leon Kass’s bioethics council, vindicated yet again: https://t.co/sU6DXDPmqT

“Scientists would never” line is always a farce.

— Jonathan Coppage (@JonCoppage) August 4, 2016

Catholic priest and blogger Father Matthew Schneider notes that the NIH is currently soliciting feedback on the proposed rule. His view: “It’s beyond immoral not only to allow but fund human-animal hybrids.”

My #ThursdayThoughts: Making animal-human hybrids & experimenting on them raises so many ethical problems… yet the NIH wants to fund it.

— Fr Matthew Schneider (@FrMatthewLC) August 4, 2016

Bioethicist Wesley J. Smith says that our science sector does not uphold the intrinsic dignity of human life, and “we can’t trust our regulatory bodies — which can be more controlled by the sectors they are supposed to regulate than the other way around — to maintain strict boundaries.”

“Another problem is that society generally doesn’t seem to care much,” Smith said. “If you tell many people that biotechnology will cure their Uncle Charlie’s Parkinson’s disease, they won’t give much of a fig about the moral ramifications.”

According to Smith, we’re already on our way down this slippery slope.

I don’t think this work can be stopped. But identifying the lines that should not — and will not — be crossed is an urgent need so that legally enforceable standards can be delineated. I just don’t see anyone currently in power within the symbiotically connected science, government and big business sectors much interested in giving such work more than placating lip service at the moment.

The NIH is taking comments through September 4. (For more from the author of “NIH Proposes Funding Human-Animal Hybrids” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Dirty Little Secret Pot Pushers Don’t Want You to Know About

/0 Comments/in , , /by

States have passed so-called “medical marijuana” laws under the theory that pot has medicinal benefits that can’t be produced by other, legal means.

But what if there was a Food and Drug Administration-approved drug that gave you all the benefits of the active ingredients in marijuana, such as tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol?

What if that drug had been rigorously tested through clinical trials to make sure that it worked as promised, was properly dosed, and had no unanticipated side effects?

And what if you could get that lawful drug from your doctor in pill or liquid form?

And what if there were three such different FDA-approved drugs, and two more on the FDA-approved fast track?

Would it surprise you to know there already are three FDA-approved THC drugs and that at least five more are on the way? We suspect so, because the pot pushers—those that push smoked and edible marijuana as “medicine”—don’t want you to know about these safe alternatives.

Some of those FDA-approved drugs have been around since the 1980s.

That’s right—the dirty little secret they hide from you is that you don’t have to smoke marijuana, eat it in a brownie, or chew it in a marijuana-laced gummy bear to reap the medicinal benefits of THC.

The three FDA-approved drugs are Marinol, Cesamet, and Syndros. Drugs like Syndros show great promise for countering today’s dangerous “medical marijuana” movement.

In early July, the FDA approved Syndros as the first orally administered liquid form of THC. Like Marinol, the original oral cannabinoid to gain FDA approval in 1985, Syndros treats anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS, as well as nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy.

Epidiolex is one drug currently on the FDA fast track. According to a recent press release from GW Pharmaceuticals, a study of 171 randomized patients suffering from Lennox-Gastaut and Dravet syndromes found that Epidiolex decreased seizure occurrence, was relatively well tolerated among patients, and generated no unexpected adverse effects.

Other cannabinoid-based medications on the international market today include Cesamet, another synthetic drug that treats nausea and vomiting stemming from chemotherapy; Cannador, which is currently used in Europe and has demonstrated potential to relieve multiple sclerosis symptoms and postoperative pain management; and Sativex, another GW Pharmaceuticals drug on the FDA fast track that treats spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis.

Since these are all medical cannabinoids, they do not require smoking. They are also safer to use because levels of THC can be monitored.

Knowing these safer alternatives exist, ask yourself: Why? Why have the pot pushers kept this secret and why don’t they want you to know this?

“The medicinal marijuana system in this country has become a bad joke, an affront to the concept of safe and reliable medicine, defying the standards that we have come to expect from the medical establishment,” Dr. Kevin Sabet, former senior adviser to President Barack Obama’s drug policy office, wrote in his book, “Reefer Sanity: Seven Great Myths About Marijuana.”

We can thank Ed Rosenthal and Richard Cowan for creating the current public perception of the so-called “medical marijuana” marketplace.

In a video filmed many years ago, which we highlighted in this 2010 blog post, Rosenthal (former editor of High Times magazine) and Cowan (former director of NORML—the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Law) joked about the nationwide “scam” they started. They realized that if they convinced enough people that smoking marijuana was “medical marijuana,” that would be the beginning of a movement toward full legalization.

“Once there’s medical access, if we continue to do what we have to do and we will, then we’ll get full legalization,” Cowan explained.

“I have to tell you that I also use marijuana medically,” Rosenthal joked. “I have a latent glaucoma which has never been diagnosed, and the reason why its never been diagnosed is because I’ve been treating it.”

But, according to Rosenthal, pleasure trumps any medicinal benefit he should derive from marijuana anyway.

“There is a reason why I do use it,” he said. “And that’s because I like to get high. Marijuana is fun.”

Sabet acknowledges that THC has potential therapeutic effects, but these do not come from smoking pot. (We don’t light any of our FDA-approved medicine on fire and smoke it, after all).

With the average strength of marijuana being five to six times what it was in the 1960s and 70s, the repercussions of marijuana and legalizing it are more evident than before. Some of these include higher risks of motor vehicle accidents, heart attacks, and impaired immune systems and short-term memories. Evidently, the pot pushers don’t want you to know this truth.

“America is being sold a false dichotomy: ‘We can either stick to our current failed policies, or we can try a ‘new approach’ with legalization,” Sabet said. “Sadly, this kind of black-and-white thinking conceals the fact that there are better, more effective ways than either legalization or incarceration to deal with this complex issue.”

Cannabinoid-based drugs are better alternatives because they reap the benefits of marijuana’s therapeutic components safely, as well as have the potential to become FDA approved if they aren’t already.

So the next time a pot pusher encourages a state to enact so-called “medical marijuana” laws, or goes for full legalization in violation of federal law, ask them: Why are they pushing an unsafe, untested product instead of pushing FDA-approved THC? (For more from the author of “The Dirty Little Secret Pot Pushers Don’t Want You to Know About” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Governor Issues Announcement – Zika Virus Spreading in This U.S. State

/0 Comments/in , /by

Governor Rick Scott, (R, Fla.), has announced that the number of people with the Zika virus in the state of Florida has risen from 4 to 14.

The Florida Department of Health maintains that the outbreak is confined to a small area of Miami-Dade county, a place known as the Wynwood arts district.

The district has a number of areas where water can collect and serve as a breeding ground for mosquitoes.

When a woman is infected with Zika during pregnancy, the virus can cause numerous, serious birth defects.

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, “there is no vaccine or medicine for Zika.”

The CDC states that there are four common symptoms of the virus including fever, rash, joint pain, and conjunctivitis (red eyes).

The center also notes that the infection can be spread through mosquito bites, from a pregnant woman to her child, from sex, and likely from blood transfusions.

There has also been level 2 alert issued for travel to Brazil, where there has been an outbreak of the virus.

Gov. Scott announced, “Following today’s announcement, I have requested that the CDC activate their emergency response team to assist DOH in their investigation, research, and sample collection efforts. Their team will consist of public health experts whose role is to augment our response efforts to confirmed local transmissions of the Zika virus.”

More than 200 individuals in Miami-Dade and Broward counties have been tested for the virus. Authorities report these individuals live or work near those who likely picked up the disease from mosquitoes.

Two women and twelve men have been identified to likely have the virus. (For more from the author of “Governor Issues Announcement – Zika Virus Spreading in This U.S. State” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

First, An Apparent Seizure, Now a Strange Hole in Hillary’s Tongue

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The Interwebs have been blowing up of late with a startling picture of Hillary Rodham Clinton appearing to shriek in laughter while standing next to one Barrack Hussein Obama.

I believe it may have been Glenn Reynolds who first examined the picture closely and wondered “What the heck is that dark thing on Hillary’s tongue?”

160731-hole-in-hillarys-tongue-closeup

Suffice it to say that it doesn’t look like a throat lozenge that might have been employed to stay her persistent, sickly cough.

iOTWreport discovered a likely cause of said cavity:

It appears to be the result of a tongue biopsy.

(see the apparent seizure from several weeks ago here:)

Such a biopsy would have have taken place when doctors feared oral cancer (interestingly, oral cancer has been linked to HPV, a sexually-transmitted disease). Here’s what the CDC has to say about the matter:

What is genital HPV?

Genital human papillomavirus (also called HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI) in the U.S. Most types of HPV are not harmful to people. There are more than 40 types of HPV that can infect the genital areas as well as the mouth and throat. Most people who become infected with HPV do not know that they are infected.

What is oral HPV?

The same types of HPV that infect the genital areas can infect the mouth and throat. HPV found in the mouth and throat is called “oral HPV.” Some types of oral HPV (known as “high risk types”) can cause cancers of the head and neck area. Other types of oral HPV (known as “low risk types”) can cause warts in the mouth or throat. In most cases, HPV infections of all types go away before they cause any health problems.

What head and neck cancers can be caused by HPV?

HPV can cause cancers in the back of the throat, most commonly in the base of the tongue and tonsils, in an area known as the “oropharynx.” These cancers are called “oropharyngeal cancers.”

What appears to be a gaping cavity on Hillary’s tongue is at or near the base and not where a piercing would have occurred.

In fact, Bill Clinton’s ex-lover Gennifer Flowers stated the following when asked about the relationship between Huma Abedin and Hillary:

I don’t know Huma or the Weiners. I just know what Bill told me and that was that he was aware that Hillary was bisexual and he didn’t care. He should know.

He said Hillary had eaten more p***y than he had.

Further, the cavity in the blown-up image resembles that of other tongue biopsies.

It’s time for Hillary Clinton to come clean about her entire medical situation; to explain the condition of her tongue and to release all of her medical records — including the injuries suffered in her infamous “fall” in Chappaqua that sidelined her for months.

And the fact that Ms. Abedin is on record as saying Hillary is “often confused”, just two months after the fall.

The American people have a right to know what the true health situation is with this very unhealthy-looking person. (For more from the author of “That Strange Hole in Hillary’s Tongue Can Only Mean One Thing” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Cops Report Krispy Kreme Doughnut Glaze Is Meth, Orlando Man Says

/0 Comments/in , /by

Krispy Kreme doughnuts are addicting, but eating them isn’t illegal – is it?

No, but an Orlando man said he was arrested because officers mistook glaze from the doughnuts for drugs during a traffic stop.

Orlando police officers stopped Daniel Rushing, 64, for going 42 in a 30-mile-an-hour zone in December. Earlier, the officers observed Rushing go into a store twice without making purchases and became suspicious . . .

“I observed in plain view a rock like substance on the floor board where his feet were,” the officer wrote. “I recognized, through my eleven years of training and experience as a law enforcement officer, the substance to be some sort of narcotic.”

“I kept telling them, ‘That’s … glaze from a doughnut. … They tried to say it was crack cocaine at first, then they said, ‘No, it’s meth, crystal meth,’” [Daniel Rushing] told the Sentinel. (Read more from “Cops Report Krispy Kreme Doughnut Glaze Is Meth, Orlando Man Says” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Don’t Bring Empty Bottles Into Michigan, You Might Go to Jail

/0 Comments/in , /by

Founding Father James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers that “It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.”

The phenomenon of overcriminalization puts all Americans at risk of being jailed for seemingly innocuous activities.

Around 10 p.m. on April 27, a Michigan state trooper pulled over Brian Everidge for a speeding violation, looked into Everidge’s rental truck, and discovered some unusual cargo that led to a felony prosecution against the Michigan resident.

Everidge was hauling over 10,000 beverage containers from Lexington, Kentucky, to exchange the containers for a bottle refund, although he didn’t tell the trooper where. Michigan provides a bottle refund, but it also makes it a felony to return bottles from out of state—a clear example of overcriminalization.

Michigan law states that if one returns or attempts to return a bottle or can that “the person knows or should know was not purchased in [Michigan] as a filled returnable container” or “did not have a deposit paid for it at the time of purchase,” he is subject to a civil or criminal penalty that increases in severity depending on how many containers are involved.

If you attempt to cash in on 10,000 or more out-of-state containers, like Everidge allegedly did, it’s a felony, and could lead to up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

Everidge’s lawyer, Marcus Wilcox, says the state “caught him too early,” that Everidge hadn’t violated the law when he was pulled over on the highway with his cargo of bottles and cans.

Using language that only a lawyer could love, or perhaps even understand, Wilcox argues that Evenridge “attempted to attempt to return the bottles,” and that “this statute doesn’t fit” the circumstances. According to the trooper, Everidge “indicated during the traffic stop that he picked up the cans from Lexington, Kentucky,” and that “his intent was to return them,” but he “didn’t say where he was going to return them.”

While this defense may be a hard sell should the case go to trial, it may be even harder for state officials to explain why this conduct should be a crime in the first place.

In 1976, Michigan lawmakers wanted to promote recycling, so they enacted a law to require anyone in the state who sells beverages “in a beverage container” to pay 10 cents to whoever “returns” a beverage container “whether or not the person is the original customer of that dealer, and whether or not the container was sold by that dealer.”

At 10 cents a bottle, Michigan boasts the highest refund in the country, compared to the 2-5 cent rate available in most state refund systems. The state estimates that it has also lost $10 to $13 million annually due to people hauling out-of-state containers into Michigan to cash in on the refund.

To stem losses while maintaining state recycling incentives, Michigan lawmakers passed a law that required container manufacturers to put a unique mark on “Michigan cans and bottles,” and to sell those containers only in Michigan or other states with similar container refund systems.

Michigan also offered in-state dealers $5,000 to help pay for bottle counting machines with scanning technology to reject unmarked containers, but many businesses refused to upgrade their machinery. In 2012, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Michigan’s bottle marking law as an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce. Bill Nichols, who runs a market in Michigan 3 miles from Indiana (which offers no refund), said the technology was “not ‘100 percent fool-proof’” anyway, and he regularly “kicks out” Indianans toting “garbage bags full of cans,” seeking a refund.

Michigan has an interest in protecting its environment and shielding state coffers from nonresidents looking to take advantage of the state refund system, but criminal law and penalties are no better of a solution to their problem than the invalidated state bottle-marking law, or Nichols’ option (Michigan law also makes it a crime for state dealers to accept out-of-state bottles, so Nichols is right to turn away the can-hauling Indianans).

The felony bottle law illustrates the phenomenon of overcriminalization, the “overuse and misuse of the criminal law and penalties” to solve problems better addressed through the civil justice system.

It may be reasonable to assume that taking advantage of a state bottle refund system is illegal. It would also be reasonable to think that Michigan could adequately punish and deter Everidge’s conduct with, for example, a civil fine equal to or greater than the $1,000 he would have made off his 10,000 bottles had he actually returned them to a store in Michigan. But few would believe that such conduct rises to the level of the seriously morally blameworthy acts that deserves a criminal sanction—much less a five-year prison sentence.

That reflects what is “perhaps the most fundamental problem caused by overcriminalization,” as legal expert John Malcolm, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Meese Center, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, “the fact that the average person no longer has fair notice of what the criminal code makes an offense.” (For more from the author of “Don’t Bring Empty Bottles Into Michigan, You Might Go to Jail” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

You Could Pay More to Fly Under This EPA Climate Change Rule

/0 Comments/in , /by

Flying used to be a luxury only the rich could afford. Advances in the airline industry making travel more efficient and affordable have expanded the mobility of hundreds of millions of Americans.

But a decision by the Environmental Protection Agency is likely to take air travel backward.

The EPA on Monday released a final “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gases from large commercial aircraft cause climate change and endanger “Americans’ health and the environment.”

It comes as no surprise that the Obama administration would reach to the skies and add airplanes to the list of its regulatory targets. The administration has been eager to regulate as many sources of greenhouse gas emissions as possible—including cars, trucks, gasoline, and power plants, among others.

And like every other global warming policy, this one will hurt the middle class and poor the most and have next to no impact on global temperatures.

EPA first made the proposal last June as United Nations discussions to set international airline standards were underway and the Obama administration sought to create momentum for a climate agreement in Paris.

What kind of impact might these regulations have on global warming? Not much.

Even if one believes in catastrophic global warming, greenhouse gas emissions from the airlines are peanuts in the grand scheme of things.

Airlines produce only 3 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., or half a percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. If the U.S. eliminated all carbon dioxide emissions—not just from planes, but every single source of carbon dioxide-emitting activity—a rise of only 0.137 degree Celsius would be averted by 2100.

Even as part of a larger international effort, the efforts by the EPA and the U.N. don’t add up to much. A draft of the first international standards, released in February by the U.N.’s International Civil Aviation Organization, is likely to be finalized in October.

Projections are underwhelming: The standards will reduce fuel consumption by 4 percent on average and lower global carbon dioxide emissions by 650 million tons over the course of 20 years. It sounds like a lot, except that 770 million tons were emitted in 2015 alone.

Zooming out further, carbon dioxide emissions from airplanes contribute a mere 2 percent of total global emissions, making the international standards even more irrelevant.

They’re “not worth the price of paper [they are] printed on,” according to Vera Pardee, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, which advocates drastic cuts in carbon dioxide emissions.

Yet the Obama administration heralded the international standards as “an important signal that the international community is well-positioned to rise to the challenge of implementing a global market-based approach to reduce aviation emissions.”

The EPA’s new endangerment finding is now the agency’s legal foundation to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from airplanes.

The EPA said it “anticipates moving forward on standards that would be at least as stringent as [U.N.] standards.” In other words, the EPA has created its own legal mandate to regulate, all without the input of Congress.

In fact, even if the EPA under the next administration chooses not to act on the new endangerment finding, outside groups can sue the agency to “do its duty” under the Clean Air Act and force it to set regulations (as some groups already have done).

While the EPA has yet to propose regulations, it is likely they will come with a price tag, if the U.N. standards are any clue.

Like every other greenhouse gas regulation from the EPA, they would be a tax on energy use that necessarily gets passed on to the customer, in this case those who travel by air. And for no environmental gain.

Congress needs to step in and prohibit the EPA and any other federal agency from regulating greenhouse gases. Regardless of what ones believes about global warming, this finding and whatever regulations result will have no meaningful impact on global temperatures. (For more from the author of “You Could Pay More to Fly Under This EPA Climate Change Rule” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Coast Guard Plots Long-Term Strategy for Increasingly Important Arctic

/0 Comments/in , /by

The inhospitable Arctic could become a major area of contention between world powers in the coming decades. As new passages open it, it is up to the U.S. Coast Guard to ensure safe lines of shipping through those perilous waters.

This August, the Crystal Serenity, an 820-foot long luxury cruise liner with 13 decks and 1,000 passengers, will sail from Anchorage, Alaska, to New York City. In an unprecedented feat, the Serenity will get there by taking a route that up until very recently has barely been navigable: the Northwest Passage.

With Arctic sea ice receding, the Serenity’s course is a harbinger of challenges to come, a wave of tourist and merchant traffic traveling through an increasingly accessible Arctic, and Arctic nations have little ability to ensure their safety.

To deal with these rapid changes and future Arctic activity, Arctic nations are stepping up their maritime security efforts in the waters of the High North. The representatives of each Arctic nations’ coast guards gathered in Connecticut in June for one of the first meetings of the Arctic Coast Guard Forum. With its unprecedented levels of coordination, the new forum hopes to chart a shared vision of a secure and cooperative Arctic.

Cooperation in the Arctic will be key for the U.S., as its own capabilities to operate in the harsh environment are currently lacking.

The Coast Guard has minimal presence in the Arctic and will be challenged to carry out large-scale search and rescue operations there if an accident occurs. The primary vessels answering such a call—icebreakers—are often days or weeks away depending on the location of the incident, and the Coast Guard has long argued that its icebreaker fleet is far smaller than it requires in the polar regions. Even if there were enough icebreakers, the U.S. does not have a deep-water port in the Arctic where it could base them.

This need for greater coordination led the U.S. and fellow Arctic nations to launch the Arctic Coast Guard Forum in October 2015. The forum expands on the role of the Arctic Council, which does not discuss military affairs in the Arctic but whose members have entered into agreements on incident response.

In the coming years, the forum will be responsible for dealing with several growing Arctic issues such as maritime security, promoting economic freedom and prosperity in the region, and dealing with its largest and most assertive member, Russia.

The forum’s most basic goal is to improve its ability to cohesively employ different nations’ resources to ensure maritime security in the Arctic. This will require a great deal of information sharing and training exercises among Arctic nations to coordinate incident response efforts, as well as commitments from each member to improve its Arctic infrastructure. This will make shipping, natural resource extraction, commercial fishing, and tourism safer and more reliable.

Since the forum is inherently security-focused (though not militarily), it is uniquely positioned to foster dialogue with Russia where other channels of communication have grown tense or have been cut in recent years.

The need for Arctic security dialogue with Russia has become increasingly important in recent years, as Russia has been rapidly militarizing its Arctic territory. Russia established a new Arctic military command, staged massive unannounced exercises with its Northern Fleet, and has been opening Arctic bases not used since the Soviet Union. These concerning actions introduce a hard security component to what could have simply been Arctic safety issues. The forum will hopefully provide a new way to address these concerns.

Predictions of larger-scale maritime activity in the Arctic have not yet materialized, but it is crucial that the U.S. Coast Guard be proactive today so that America will be prepared for what future its northern territory might hold. No nation is fully ready for increased Arctic activity, but with its responsibilities in mind, the Arctic Coast Guard Forum is a step in the right direction. (For more from the author of “Coast Guard Plots Long-Term Strategy for Increasingly Important Arctic” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.