We asked Republican senators about Tucker Carlson's 

favorite authoritarian leader. 

Their praise and dodges 

underscore the danger to 

the US.

Eliza Relman,John Haltiwanger

Fri, August 13, 2021, 

The Fox News host Tucker Carlson interviewing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. YouTube

• Carlson's recent visit to Hungary sparked alarm among democracy watchdogs and Democratic lawmakers.

• But some Republican senators endorsed Carlson's embrace of Viktor Orbán and his authoritarian model.

• Romney, however, denounced Orbán as an autocrat who's "only a few clicks away from Vladimir Putin."

The host of America's most-watched cable news show recently spent a week in Budapest extolling the virtues of a small European country sliding into autocracy, triggering alarm among democracy experts and Democratic lawmakers.

Insider approached nearly a dozen Republican senators this week to ask them whether they endorse Fox host Tucker Carlson's promotion of Hungary's right-wing populist leader. Their answers - and nonanswers - underscore the ongoing erosion of support for democracy on the American right.

Some Republican lawmakers either tacitly or explicitly portrayed Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's government as a model for US conservatives. Others insisted they weren't well-informed enough to answer questions about Hungary, which has attracted widespread condemnation, while putting its European Union membership in question.

"The only thing I know about [Orbán] is what I heard right there on [Carlson's] program," Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who's served in the Senate for 40 years, told Insider at the Capitol on Tuesday. "I saw enough snippets that I thought that he was a rational person."

"I haven't been tracking what's happening," Tennessee Sen. Bill Hagerty, who served as Trump's ambassador to Japan and sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, told Insider.

"Call our press office," Sen. Ted Cruz, who also sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, told Insider. Cruz's spokespeople declined to comment when Insider reached them by email.

The only GOP senator who said he was very familiar with Hungary's government was Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican and close ally of former President Donald Trump, who endorsed Orbán's leadership as a model for the US. He called Carlson's glowing portrayal of the autocrat "pretty accurate."

"I recognize the liberal left doesn't like Hungary, but there are so many positive things about what they're doing in that country," Johnson told Insider.

Carlson on the cover page of the Hungarian weekly magazine Mandiner on August 7. Janos Kummer/Getty Images

Hungary's democratic backslide

Orbán has spent the past 11 years in power asserting control over the judiciary, enriching his loyalists, and eliminating the free press, while remaking his country's laws to benefit his far-right Fidesz party.

After winning two-thirds of the seats in parliament in 2010, Orbán wasted no time in overhauling the nation's constitution. Foundational laws were promptly rewritten without the approval of any lawmakers outside Fidesz, with the EU and UN raising concerns, and critics warning that Hungary was "sliding into authoritarianism." This set the tone for Orbán's rule.

Fidesz has since remade Hungary's electoral system - gerrymandering parliamentary districts and nearly halving the number of seats in parliament - to give it an advantage. The party has consistently won a two-thirds majority in parliament since 2010, despite not always winning a majority of the national vote. And Orbán granted dual citizenship to ethnic Hungarians outside the country's borders, who vote overwhelmingly for Fidesz.

In his domestic policy, Orbán has taken particularly aggressive stances against immigration - including erecting a 180-mile border wall - and LGBTQ rights in his efforts to keep the country of nearly 10 million white, Christian, and conservative. He's forced Central Europe's premier university out of the country, and he's funneled billions of dollars in government money into conservative institutions run by his loyalists as part of an effort "to turn Hungary into the intellectual capital of the nationalist conservative movement," Dalibor Rohac, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, told Insider.

Orbán's close ties to Russia and China have also been a source of tension with the EU, which has frequently condemned the Hungarian leader on issues like human rights.

Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem), a project that monitors the health of democracy worldwide, said in its 2021 report that Hungary lost its status as a democracy in 2018 and ranked among the top 10 autocratizing countries.

"Over the past decade, the Orbán government has undermined the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, and freedom of the press; impeded Ukraine's cooperation with NATO; and cozied up to Russia, among many other acts inconsistent with a modern European liberal democracy," James Kirchick, a visiting fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution, told Insider.

'Everybody's got different views' on Hungary

Multiple GOP senators declined to comment or said they didn't know enough about Orbán's leadership to have an opinion on the state of Hungarian democracy or the US right's affinity for it. Others took the opportunity to criticize American democracy.

Grassley said he didn't have "the slightest idea" what Orbán had done in Hungary but had a favorable opinion of the leader after watching clips of Carlson's show last week. He went on to suggest that it wouldn't be out of character for Republicans to look abroad for political inspiration.

"Have you ever heard of Mrs. Thatcher?" he said, referring to the former conservative British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. "A lot of things that Republicans started to do in the 1980s was because of what Thatcher was successful doing in Great Britain."

An aide to the senator interjected to say Grassley didn't condone what Orbán has done in Hungary, but the senator insisted the Hungarian leader appeared "rational."

Sen. Rick Scott of Florida insisted that "everybody's got different views" on Hungary's leadership and pivoted to criticizing American democracy. He said he had a Hungarian friend who's considering moving back to his home country if the US "keeps going down this path of systemic socialism."

Orbán at the White House with then-President Donald Trump. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

Johnson, the Wisconsin senator who said he felt Hungary was a model for the US, was asked if he thought Orbán's restrictions on free speech and civic society were still problematic. He replied by turning the question around.

"I think what's problematic is what's happening in this country in terms of the media censorship and the media bias," he said.

Sen. Todd Young, an Indiana Republican who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, declined to comment on Hungary and Carlson and instead emphasized American exceptionalism.

"I think the US model should serve as a model for the world, one in which we continuously improve each generation upon the previous generation's handiwork and we leave a more perfect union for our children and grandchildren," Young told Insider. "I've got nothing else to say."

Why Hungarian autocracy appeals to the American right

Carlson's full-throated embrace of Orbán and his populist-nationalist Fidesz party didn't surprise many observers of conservatism. Orbán has become a hero to the far-right across Europe and the US, who've applauded his efforts to create a conservative ethnostate through strict anti-immigration policies, incentives for Hungarian parents, and censorship of progressive civic and educational institutions.

After years of criticism from US administrations, Orbán has found admirers in Trumpian Republicans. Right-wing commentators and operators, including the former Trump advisor Steve Bannon and writers at conservative outlets like National Review and American Conservative, are big fans.

Johnson told Insider he'd met "repeatedly" with Hungarian parliamentarians and called them "family-oriented." He added that Orbán's anti-immigration policies had shown "you actually can defend your border and represent the people of your country, as opposed to an open border and chaos that we're seeing here."

Experts on authoritarianism say that Trump's embrace of autocratic leaders and his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election have deepened the American right's disdain for democracy.

Staffan Lindberg, a Swedish political scientist and the director of V-Dem, said that embracing Orbán and his politics "means espousing authoritarianism and anti-pluralism."

"The suggestion that the GOP should emulate Fidesz and Orbán's politics is nothing short of saying that democracy is no longer the system for the US: Democracy should be dismantled, die," he told Insider.

Democrats are outspoken in their condemnation of Orbán, who President Joe Biden last year suggested was a totalitarian "thug," and say they're increasingly worried about the US right's embrace of authoritarianism.

"Orbán is trying to model a kind of repressive, pseudo-democracy where free speech is virtually nonexistent," Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, told Insider this week.

"There's obviously a lot of sympathy in the Republican Party for authoritarianism and there's a lot of Republicans who are giving up on democracy," he added. "That's what January 6 was all about. ... The Republican Party right now presents a real threat to American democracy."

Many European conservatives and experts on the right are also increasingly critical of the Hungarian ruling party.

Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute and former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan, said conservative respect for Orbán "reflects the continued deterioration of the American Right."

"Supposed conservatives are sacrificing once strongly held commitments to liberty and the rule of law," Bandow told Insider. "Support for the family and tradition are important but are secure only when nestled within a democratic system and based on a liberal constitutional order."

Carlson broadcasts from Hungary and praises the country's autocratic leader. YouTube

There used to be stronger opposition to Orbán's leadership in the GOP's ranks. In 2019, the bipartisan leadership of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee sent a letter to Trump expressing its concern with Hungary's "downward democratic trajectory." The lawmakers, including Republican Sens. James Risch and Marco Rubio, urged Trump to press Orbán on Hungary's embrace of China and Russia and its authoritarian slide.

Rohac said the right's criticism of Orbán had mostly dried up since then and "pro-Orbán and anti-anti-Orbán voices are dominating the conversation."

"It wasn't taken as a given that Viktor Orbán is a friend of conservative values, of the conservative movement," Rohac said. "I think those scruples have just disappeared. It's very hard to find anybody who would be critical of Orbán among politically active Republicans."

Still, a few GOP elected officials remain willing to speak out against Hungarian authoritarianism.

"I think Viktor Orbán and Hungary are far from a model for any other nation," Sen. Mitt Romney, a Utah Republican and former GOP presidential nominee, told Insider on Tuesday. "Mr. Orbán is only a few clicks away from Vladimir Putin, and autocracy is antithetical to the American experience."

Spokespeople for Risch and Rubio didn't reply to Insider's multiple requests for comment.

Rohac said Orbán's appeal to Republicans came down to his success in crushing progressive culture and politics.

"The best explanation was provided by Tucker Carlson himself at this dinner with Orbán last week when he said that you are hated by the right sort of people," Rohac said, referring to Carlson's comment last week to Hungarian right-wingers.

"I'm afraid that's where we are with intellectual conservatism - that it's no longer about policy. It's no longer about principles. It's no longer about having some sort of coherent worldview that reflects conservative principles.

"It's squarely about owning the libs. It's squarely about just doing things that the other side will hate. And for that, Orbán is your man."

Read the original article on Business Insider

 Coyote attacks in Canada: Why it seems like the animals are getting more aggressive

Elianna Lev

Thu, August 12, 2021,

Encounters with coyotes in cities across Canada appear to be more frequent these days. Starling incidents with the animals have made headlines around the world, such as the case of Macy the Yorkie, who ended up in ICU after trying to protect her 10-year-old owner from an attack in a Toronto neighbourhood. When a Global News crew came to interview the young girl, the same coyote appeared on camera chasing another neighbour.

Meanwhile, Vancouver’s Stanley Park has been the scene of a number of attacks in recent months, including one involving a two-year-old girl, which resulted in a trip to hospital, a female jogger, and a woman who was attacked from behind by the animal. The incidents led to a cull of four coyotes in the park, using soft-foot hold traps.

Are coyote attacks really on the rise in Canada?

Simon Gadbois, an ethologist at Dalhousie University who’s studied wild canines for 30 years, says while it may seem like these incidents are on the rise, it could be that the media is paying more attention. He refers to the fatal incident from 2009 involving 19-year-old Taylor Mitchell, who was attacked by coyotes while on a hike in Cape Breton Highlands National Park. It’s the only known fatal coyote attack on an adult ever reported.

“Coyotes were in the news and everybody had Land and Forest on their speed dial,” he tells Yahoo Canada News. “Any time people would see a coyote they would panic and call.”

However, when Gadbois started researching incidents between coyotes and humans, he learned that there had been many such reports over the last 20 years.

“I’m not sure it’s as much as on the increase as people think,” he says. “But this past year, there seems to be something going on but it comes in waves.”

Currently, Stanley Park seems to be at the centre of that. Gadbois explains that coyotes aren’t attracted to humans, and if they are, there’s something compelling them, particularly a source of food.

People are either feeding them, or more often its indirect feeding like garbage management or picking up apples from your yard, emptying the bins in school yards. They’re around schools because there’s really juicy stuff in those garbage bins.Simon Gadbois, Ethologist at Dalhousie University

Culling of the animal is a decision made by a provincial government body, like the Department of Land and Forest. Gadbois explains that culling can actually backfire, since the move tends to boost the population down the line. The first year will see a reduction in numbers, but the following year there will be an increase in prey, so that the pups will have a better survival rate.

What to do if you encounter a coyote

There are other ways to secure a boundary between humans and coyotes. One is called hazing, in which a method is used to deter the animal from an area, conditioning them to associate humans with something other than food. There’s different ways to do this, which range from making loud noises, using water guns with vinegar or projecting rubber balls.

If you find yourself crossing paths with a coyote in the wild, Gadbois stresses that whatever you do, resist the urge to run away.

“Even if they’re not in predatory mode, they will start running after anything that moves,” he says. “It’s almost an instinctual response. You’re triggering something there and they can’t stop it.”

The same advice goes for people on bikes - don’t bike away. Instead, stop and get off. If you stop moving, the animal will stop.

Another step to take to discourage the animal from bothering you is to make a lot of noise, especially in a low voice.

“Make yourself look big, find something to throw,” he says. “Basically you’re sending a message that this isn’t going to be an easy fight and it’s not worth it.”

First New Oil Sands Pipeline in Years Could Start Next Month


Robert Tuttle
Fri, August 13, 2021


(Bloomberg) -- A key pipeline linking Canada’s oil sands to U.S. markets could start shipping crude as early as next month.

Enbridge Inc.’s Line 3 oil pipeline from Alberta to Wisconsin could start operating as soon as Sept. 15, bringing relief to Canadian oil sands producers who have had limited access to export pipelines. The new 760,0000 barrel-a-day conduit that replaces an older one with less capacity is as little as 30 to 60 days from completion, according to a notice sent to shippers.

Canada’s oil sands producers have struggled for years with a shortage of export pipelines as projects to build new ones face increasing scrutiny from courts and regulators. U.S. President Joe Biden, on his first day in office, rescinded a permit for TC Energy Corp.’s Keystone XL project that would have helped increase shipments of Canadian crude to the U.S. Gulf Coast.

“Enbridge has filed for toll surcharges on the Line 3 replacement with the Canada Energy Regulator and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which could be effective as early as Sept. 15,” a spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “There will be a further filing to specify the specific in-service date shortly before the line goes into service once all necessary construction and commissioning activities are complete.”

Heavy Western Canadian Select crude for September delivery was unchanged at a $13 a barrel discount to benchmark West Texas Intermediate at 2:48 p.m. Calgary time, after the spread earlier shrank to as narrow as $12.60 a barrel, NE2 Group data show.

The pipeline would be the first new cross-border export project built between Canada and the U.S. in years. The line is scheduled to enter service with oil sands production exceeding the capacity of existing lines out of Western Canada, forcing some companies to ship crude by rail.

The Line 3 project has been fiercely opposed by some environmental and indigenous groups, who have staged protests this summer along the construction route. Enbridge spent years in court fights and regulatory battles to get the line built. The Trans Mountain expansion, another export pipeline under construction is British Columbia, is scheduled to enter service as early as 2022.

Enbridge shares were little changed in Toronto on Friday, at C$49.06.

3,000 Americans died in worst year of polio epidemic, yet we all got vaccinated ASAP



Dave Helling
Thu, August 12, 2021

I got my first polio vaccine in the early 1960s. It came in a sugar cube. Like millions of baby boomers, I lined up for the dose at a local clinic, with my parents and hundreds of other kids.

We didn’t know what polio was. We knew polio was sometimes called “infantile paralysis,” which would have been scary if we’d known what “infantile” meant. We collected dimes in a special card at school, to help pay for research into the disease. That was about it.

But my dad knew. Polio was a terror, he told us. Pools and churches and schools closed in the hot weather, when the strange virus circulated. Pictures of kids in machines called “iron lungs,” or wearing leg braces, filled the newspapers.


A president got polio. If you weren’t careful, you could get it too.

The disease prompted an unprecedented search for a vaccine. Jonas Salk and associates found one in 1955; later, Albert Sabin’s group developed the oral dose that I got. Both discoveries brought headlines, and worldwide acclaim.

For my parents, the polio vaccine was a miracle. My dad was deeply conservative — he thought Barry Goldwater was too far left — but there was never any question we would take the Sabin vaccine, and escape the scourge of polio.

So let’s think about this: The nation saw about 58,000 polio cases in 1952, the worst year for the disease in American history. Around 21,000 people were paralyzed, some permanently. There were 3,145 deaths.

So far, 615,000 people have died from COVID-19.

It’s astonishing that the U.S. conducted a mass vaccination program for a disease that killed two or three thousand patients a year, yet struggles to get enough people to take shots for a disease that killed 21,000 people in one week.

It’s true that polio largely infected children, while COVID attacked mostly adults and the elderly. But the onslaught of this coronavirus hasn’t spared the young: As of this month, 4.3 million children have caught COVID-19, roughly 14% of all cases.

Kansas reports 43,000 kids have been infected with COVID; Missouri, 66,000.

More children are being hospitalized with COVID now; the delta variant seems to be more harmful to kids. As of now, children younger than 12 can’t get a vaccine, which could make things worse.

And death isn’t the only danger from COVID-19. Studies now show a disturbing number of children suffer from “long COVID,” a disastrous side effect that could affect learning and living for years, even decades.

The numbers of pediatric long COVID cases aren’t clear. Even if it’s just 1%, though, that would mean 43,000 kids could potentially face debilitating COVID symptoms and disability, including one thousand children in Kansas and Missouri.

The harm is real, and ongoing. By any measure, COVID-19 is far more dangerous than polio. Yet hundreds of thousands of Americans now fiercely resist any meaningful attempt to limit COVID exposure to kids. Some states have banned schools from requiring masks.

Hundreds of thousands of kids will face COVID at reopened schools without shots, without masks, without protection. They’re on their own. History will remember this tragedy, and a nation’s blindness to facts.

It might have been different.

Since 1979, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says, not a single case of polio has originated in the U.S. The last time someone brought polio into the country was 1993. Vaccines have all but eradicated polio as a disease.

Yet most kids are still required to get polio shots. Four are recommended (interestingly, the live oral vaccine I got hasn’t been used for years). The reason is simple: Vaccines work. They protect kids, and everyone else.

The nation once understood this. We no longer do

Arnold Schwarzenegger asks if Americans are 'really this selfish and angry' after his rant against anti-maskers


Brendan Morrow, Staff Writer
Fri, August 13, 2021


Arnold Schwarzenegger NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images

Arnold Schwarzenegger is continuing to call out those "schmucks" refusing to wear a mask or get vaccinated against COVID-19.

The former Republican governor of California earlier this week blasted anyone who claims that wearing a mask infringes upon their freedom, telling them "screw your freedom" and that "you're a schmuck for not wearing a mask." He expanded on that in an essay for The Atlantic on Friday, saying he stands by his rant, while acknowledging it may have been "a little much."

Schwarzenegger goes on to write, though, that some responses he received to his rant "really worried me," as "many people told me that the Constitution gives them rights, but not responsibilities," and they apparently "feel no duty to protect their fellow citizens." In response to this sentiment, he calls on Americans to reflect on the fact that "our country began with a willingness to make personal sacrifices for the collective good."

"When I look at the response to this pandemic, I really worry about the future of our country," he continues. "We have lost more than 600,000 Americans to COVID-19. Are we really this selfish and angry? Are we this partisan?"

Schwarzenegger also writes that it "doesn't bother me" that some have accused him of being a RINO, or a Republican In Name Only, because of his stance.

"Honestly, rhinos are beautiful, powerful animals," he writes, "so I take that as a compliment." Read the full essay at The Atlantic.

Inconvenient truth: Droughts shrink hydropower, pose risk to global push to clean energy


FILE PHOTO: Hoover Dam reservoir sinks to record low, in sign of extreme Western U.S. drought

Sharon Bernstein, Jake Spring and David Stanway
Thu, August 12, 2021

SACRAMENTO, Calif./BRASILIA/SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Severe droughts are drying up rivers and reservoirs vital for the production of zero-emissions hydropower in several countries around the globe, in some cases leading governments to rely more heavily on fossil fuels.

The emerging problems with hydropower production in places like the United States, China and Brazil represent what scientists and energy experts say is going to be a long-term issue for the industry as climate change https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/once-in-50-year-heat-waves-now-happening-every-decade-un-climate-report-2021-08-09 triggers more erratic weather and makes water access less reliable.


They also could pose a threat to international ambitions to fight global warming by hindering one of the leading forms of existing clean power. Hydropower is the world's top source of clean energy and makes up close to 16% of world electricity generation, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

This year, climate-driven droughts have triggered the biggest disruptions in hydropower generation in decades in places like the western United States and Brazil. China is still recovering from the effects of last year's severe drought on hydro production in Yunnan province in the southwestern part of the country.

Elsewhere, too much water is the problem.

Last year in Malawi, for example, flooding and debris from megastorms forced two power stations to go offline, reducing hydropower capacity from 320 megawatts (MW) to 50 MW, according to the IEA.

Those effects have forced power grid operators to rely more heavily on thermal power plants, often fired by natural gas or coal, and to ask businesses to curtail electricity use to prevent outages, according to Reuters interviews with grid operators and regulators.

"When we're talking about hydropower we're really talking about making sure we have enough water to get electricity," said Kristen Averyt, a research professor focusing on climate resilience at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas. "What does that hydro generation get replaced with?"

SHUTDOWN AT LAKE OROVILLE

In California, the State Water Project was forced to shut down a 750-MW hydroelectric power plant at Lake Oroville this month for the first time since it was built in 1967 because of low water levels. In good years, the plant can power half a million homes.

Power facilities at Lake Shasta, the largest reservoir in the federal government's Central Valley Project in California, were also generating about 30% less power than usual this summer, said Cary Fox, a team leader for the Bureau of Reclamation's operations in the state.

The lake usually provides about 710 MW during the summer, but in July was producing only 500 MW, Fox said.

At the huge 2,000 MW Hoover Dam on the Colorado River at the border of Nevada and Arizona, production was also down by about 25% last month, the agency said.

One megawatt can power up to 1,000 U.S. homes.

Tight power supplies in California, driven in part by low hydropower production, led Governor Gavin Newsom to issue an order on July 30 allowing industrial power consumers to run on diesel generators and engines that emit more greenhouse gases. [

The order also allowed ships at port to use diesel generators instead of plugging into the grid, and lifted restrictions on the amount of fuel natural gas plants can use to generate power.

Environmentalists have criticized the move, saying it will worsen air quality in California and undermine the state's efforts to fight climate change.

Tim Welch, director of hydropower research at the U.S. Department of Energy, said the department is researching ways that dams can more efficiently store water during rainy periods so it can be reserved for use during droughts.

Hydropower plants in the United States are capable of producing about 80 gigawatts (GW) of energy, about 7% of total energy production, Welch said.

DROUGHT IN BRAZIL

In Brazil, where hydroelectric power is the top source of electricity at 61%, drought recently cut water flows into hydro dams to a 91-year low, the country's mines and energy minister said.

To offset the drop in hydropower, the country is seeking to activate thermoelectric plants, mainly powered by natural gas, threatening to drive up greenhouse gas emissions. In July, sector regulator Aneel raised the most expensive electricity rate by 52%, due to the drought crisis.

Severe weather events like the current drought will become increasingly frequent with climate change, and Brazilians will need to change their attitudes about water, said José Marengo, a climatologist at the government's disaster monitoring center.

"People always thought that water is unlimited, but it really isn't," Marengo said.

Brazil Mines and Energy Minister Bento Albuquerque said in an online briefing with reporters that a boom in the construction of power lines to reroute electricity to where it is needed and diversification away from hydro to solar and wind will help the country deal with such events in the future, and prevent the need for water rationing.

Even so, Brazil will remain reliant on hydropower for years. By 2030, the energy ministry predicts 49% of electricity will come from hydro. The country is also maintaining plans to build more hydro plants, exploring potential cross-border dam projects with Bolivia, Guyana and Argentina, as well as building 2 GW worth of small dams domestically.

DAMS - SAVE THE PLANET OR HARM IT?

Last year's drought in China's Yunnan province slashed hydro power generation by nearly 30% during the first five months of 2020, according to official data. Output this year remains curtailed by around 10%.

Yunnan usually accounts for roughly a quarter of China's total hydro generation, and the province is home to several aluminum smelting businesses that require vast quantities of power to operate. The province restricted metal producers' power use earlier this year, forcing some smelting capacity to be temporarily shut.

More disruptions are expected.

A recent study by researchers in Nanjing looked at the potential impact of climate change and rising temperatures on hydropower generation in Yunnan. Their models showed decreases in rain and snowfall during the October-April drought season and increases in the summer rainy season.

To even out the variability, the researchers proposed more storage capacity - more dams and reservoirs.

But the diversions could worsen droughts elsewhere, according to experts. China's giant reservoirs

 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mekong-river-idUSKCN21V0U7

 on the upper reaches of the Mekong River in Yunnan have already been blamed

 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mekong-river-idUSKBN2AC0K0 

for reducing downstream flows – affecting water access in Thailand, Cambodia

 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mekong-river-cambodia-idUSKBN2B002T 

and Myanmar.

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein in Sacramento, California, Jake Spring in Brasilia, David Stanway in Shanghai; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

Carbon emissions from wildfires raging across the world are adding up



Andrew Freedman
Fri, August 13, 2021
Data: CAMS/Mark Parrington; Chart: Danielle Alberti/Axios

Wildfires are raging in Canada, the U.S. and Siberia, emitting carbon dioxide, soot, and other planet-warming pollutants, while also destroying homes and fouling air quality. Now new data shows just how large the fires' carbon footprint may be.

Why it matters: The wildfires in these three regions are likely to continue to burn until the onset of winter snows (some could persist through the winter as zombie fires).

Until then, they will continue to emit greenhouse gases. The Siberian fires alone are emitting as much as individual countries do in a year, according to data from the Copernicus Atmospheric Monitoring Service (CAMS).

By the numbers: According to Mark Parrington, a senior scientist at CAMS, the two Canadian provinces contributing the most fire-related carbon dioxide emissions are British Columbia and Saskatchewan, while the Sakha Republic and Far Eastern Federal District of Russia are emitting the greatest amounts in Russia.

So far, the Siberian fires have emitted total emissions of about 1613.00 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent gases, which is on par with Indonesia's annual emissions in 2019, per numbers from The Rhodium Group.

It's also higher than emissions last year from Siberian fires, which was also an unusually severe fire season.

Smoke from the Siberian fires has crossed the Arctic over the North Pole and into Canada.

The World’s Biggest Fires May Reach Moscow Thanks to Putin

Anna Nemtsova
Thu, August 12, 2021

Dimitar Dilkoff/AFP via Getty Images

MOSCOW—Russia is on fire.

Massive wildfires are wiping out entire Siberian villages, killing people, emitting dangerous smoke, and destroying woods and national parks across more than 5 million hectares.

The fires, which started in May in Yakutia, are now larger than all wildfires around the planet combined, according to Greenpeace. There is no official death toll yet, but at least five people are known to have died so far.


For months, Russian authorities have been saying that the situation was under control. Finally, on Thursday, the minister of Emergency Situations, Yevgeny Zinichev, traveled to the epicenter of the disaster in Yakutia and concluded: the fires will reach Moscow, if nobody stops them.

Putinology Is to Russia What Astrology Is to Science

There are more than 3,000 miles between Moscow and Yakutia, a republic four times the size of France, located in northeastern Siberia. It is one of the coldest places on the planet in winter time. But this summer has been unusually hot, with unprecedented droughts and strong winds fueling the disaster.

On Wednesday, a local tractor driver died fighting the fire in Yakutia, which has been burning for weeks. Many locals blame the Kremlin for not doing enough to help the burning north. “Russia is a huge power. Every year it demonstrates its military power but cannot put out the fires. Or does it not want to?,” a prominent Yakutia politician, Sardana Avksentyeva, wrote in a Thursday Instagram post.

When Avksentyeva started posting photographs of wildfires on June 8, she was convinced that the special forces of the emergency ministry, known as MCHS, would handle the problem. But by Aug. 1, houses were still burning and animals were still dying as 163 fires raged around the republic.

“It seems the authorities are simply waiting for August rains to put down the fires. MCHS, are you alive?” she wrote on Instagram. “All our pleas to announce the emergency situation were left unanswered.”

Meanwhile, Moscow has been focused on upcoming parliament elections—and on persecuting the opposition. Yakutia had to fight the fires using only its own local budget. “This is a lesson to all the other Russian regions: do not wait for the center’s help, count only on yourself.”

The leader of Greenpeace Russia’s firefighting team, Grigory Kuksin, says that the government is to blame for the lack of funding to manage the disaster.

“Russia spends about 30 billion rubles on preventing fires and training regional forest firefighting teams, but the budget should be at least three times bigger,” Kuksin told The Daily Beast on Thursday.

He added: “Professional firefighters cannot appear from nowhere, they should have been trained. The aftermath of lives lost, as a result of these fires, will number thousands, since several cities are now suffering from smoke.”

Every day, Polina Pavlova, a volunteer from the devastated region of Berdigestyakh, posts emergency phone numbers, calls for volunteers, and posts photographs of her smoky village, which has been receiving hundreds of evacuated victims. Local authorities provide aid for pregnant women, little children, and others whose homes have burnt in the wildfire. “There is so much smoke, we cannot see the sun,” Pavlova posted on Facebook on Wednesday.

Earlier this week Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the deployment of more firefighting aircraft to Siberian regions, but ecologists say the government was late.

“Right now, there are about 5,000 people fighting the wildfires around one million kilometers of burning woods in Yakutia, at least 3,000 of them are local volunteers,” Bagdan Bakaleiko, a Rain TV journalist covering the crisis in Yakutia, told The Daily Beast. “Firefighters tell us that everything that has never burnt before is burning now.”

‘No Words’: California’s Devastating Dixie Fire Is Now the Third Largest in State History

The entire village of Byas-Kyuel has burnt to the ground. Flames destroyed 31 houses, and at least 400 people were evacuated to temporary shelters. Authorities promise to build new homes for the victims by October. Reporters from News.Yukt.ru compare the scene in the ruined village to an “apocalypse.” Meanwhile, the smoke has reached the republic’s capital, Yakutsk. The IQAir monitors suggest that the concentration of toxic smoke pollution in the air is 247 times the recommended norm.

Several other Russian regions are suffering from wildfires in the Urals, Far East and in the central parts of Russia. Earlier this month, wildfires spread in the national park of Republic of Mordovia, 352 miles from Moscow. This week, the fires reached Alamasovo village in the Nizhny Novgorod region.

“Until recently the Kremlin did not pay much attention to wildfires, but considered the significance of climate change,” Kuksin said. “Russian authorities should be focusing harder and spending bigger budgets on fire prevention, and training professional wood firefighters.”

Forest Service maxed out as wildfires break across US West

EUGENE GARCIA and DAISY NGUYEN
Thu, August 12, 2021

WESTWOOD, Calif. (AP) — The U.S. Forest Service said Friday it's operating in crisis mode, fully deploying firefighters and maxing out its support system as wildfires continue to break out across the U.S. West, threatening thousands of homes and entire towns.

The roughly 21,000 federal firefighters working on the ground is more than double the number of firefighters sent to contain forest fires at this time a year ago, and the agency is facing “critical resources limitations,” said Anthony Scardina, a deputy forester for the agency's Pacific Southwest region.

An estimated 6,170 firefighters alone are battling the Dixie Fire in Northern California, the largest of 100 large fires burning in 14 states, with dozens more burning in western Canada.

The fire began a month ago and has destroyed more than 1,000 homes, businesses and other structures, much of it in the small town of Greenville in the northern Sierra Nevada.

The fire had ravaged more than 800 square miles (well over 2,000 square kilometers) — an area larger than the city of London — and continued to threaten more than a dozen rural and forest communities.

Containment lines for the fire held overnight, but it was just 31% surrounded. Gusty and erratic winds were threatening to spread the fire to Westwood, a lumber town of 1,700. Lightning could spark new blazes even as crews try to surround a number of other forest fires ignited by lightning last month.

"Mother nature just kind of keeps throwing us obstacles our way," said Edwin Zuniga, a spokesman with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, working together with the Forest Service to tamp out the blaze.

Meanwhile, firefighters and residents were scrambling to save hundreds of homes as flames advance across the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation in southeastern Montana.

The blaze was still burning near the tribal headquarters town of Lame Deer, where a mandatory evacuation remained in place and a second fire was threatening from the opposite direction.

Smoke from the blazes grew so thick Friday morning that the health clinic in Lame Deer was shut down after its air filters could not keep up with the pollution, Northern Cheyenne Tribe spokesperson Angel Becker said.

Smoke drove air pollution levels to unhealthy or very unhealthy levels in portions of Montana, Idaho, Oregon Washington and Northern California, according to Environmental Protection Agency air quality monitoring.

An air quality alert covering seven Montana counties warned of extremely high levels of small pollution particles found in smoke, which can cause lung issues and other health problems if inhaled.

The fires near Lame Deer combined have burned 275 square miles (710 square kilometers) this week, so far sparing homes but causing extensive damage to pasture lands that ranchers depend on to feed their cows and horses.

Gusts and low humidity were creating extremely dangerous conditions as flames devoured brush, short grass and timber, fire officials said.

Hot, dry weather with strong afternoon winds also propelled several fires in Washington state, and similar weather was expected into the weekend, fire officials said.

In southeastern Oregon, two new wildfires started by lightning Thursday near the California border were spreading through juniper trees, sagebrush and evergreen trees.

Gov. Kate Brown declared an emergency for one of the fires to mobilize crews and other resources to the area of ranches, rural subdivisions and RV parks about 14 miles (23 kilometers) from the small town of Lakeview.

The blaze grew from a lightning strike to 11 square miles (28 square kilometers) in less than 24 hours, said Tamara Schmidt, a U.S. Forest Service spokeswoman.

Authorities Thursday evening ordered the evacuation of an RV park that stood in the path of the Oregon's Patton Meadow Fire.

The fires are near the area torched Oregon's Bootleg Fire which started July 6 and burned an area more than half the size of Rhode Island before crews gained the upper hand. The fire is not yet fully contained and was the nation’s largest until being eclipsed by the Dixie Fire.

Triple-digit temperatures and bone-dry conditions in Oregon, enduring a third day of extreme heat, could increase fire risks through the weekend.

Climate change has made the U.S. West warmer and drier in the past 30 years and will continue to make the weather more extreme and wildfires more destructive, according to scientists.

More than 6,000 square miles (almost 16,000 square kilometers) have been burned in the U.S. so far this year. That's well ahead of the amount burned by this point last year, but below the 10-year average, according to the National Interagency Fire Center.

Parts of Europe also are burning, including in Greece, where where a massive wildfire has decimated forests and torched homes, and was still smoldering 10 days after it started.

___

Nguyen reported from Oakland, Calif. Matthew Brown in Billings, Mont., Olga R. Rodriguez in San Francisco and Gillian Flaccus in Portland contributed to this report.

A lawyer for The New York Times accidentally emailed a confidential internal document to a union official

Kate Duffy
Fri, August 13, 2021

A lawyer for the NYT accidentally sent a confidential slideshow to a union official, the paper confirmed.

The Daily Beast first reported that the email had been sent in error to the official.

The slideshow set out proposals the newspaper's handling of unionization efforts by tech staff.

A lawyer advising The New York Times accidentally emailed a union official with a game plan for how the newspaper could handle unionizing workers.

A Times spokesperson said that the document offered "a range of options" for the newspaper to respond to the unionization efforts but was "sent accidentally" to the official. The accident was first reported by The Daily Beast on Thursday.

In April, more than 650 tech workers at The Times formed the Times Tech Guild unit with the aim of unionizing. The newspaper rejected the unit's request for voluntary recognition, though, meaning that the National Labor Relations Board will supervise a vote on the matter. The Times Tech Guild is organized by NewsGuild of New York, a branch of the Communications Workers of America.

Michael Lebowich, a partner at the law firm Proskauer Rose, which is advising The Times on the unionization, sent an email on August 5 titled "Tech Organizing Unit Scope Decision Options," The Daily Beast reported. The email contained a slideshow, marked "privileged and confidential," that set out proposals for how the newspaper could handle the tech-staff unionization, The Daily Beast said.

Lebowich sent the email to several colleagues and Andrew Gutterman, senior vice president and deputy general counsel at The Times, who leads union discussions on behalf of the newspaper, The Daily Beast reported. But Lebowich also sent the email to Rachel Sanders, a representative for the NewsGuild of New York, the site reported.

A Times spokesperson told Insider: "The document ... lists a range of options the company has and considerations for each choice. It was accidentally sent to a union official last week as the legal team prepared to review these options with leadership."

The fall of Afghanistan is the result of a financial judgement

REUTERSTaliban fighters patrol Farah, Afghanistan


By Hasit Shah
News editor
Published August 13, 2021

In Washington this week, the US Senate approved a $1 trillion package for America’s infrastructure. A few days later, Senate Democrats unveiled a $3.5 trillion anti-poverty plan, likely to be fiercely contested, that is also part of the Biden administration’s core agenda.

Thousands of miles away, in the same week, the Taliban has rapidly taken over large parts of Afghanistan. Its second largest city, Kandahar, fell today (Aug. 13) and Kabul is next. The US and allies are sending in thousands of troops to protect embassies and facilitate the removal of their citizens, though this is temporary and not a reversal of policy, and a sign that Afghan forces still can’t be entrusted with the task

Over the past 20 years, the US has spent around $1 trillion in Afghanistan, only to return to square one as soon as it departed. Nation-building is expensive, and US president Joe Biden has chosen to spend the money at home rather than in a hostile, complex overseas environment that he feels is no longer America’s problem. “I do not regret my decision [to pull the US out of Afghanistan],” said Biden on Aug. 10. “Afghan leaders have to come together. They’ve got to fight for themselves, fight for their nation.”
Planning the US withdrawal from Afghanistan

The Trump administration announced its deal with the Taliban in February 2020, in the Qatari capital Doha. Under its terms, the US and NATO allies would leave Afghanistan within 14 months if, among other things, the Taliban severed ties with Al-Qaeda and removed extremists from the region. The official Afghan government was not involved in talks.

Joe Biden reviewed the deal after the US election, and forged ahead with a plan to end American involvement by the symbolic date of Sept. 11, 2021—20 years after the devastating terror attack that precipitated the US effort to remove the Taliban in the first place.

Meanwhile, the US president has mapped out an ambitious domestic agenda for which every cent is needed, and has decided that the financial cost of staying in Afghanistan is greater than the cost of leaving. The moral and geopolitical imperatives have shifted.
What will the Taliban do now?

The Taliban never went away. In the two decades since the US-led invasion, its power base shifted to more remote, inaccessible parts of Afghanistan, and militants made regular, deadly incursions into Kabul and other major cities.

I spent some time in Afghanistan in 2011. Kabul was still a highly militarized city 10 years after the Taliban had supposedly gone, and we were not allowed to travel without minders and armored vehicles. However, there were signs of life in markets and other commercial areas, and the stunning Shomali Plain, in the shadow of the Himalayas just north of the city, was once again producing high-quality fruit and vegetables after decades of mistreatment under the Soviets and the Taliban.

What happens next is unclear. Despite Taliban pledges to run Afghanistan with fairness and civility, and to retreat from extremism, reports have already emerged of extrajudicial killings, forced marriages, and severe restrictions. Women, in particular, are fearful. Thousands of Afghans have fled from Taliban-controlled areas to Kabul, which, US officials are saying, could itself fall imminently.

Retired NATO general blames '20 years of American misjudgments' for the Afghanistan crisis, where the Taliban is advancing in the wake of US withdrawals


Retired NATO general blames '20 years of American misjudgments' for the Afghanistan crisis, where the Taliban is advancing in the wake of US withdrawals


Tom Porter
Fri, August 13, 2021, 4:28 AM·2 min read


Former NATO commander Gen. Wesley Clark weighed in on the crisis in Afghanistan on CNN Thursday.


He described the situation as the result of "20 years of American misjudgments."


The Taliban has been rapidly seizing land as Afghan security forces crumble with the US troop pullout.


Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, the former supreme commander of NATO in Europe, has said that the current crisis in Afghanistan was the result of "20 years of American misjudgments, of poor prioritizations and failed policies."

"For the Biden administration I think they reached the end of the road. It was clear that they weren't going to be able to create or help create an Afghanistan government that supported its people," Clark told CNN host Jim Acosta on Thursday.

"And without that government support, its military did not have the support of the people. And this is the consequence of it. It's painful. It's tragic."

Clark's assessment came as the Taliban seized multiple provincial capitals in Afghanistan as part of their sweeping offensive.

As of Friday, the militant organization was effectively controlling about two-thirds of the country, with Afghan security forces struggling to contain the advance in the wake of the US' withdrawal of most of its forces in July.

Thousands of people have fled the fighting to the Afghan capital, Kabul, which US intelligence officials told The Washington Post could fall to the Taliban in a matter of weeks.

President Joe Biden's administration is coming under pressure for its withdrawal strategy, with Biden on July 8 having described the prospect of the Taliban seizing back control of the country as "extremely unlikely."

Three thousand additional US troops were deployed to Kabul on Thursday help ensure the safe evacuation of remaining military forces there ahead of the scheduled full US withdrawal on September 11.

Clark served as NATO military chief from 1997 until 2000, the year before US and NATO forces launched the invasion of Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attacks. He ran as a Democratic presidential candidate in 2004.

In the CNN interview, Clark expressed bafflement as to why the US had been caught off guard by the rapid Taliban advances.

"Once you are actually committed to withdrawal, set the date, you will supercharge the Taliban. They will have a sense of momentum, a belief that their long-held faith in ultimate victory is about to be realized," he said.

‘It may never happen’: The $88 billion gamble on the Afghan army that's going up in smoke


Bryan Bender and Paul McLeary
Fri, August 13, 2021

The United States spent more than $88 billion to train and equip Afghanistan’s army and police, nearly two-thirds of all of its foreign aid to the country since 2002. So why are they crumbling in the face of the Taliban onslaught?

The breathtaking failure to mold a cohesive and independent Afghan fighting force can be traced to years of overly optimistic assessments from U.S. officials that obscured — and in some cases, purposely hid — evidence of deep-rooted corruption, low morale, and even “ghost soldiers and police” who existed merely on the payrolls of the Afghan Defense and Interior Ministries, according to current and former officials directly involved in the training effort.

Even the Afghan units who have fought valiantly in the face of a formidable enemy, suffering enormous casualties in the process, were never expected to operate without high-tech air and ground support from foreign allies, they say.


“How do we get the Afghans to fight for themselves? It may never happen,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a retired Army lieutenant colonel and member of the Armed Services Committee who opposed the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Ernst, who reviewed the training on several occasions, said the Americans in charge “were optimistic.”

“The special operations were really doing quite well,” she said in an interview. “But that’s always when they had Americans advising and assisting them."

In recent days, the country’s second- and third-largest cities, Ghazni and Herat, have fallen to the Taliban. On Friday, Lashkar Gah, the capital of Helmand province, was also in the militant movement’s control. There are now growing doubts among military officials that Afghan units assigned to defend Kabul will fare much better and Washington and its allies are anticipating the Taliban could soon be at the gates of the capital.

The Pentagon insisted it is not counting them out yet, even as 3,000 American troops are flowing into Kabul to evacuate U.S. diplomats, who were instructed Friday to destroy sensitive government documents before fleeing for their safety.

“We want to see the will and the political leadership, the military leadership, that's required in the field,” Pentagon press secretary John Kirby told reporters on Friday. “We still want to see that, and we hope to see that, but whether it happens or not, whether it pans out or not, that's really for the Afghans to decide.”

He added that the Afghan forces’ “advantages,” citing their numerical superiority and the fact the Taliban lacks an air force, “are still there. You have to use it.”

But as Afghans are now tragically learning, numbers can lie.

An incomplete picture

The Afghan security forces have expanded substantially over the past two decades — from just 6,000 under the Ministry of Defense and no national police at all in 2003, to 182,071 and 118,628, respectively, as of April 2021, according to the latest Pentagon figures.

As the forces have ballooned, however, so have the claims of their prowess.

One U.S. commander boasted a decade ago that Afghanistan’s army “fought with skill and courage.” A successor in 2015 said they had “proven themselves to be increasingly capable.” As recently as last month, the Pentagon’s chief spokesperson insisted the Afghan forces “know how to defend their country.”

But the countervailing evidence that government forces were ill-prepared to take on any sustained conflict was often left out of public testimony or simply classified as secret.

Beginning in 2015, the Pentagon started shielding some data on the Afghan forces from the public, in a move that the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction at the time called “unprecedented.”

The independent watchdog concluded that it was “unable to publicly report on most of the U.S.-taxpayer-funded efforts to build, train, equip, and sustain” the Afghan forces.

The Pentagon loosened some restrictions on data but since 2017, much of the previously available information about the size, strength and casualty rates of Afghan military units has remained hidden.

In a July 30 report to Congress, the special IG said that U.S. forces “continued to classify detailed ANDSF attrition information,” using an acronym for Afghan National Defense and Security Forces, and that some information was simply no longer available, including the “operational performance” of the Afghan forces, maintenance data, and “the impact of COVID-19 on ANDSF recruitment and attrition.”

The Pentagon’s secrecy, while perhaps defensible on security grounds, left a misleading impression of just how swiftly those forces might fold under Taliban pressure.

Efforts to limit public reporting have “contributed to a broad lack of understanding of the inadequacy of Afghan security forces,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, who has tracked the lack of disclosure. “That by itself should have been a warning sign. If they were highly capable and highly competent, that is not something you’d want to keep secret.”

Ground truth

But the signs have been mounting for years that the rosier assessments did not reflect the reality on the ground.

Infantry units face high turnover in any army, but that has been especially true for the Afghans, who have been plagued from the outset by troops abandoning their posts for reasons ranging from harvest schedules to combat losses to desertion.

The high rate of attrition has led to a lack of cohesion. “If you don't pump new energy and professionalism into the force constantly, it disintegrates pretty quickly and you won't recognize it two years later, much less often,” said Mike Jason, a retired Army colonel who commanded training units in Afghanistan.

A formidable Taliban has also exacted a heavy toll in recent years. “That’s caused huge losses for the Afghan army and they’ve had to start from scratch with a lot of recruits,” said Michael O’Hanlon, a military expert at the Brookings Institution who completed several research trips to assess the progress of the NATO training effort. “Almost every year they are having 20 or 20 percent attrition either from casualties or desertion.”

As for the U.S-trained Afghan air force, it is still flying dozens of bombing missions in support of the Afghan army.

But there is only so much a relative handful of propeller-driven planes and aging attack helicopters with few spare parts can accomplish, and the air force has struggled to respond to the multiple battles raging across the country.

The poor performance of the Afghan air force has in turn spurred ground troops to flee, said a former senior U.S. military commander in Afghanistan who wished to remain anonymous.

“They realized after fighting two to three days, being hit in various locations all around the country, that the Afghan air force would not deliver reinforcements, resupplies, air medevac, or close air support,” the former commander said, referring to medical evacuations. “I warned of this months ago, especially when we withdrew our maintenance contractors who kept the sophisticated U.S.-provided systems operational.”

Some also view the original conception of the training program as faulty.

Mark Jacobson, a former Pentagon official and combat veteran who was a senior NATO official in Afghanistan, believes too much focus was given to preparing the Afghan military to repel a foreign army rather than a home-grown insurgency like the Taliban.

“We failed in trying to make the Afghan army in our own image,” he said in an interview. “We tried to create regiments and brigades when we needed to create an army and police force that was basically special forces designed specifically to beat back an insurgency, not to defend the Afghan borders against outside conventional attacks.”

The Afghans’ inability to hold the line is also simply a function of geography, said retired Army Gen. Joseph Votel, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East from 2016 to 2019.

“You have a lot of forces out away from the capital, and many of them are dispersed in smaller locations that are easy to be isolated and cut off,” he said in an interview. “They’re hard to reinforce.”

That also means the most effective Afghan units, which by definition can only be engaged in one battle at a time, are under especially heavy demand.

‘Corrosive effects’

But the problems have also been much more systematic. The special U.S. government watchdog for Afghan reconstruction, in its July report to Congress, cited the “corrosive effects of corruption” within the ranks, as well as “questionable accuracy of data on the actual strength of the force” and an inability to assess “intangible factors” such as “the will to fight.”

Outlining the continuing impact of corruption on personnel strength, for example, it cited problems “such as fake personnel records that corrupt actors used to pocket salaries” for both “ghost soldiers and police.”

Others who have been involved in the training, however, believe the events of recent days are largely the result of the United States leaving the Afghans in the lurch.

“They have stood and fought with us for many years and have taken casualty rates that are many times those of U.S. forces,” said Kimberly Kagan, president of the Institute for the Study of War who was a member of the Strategic Assessment Group of then-U.S. commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

She complained it is “the abandonment of Afghanistan by the United States and its allies that has caused the dramatic change in the ability of the Taliban to accelerate its campaign to take territory” and in the process, "destroyed the confidence” of the Afghan security forces.

O’Hanlon, who served as an informal adviser to U.S. commanders, agreed that “one problem is just that we never expected an abrupt departure.

“We always assumed there would be a 12- to 24-month notification of a drawdown or a departure and that would have allowed for some adjustments,” he said.

The speedy U.S. and NATO withdrawal had a huge effect on rank and file Afghan troops, he believes. “Anybody who was a fence sitter on how hard they were going to fight in defense of the government has decided not to be a fence sitter anymore, but to go ahead and lay down their arms and either do a deal with the Taliban or blend in.”

Still, many others insist it is unlikely the persistent readiness problems could have been solved by more American training and financial aid.

“The Afghan force has been struggling with low degree of control, poor leadership, lack of recruitment, desertion and weak battlefield performances,” said Neha Dwivedi, a research analyst at Janes, a defense and intelligence consultancy. “While the Afghan security force boasts of sophisticated and technologically advanced weapons, it suffers from a lack of cohesiveness, corruption and mismanagement.”

“The Taliban, on the other hand,” she added, “lacks high technology weapons but appears financially stable with a stable cohesive group.”