Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Manhattan Institute Issues Commentary to Spectator: Marjorie Taylor Greene - Anti-Trump Resistance Hero?
NEW YORK, Nov. 22 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Nov. 20, 2025, to the Spectator:
* * *
Marjorie Taylor Greene: Anti-Trump Resistance Hero?
By Douglas Murray
The left sees that she might be useful in their war to bring down Trump
It is always interesting to see who the American left claims are the leaders of the American right.
There was a time during President Trump's first term when Steve Bannon fit the role - and relished playing it. Back then most days brought another media profile of the dark genius of the MAGA movement. The Guardian, New
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, Nov. 22 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Nov. 20, 2025, to the Spectator:
* * *
Marjorie Taylor Greene: Anti-Trump Resistance Hero?
By Douglas Murray
The left sees that she might be useful in their war to bring down Trump
It is always interesting to see who the American left claims are the leaders of the American right.
There was a time during President Trump's first term when Steve Bannon fit the role - and relished playing it. Back then most days brought another media profile of the dark genius of the MAGA movement. The Guardian, NewYork Times and others were obsessed. Vanity Fair would send reporters to follow Bannon as he conquered America and, er, Europe. Documentary crews were perennially in tow. Indeed one documentary following Bannon around included a scene in which they followed him to the showing...
Continue reading the entire piece here at The Spectator (https://thespectator.com/topic/marjorie-taylor-greene-anti-trump-resistance-hero)
* * *
Douglas Murray is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and contributing editor of City Journal.
* * *
Original text here: https://manhattan.institute/article/marjorie-taylor-greene-anti-trump-resistance-hero
[Category: ThinkTank]
How Trump Can End 'Woke Capital' - and Free US Companies To Get Back to Business
NEW YORK, Nov. 22 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Nov. 21, 2025, to the New York Post:
* * *
How Trump Can End 'Woke Capital' - and Free US Companies To Get Back to Business
By James R. Copland
In his second term, President Donald Trump certainly hasn't been afraid to go bold -- and now it could be the stock market's turn.
Trump's administration is eyeing a major overhaul in how the feds oversee the market, The Wall Street Journal has reported.
The slate of reforms under consideration could be the biggest positive development for our financial markets
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, Nov. 22 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Nov. 21, 2025, to the New York Post:
* * *
How Trump Can End 'Woke Capital' - and Free US Companies To Get Back to Business
By James R. Copland
In his second term, President Donald Trump certainly hasn't been afraid to go bold -- and now it could be the stock market's turn.
Trump's administration is eyeing a major overhaul in how the feds oversee the market, The Wall Street Journal has reported.
The slate of reforms under consideration could be the biggest positive development for our financial marketssince the early days of the Reagan administration, if not since the creation of the federal securities laws themselves.
Continue reading the entire piece here at the New York Post (https://nypost.com/2025/11/21/opinion/trump-can-end-woke-capital-and-get-us-companies-back-to-business)
* * *
James R. Copland is a senior fellow and director of legal policy at the Manhattan Institute. He is the author of "The Unelected: How an Unaccountable Elite is Governing America."
* * *
Original text here: https://manhattan.institute/article/how-trump-can-end-woke-capital-and-free-us-companies-to-get-back-to-business
[Category: ThinkTank]
Goldwater Institute: Week in Review - Union Members Only? Nope.
PHOENIX, Arizona, Nov. 22 -- The Goldwater Institute issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
Week in Review: Union Members Only? Nope.
By Fiona Baum
When people apply for government jobs, they should be judged on their merits and their ability to do the work. But that's not how it works at the University of Rhode Island--the university gives local union members a leg up in the hiring process. That's unconstitutional, so the Goldwater Institute sued the university this week to challenge its illegal policy.
As part of its collective bargaining agreement with the National Education
... Show Full Article
PHOENIX, Arizona, Nov. 22 -- The Goldwater Institute issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
Week in Review: Union Members Only? Nope.
By Fiona Baum
When people apply for government jobs, they should be judged on their merits and their ability to do the work. But that's not how it works at the University of Rhode Island--the university gives local union members a leg up in the hiring process. That's unconstitutional, so the Goldwater Institute sued the university this week to challenge its illegal policy.
As part of its collective bargaining agreement with the National EducationAssociation Rhode Island, the university gives union members "preferential consideration" for employment. In fact, non-union members will only be considered for a position if it is "not filled by a current union member," the agreement states. But conditioning employment on union membership--which is often a political association--restricts an individual's First Amendment right to choose not to associate with a union.
The University of Rhode Island must follow the law. The Goldwater Institute, with the help of our American Freedom Network of volunteer attorneys, is ensuring they do.
Read more here (https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/union-cronies-wanted-goldwater-fights-university-of-rhode-islands-illegal-hiring-preferences/).
Fighting for Government Transparency at the Arizona Supreme Court
When the government negotiates with labor unions, it's supposed to be on the public's behalf. But city of Phoenix leaders are intentionally keeping the public in the dark about their union negotiations. That's why the Goldwater Institute is heading back to the Arizona Supreme Court to argue in favor of government transparency.
Goldwater lawyers will appear before the Arizona Supreme Court on Monday and urge the justices to compel the city to comply with Arizona's Public Records Law and release records exchanged during its union negotiations. Awkwardly, the city claims that hiding the records from the public is somehow in the public's best interest. Yet, city leaders have never explained how releasing the records would harm the public, only saying that disclosing the documents "may result" in the "politicization" of union negotiations.
This will be the Goldwater Institute's fourteenth time arguing before its home state's highest court. As always, Goldwater will fight for open and transparent government in Arizona and around the country.
Read more here (https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/fighting-for-government-transparency-at-the-arizona-supreme-court/).
Indoctrination at Michigan State University
Another week, another public university indoctrinating students with leftwing ideology. This time it's Michigan State University, where education majors are forced to take a course where they're taught that "whiteness" is destructive and contrary to equality.
The course, TE 101: Social Foundations of Justice and Equity in Education, uses frameworks from the Black Lives Matter movement, Learning for Justice, and the Abolitionist Teaching Network to instruct impressionable students on "systemic oppression," "racial privilege" and the many problems with "whiteness." Students are not expected to question these ideas, but affirm them.
This latest revelation underscores the importance of the Goldwater Institute's Freedom from Indoctrination Act, which aims to restore neutrality and ensure that universities serve the public, not a political ideology. Through its reforms, Goldwater aims to protect the academic freedom of every student and professor, not just those who echo the prevailing orthodoxy.
Read more here (https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/michigan-state-turns-teacher-training-into-ideological-indoctrination/).
* * *
Fiona Baum is the Marketing and Digital Communications Manager at the Goldwater Institute, where she oversees the organization's digital presence, including its website, blog, and social media platforms.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/week-in-review-union-members-only-nope/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Capital Research Center: Where Do Leftist Networks Go When They Die?
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The Capital Research Center issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
Where do leftist networks go when they die?
The death of ACORN, and its afterlife
By Michael Watson
In 2010, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, better known by the acronym ACORN, declared bankruptcy and dissolved. It was a moment of triumph for conservative activists who had implicated the left-wing network in controversial voter registration practices and who had caught network employees appearing to condone illegal activities on surreptitiously recorded videos.
But
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The Capital Research Center issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
Where do leftist networks go when they die?
The death of ACORN, and its afterlife
By Michael Watson
In 2010, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, better known by the acronym ACORN, declared bankruptcy and dissolved. It was a moment of triumph for conservative activists who had implicated the left-wing network in controversial voter registration practices and who had caught network employees appearing to condone illegal activities on surreptitiously recorded videos.
Butbankruptcy does not mean the underlying assets cease to exist, and dissolving the network does not mean that the local organizers will sit idle forever. In the case of ACORN, those local organizers ensured the network continued its work supporting left-wing politicians, labor union organizing campaigns, and radical low-income housing policies.
The stiff
Despite the election of ACORN ally Barack Obama to the presidency in 2008, the organization had an unhappy time from around then through its official dissolution in 2010. Conservatives had long suspected ACORN of engaging in voter registration fraud, and numerous ACORN-affiliated activists faced charges for their work with the group. ACORN had relied on federal funds for a substantial amount of its network operations, and faced Congressional action to strip future funds.
And then two right-wing undercover activists with a hidden camera started showing up at ACORN regional office to make ACORN's life even worse. The series of undercover stings conducted by James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles showed ACORN staff appearing to aid the two in creating a prostitution ring, and increased the public pressure on ACORN as an organization. By the end of 2010, its position had become untenable, and ACORN filed for bankruptcy and ceased to exist.
The afterlife
But that was not the end of the ACORN network. The national structure may have dissolved, but the local roots were well established and lived on after ACORN died. Local-level constituent parts of the network continued operating much as they had been, with funding from institutional leftist donors like the Service Employees International Union to conduct union organizing campaigns. This is not disputed: By the mid-2010s, liberal outlets were enthusiastic about how the "successors" were continuing ACORN's work despite right-wing efforts to shut it down.
Striking with SEIU
The successor groups rose to national prominence as the grunts in the Service Employees International Union's "Fast Food Strikes" in the "Fight for $15" campaign. The SEIU has long sought to organize quick-service restaurants like McDonald's, seeking a foothold toward a potential billion-dollar windfall in dues revenues.
In late 2012, the union adopted an aggressive public relations strategy to pressure the company to agree to a "card check" unionization, to encourage the Obama administration to make regulatory changes favorable to union organizing, and to persuade left-wing local governments to enact substantial increases to minimum wages. Under the management of liberal political public relations firm BerlinRosen, the SEIU would stage-manage what it called "fast food strikes" for "$15 and a union."
But workplace-level organizing is hard. Drawing on existing activist allies is easy, and if the media is on one's side (and for Big Labor, it almost always is) activists in different shirts can be portrayed not as 'filling out the bodies' but as 'a broad-based grassroots coalition of community groups.' So the SEIU shoveled millions of dollars out the door to ACORN successor groups, among them New York Communities for Change (NYCC), Chicago's Action Now, Missourians Organized for Reform and Empowerment, Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, and the Black Institute, run by former ACORN head Bertha Lewis, to ensure that the ACORN successors were ready to support a multi-year national campaign.
In Heaven with Bill: When ACORN's successors ruled New York
In 2013, the New York City-based ACORN successors like NYCC and the Black Institute (alongside the campaign consultants at BerlinRosen) helped put a very good friend in that city's mayoral office: then-Public Advocate Bill de Blasio. The "Mayor from ACORN" invited former ACORN head Lewis to his victory stage to celebrate his securing the Democratic nomination, and reporting noted that de Blasio had worked closely with ACORN as a city and federal housing official.
De Blasio was also closely allied with labor unions, especially the 1199SEIU division of the SEIU. Not surprisingly, the union-tied mayor was intimately involved with the union-tied formerly-ACORN activist network.
Lessons
The ACORN successors continue their work, and continue morphing into the street-level grunts of whatever campaigns the radical left are conducting at any given time. They participated in the "summer of love" in 2020; through the ACORN-linked (but not lineally descended) Working Families Party, they helped bring socialist New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani (D) to power.
As Arabella Advisors goes to meet its reward and breaks into the Sunflower Services and Vital Impact networks, the lessons of ACORN are clear. The end of a network does not mean the end of its work--and Capital Research Center's work watching these networks does not end with their deaths.
* * *
Michael Watson
Michael is Research Director for Capital Research Center and serves as the managing editor for InfluenceWatch.
* * *
Original text here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/where-do-leftist-networks-go-when-they-die/
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues Commentary: U.S. Army and a Second Manhattan Project for AI
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
The U.S. Army and a Second Manhattan Project for AI
By Jake S. Kwon and Benjamin Jensen
In the near future, the U.S. Army can once again become the nation's prime integrator of science and defense innovation--just as it did in World War II with the original Manhattan Project. While the scientists provided the breakthroughs, it was the Army--through the Corps of Engineers, military police, signal corps, logistics, and counterintelligence units--that built the secret
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
The U.S. Army and a Second Manhattan Project for AI
By Jake S. Kwon and Benjamin Jensen
In the near future, the U.S. Army can once again become the nation's prime integrator of science and defense innovation--just as it did in World War II with the original Manhattan Project. While the scientists provided the breakthroughs, it was the Army--through the Corps of Engineers, military police, signal corps, logistics, and counterintelligence units--that built the secretcities, secured the facilities, and set the conditions for those breakthroughs to flourish. In short, the Army played a key enabling role that created and secured the space in which scientific talent could build the atomic bomb. Land power is more than just controlling terrain--it is about setting conditions for follow-on actions, from scientific breakthroughs to major joint offensive campaigns, that change the world.
What Would a Second Manhattan Project Look Like?
Today, a growing chorus of voices in government and industry is calling for a "second Manhattan Project"--this time focused on ensuring U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence. In November 2024, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission recommended a Manhattan Project-style initiative to win the long-term technological competition with China, emphasizing a centralized, state-led effort that coordinates private sector initiatives. The idea is to mobilize public and private talent around AI infrastructure, just as the original Manhattan Project unified the atomic effort. These calls were echoed by Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Chris Wright in July 2025 to include linking the need for a nuclear renaissance to power the initiative.
Meanwhile, industry is sprinting. xAI, for example, is building out gigawatt-scale power and massive datacenters around Memphis to power training clusters measured in the hundreds of thousands of graphics processing units (GPUs)--an emblem of how control of compute and energy is becoming a strategic terrain in its own right. Multiple agencies--along with private sector bodies and companies--see the need for a concerted effort that links the science of AI to infrastructure investments and multiyear contracts for leading AI companies backed by the U.S. government. Both proponents and critics see the race for AI leadership as the defining battle of the twenty-first century.
There are also innovative calls to use private equity-style vehicles to finance modernizing Army capabilities and infrastructure. During the recent Association of the United States Army Annual Meeting and Exposition, the Secretary of the Army announced Project FUZE, a new initiative to accelerate Army modernization and search beyond traditional defense acquisition routes. Additional modernization proposals include transforming bases to support public-private datacenters and their supporting energy infrastructure--required to power an AI future--and critical mineral refineries. The deals would turn otherwise idle land into productive capital while building the networks required to generate algorithmic combat power.
The Army and the First Manhattan Project
Under General Leslie Groves, the Manhattan Engineer District administered the design, construction, and operation of the projects infrastructure--effectively standing up entire cities at Oak Ridge, Hanford, and Los Alamos in under two years. The Corps of Engineers synchronized land acquisition, industrial contracting, power and water, and compartmented facilities under tight secrecy. These efforts were not limited to construction. They also included concerted efforts to build new networks connecting the sites including communications relays and roads that supported an army of scientists.
These activities--often called combat support and combat service support--illustrate how to think about land power. More than pitched infantry battles, land power is the process of changing the environment and setting conditions for moving forces and generating effects. In the case of the Manhattan Project, the "effect" was building the infrastructure and support system required for thousands of scientists to focus on solving basic and applied research programs.
The paramount need for secrecy surrounded these efforts. The Army G-2 assigned Major John Lansdale Jr. as the project's counterintelligence lead. Landsdale built an extensive array of overt physical security and quasi-clandestine countersurveillance networks that monitored each site and cleared workers. These efforts were run out of the Protective Security Section that coordinated with the FBI and focused on personnel, plant, and information security. These activities illustrate the often overlooked role of defensive intelligence operations. The Army doesn't just secure key terrain physically, it denies further infiltration from a mix of human and technical intelligence.
The Army and a Second Manhattan Project
Just like in the original Manhattan project, there is a massive infrastructure component to the AI race. Unlike the secluded labs of the World War II, the current technology race relies on known math and model architectures, with innovation in refinement (i.e., data, weights, optimization), access to chips, scalability, and fit-for-purpose model applications. Even if a new approach to generative AI emerges, these characteristics are unlikely to change and require a larger network of firms more than they do secluded cloisters of scientists.
The terrain is different. As a result, securing that terrain and setting conditions for ushering in rapid increases in AI performance look different.
First, there will be a need for building and protecting critical infrastructure. While much of this will be commercial, the Army can support these effort through accelerating contracting and even mobilizing Army Reserve and National Guard units for short surges. This surge capability could be used to augment the construction of datacenters and energy projects that support national AI capacity. In fact, some of the sites--including Oak Ridge--that DOE sees as important to new AI datacenters were key hubs in the original Manhattan Project.
Second, this effort would also have to focus on site security, but with a twist. Unlike Major Lansdale's Protective Security Service, the Army would need to link together new teams that combine counterintelligence agents and analysts, signals intelligence analysts, information warfare specialists, data scientists (i.e., operations researchers), and cyber protection teams. These teams would provide the type of cross-functional expertise required to help industry understand how modern adversaries seek to infiltrate and exploit critical infrastructure. Additionally, the cross-functional teams would maintain the precarious balance between upholding operations security while managing adversary perceptions to avoid accelerating an AI arms race. That would require working through entities like Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) alongside the FBI and key agencies like the Departments of Commerce and Energy as well as the Intelligence community while preserving key protections granted to U.S. persons under Executive Order 12333 and Department of Defense Directive 5240.01.
Third, the Army has an opportunity to accelerate commercial adoption by both supporting the construction and security of infrastructure, and training the next generation workforce. There is a deep history of the Army building critical transportation infrastructure and later having soldiers lead businesses linked to it, expanding economic opportunity. The Army Corps of Engineers took a leading role designing and building major early U.S. transportation networks including the Chesapeake Bay, Delaware Canal, and C&O Canal, and later critical infrastructure that changed global trade, including the Panama Canal. For much of the nineteenth century, West Point graduates were critical to the development of U.S railroads. The Army can revive this history by accelerating AI training and certification in its ranks while also building the critical skills required to build datacenters and energy plants. The AI economy will need people who can adapt AI models to reimagine work as well as operate heavy equipment, weld, and wire buildings.
In parallel, the Army should become the first joint force organization to field AI at scale, visibly. This effort should include institutionalizing agentic workflows in fires, sustainment, protection, and even military planning. This effort will require the Army to invest in benchmarking and uplift modeling. Benchmarking involves identifying general model tendency and bias to support refining them for highly contextual activities like warfighting. Uplift modeling compares how users complete tasks with AI, helping identify better optimization. Both are required to achieve better performance. The Army cannot just buy its way into the AI future without making significant investments in improving a legacy model of training and professional military education.
Conclusion: Start Now
The time to change is now, and it must involve a mix of innovation at the edge alongside large investments. It must build on existing efforts, like a recent AI tabletop exercise with industry leaders attended by one of the authors. A Second Manhattan Project for AI will not hinge on a single breakthrough or a solitary lab. It will be decided by whether the United States can build and secure the enabling conditions--compute, energy, networks, data integrity, and a trained workforce--and translate them into repeatable operational advantage. That is a quintessentially Army problem to solve: Just as the service once turned dispersed scientific effort into a disciplined enterprise, it can now integrate a diverse AI ecosystem into doctrine, training, and combat power. Nationally, that means helping accelerate the build-out of datacenters and resilient energy, expanding Guard and Reserve engineering and cyber protection capacity, and partnering with the DOE, DHS and CISA, FBI, and industry to defend the AI supply chain. Internally, it means fielding agentic workflows at echelon, institutionalizing benchmarking and uplift modeling, weaving AI literacy through professional military education and unit training, and also growing innovation centers on installations to help soldiers upskill in AI so gains are measurable, repeatable, and accountable.
If the last Manhattan Project proved that land power can create the physical and security conditions for science to change the war, the next one must show that land power can create the computational and organizational conditions for AI to change the force--ethically, securely, and at speed. Do that, and the Army won't just keep pace with the AI age; it will set the standard for how a democracy mobilizes technology into credible deterrence and decisive advantage.
* * *
Major General Jake S. Kwon is the director of strategic operations in the Headquarters, Department of the Army G-3/5/7. Benjamin Jensen is the director of the Futures Lab and a senior fellow for the Defense and Security Department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-army-and-second-manhattan-project-ai
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues Commentary: Mogami - Advancing Australia-Japan Defense Cooperation
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
The Mogami: Advancing Australia-Japan Defense Cooperation
By Moyuru Tanaka
In August 2025, the Australian government announced its selection of the upgraded Japanese Mogami-class frigate as its new general-purpose frigate. Just one month later, on September 5, 2025, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Richard Marles met with Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani in Tokyo for the 12th Japan-Australia 2+2 Ministerial Consultations. Later that day, they observed
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
The Mogami: Advancing Australia-Japan Defense Cooperation
By Moyuru Tanaka
In August 2025, the Australian government announced its selection of the upgraded Japanese Mogami-class frigate as its new general-purpose frigate. Just one month later, on September 5, 2025, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Richard Marles met with Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani in Tokyo for the 12th Japan-Australia 2+2 Ministerial Consultations. Later that day, they observedthe Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) frigate JS Mikuma, which is the fourth vessel of the Mogami-class frigate.
This development in shipbuilding cooperation between Australia and Japan will boost Australia's naval capabilities, enhance interoperability between the two countries, reinforce deterrence against China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific, strengthen Australia's shipbuilding industrial base, and deepen supply chain cooperation between Australia and Japan.
During the consultations, the ministers also recognized that strengthening cooperation with the United States, a key ally for both nations, is critical to realizing their shared objectives. The Australia-Japan naval shipbuilding partnership also presents opportunities to strengthen trilateral cooperation and symbolizes the broader significance of cooperation among U.S. allies to secure peace and stability in the region.
Aligning Security Strategies
Japan's 2022 National Defense Strategy identified Australia as its closest security partner second only to the United States, under the framework of the "Special Strategic Partnership". Australia's 2024 National Defence Strategy stated that the alliance with the United States is fundamental to national security, and that Japan is an indispensable partner for achieving regional peace and prosperity. Both countries view their alliances with the United Sates as a key pillar of their security policies.
Prior to 2014, Japan had effectively prohibited defense exports for decades. However, in response to an increasingly severe security environment, it established the Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology that year. Despite this policy shift, Japan lost to France in the bid for Australia's submarine program in 2016 and has made little progress since then, aside from a 2020 agreement to transfer air surveillance radars to the Philippines. The transfer of upgraded Mogami-class frigates to Australia, alongside the recently announced joint development of next-generation fighter aircraft with Italy and the United Kingdom, marks a significant step forward in Japan's defense export policy and its defense cooperation with allies and partners.
Australia-Japan defense ties date back to the 2003 Memorandum on Defence Exchange. Since then, both countries have steadily cultivated a foundation for joint activities through a series of key agreements, including the 2007 Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation, the 2013 Agreement Concerning Reciprocal Provision of Supplies and Services, the 2013 Agreement on the Security of Information, the 2014 Agreement Concerning the Transfer of Defence Equipment and Technology, and the 2023 Agreement Concerning the Facilitation of Reciprocal Access and Cooperation.
Building on that foundation, both countries are steadily making practical progress through bilateral and multilateral exercises such as Nichi-Gou Trident, Talisman Sabre, and Orient Shield, as well as through the mutual exchange of liaison officers between the Australian Defence Force Headquarters Joint Operations Command and the Japan Self-Defense Forces Joint Operations Command.
Why the Mogami Was Selected
Australia is increasingly concerned about China's coercive activities in the Indo-Pacific and its expansion of influence and presence in the Pacific Island nations. For example, in November 2023, the Chinese navy used sonar pulses against Australian divers in international waters off Japan, injuring them. In June 2024, Chinese coast guard vessels fired water cannons and blocked an Armed Forces of the Philippines resupply mission in the South China Sea, severely injuring a Philippine sailor. In February 2025, the Chinese navy conducted live-fire exercises in the Tasman Sea without adequate notification, prompting passenger planes to change course mid-flight. In April 2025, China launched large-scale military drills around Taiwan, simulating attacks and maritime blockades.
In response to the intensifying security environment, Australia's 2023 Defence Strategic Review concluded that the Australian Defence Force's current force structure is not fit for purpose. It emphasized the need for an enhanced lethality surface combatant fleet and recommended an independent analysis to assess its size, structure, and composition. That analysis, released in February 2024, recommended that the government accelerate the acquisition of 11 general-purpose frigates to replace the aging Anzac-class frigates, with capabilities to secure maritime trade routes, defend the northern approaches, and escort military assets, using a hybrid offshore-then-onshore build strategy. In November 2024, the Australian government announced that the first three ships would be constructed offshore, with the remainder to be built domestically in Australia once production capacity at the Henderson precinct is ready.
The Australian defence minister emphasized that the decision was entirely based on capability. The upgraded Mogami-class frigate selected by Australia offers the following key features:
* Long-Range Navigation Capability: The Mogami provides a range of up to 10,000 nautical miles and a top speed exceeding 30 knots, enabled by its powerful and efficient propulsion system. This supports Royal Australian Navy (RAN) sea lane defense operations, contributing to securing maritime trade routes.
* Missile Strike Capability: The Mogami is equipped with a 32-cell Vertical Launch System, four times as many cells as the eight on the RAN's current Anzac-class frigate, for surface-to-air missiles such as the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile, and also carries anti-ship missiles. This can enhance the RAN's deterrence posture and supports its strategy of denial in the northern approaches.
* Interoperability with U.S. Forces: The Mogami is highly interoperable with U.S. systems. Both Australia and Japan prioritize interoperability with U.S. forces and employ many U.S.-made weapons. This commonality would further strengthen their ability to operate seamlessly alongside U.S. forces.
* Manpower Efficiency: The Mogami offers manpower-saving operations through its Combat Information Center, which consolidates information control functions using advanced automation technologies. Consequently, it can be operated by only 90 crew members, half the approximately 180 required to operate the RAN's existing Anzac-class frigate. This would significantly ease the RAN's workforce challenges, which are the most severe among the three services.
* Rapid Construction and On-Time Delivery: Australia's Hunter-class frigate program has faced cost overruns and delivery delays due to repeated specification changes. In contrast, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), the shipbuilder of the Mogami, has a 35-year record of on-time delivery to the JMSDF, thanks to its swift and efficient construction methods and scheduling. To reduce program risk, the Australian version will have minimal changes. As a result, the first Australian Mogami is scheduled for delivery in 2029, with operational deployment targeted for 2030.
Strengthening the Shipbuilding Industrial Base
The analysis released by the Australian government also emphasized the need to support Australia's continuous naval shipbuilding and sustainment industry. The government has stated that it will invest tens of billions of dollars in defense capabilities in Western Australia over the next two decades, creating approximately 10,000 well-paid, high-skilled jobs. However, Australia's 2024 Defence Industry Development Strategy highlights a shortage of skilled engineers, making workforce development an urgent priority for rapid ship construction.
To address the workforce shortage, the offshore production phase in Japan is essential. MHI could host Australian engineers at its shipyard, providing technical training, such as welding skills, and sharing advanced shipbuilding technologies, including digital engineering. Australian engineers could further develop their skills by working alongside Japanese engineers during ship construction.
A naval ship comprises not only a hull but also numerous onboard systems, including radars, antennas, sonars, sensors, and information processing systems. This means that in addition to MHI, which is the prime shipbuilder for the hull, many Japanese onboard systems companies, such as Mitsubishi Electric, NEC, Hitachi, Fujitsu, and Oki Electric Industry, are involved in the construction of Australian Mogami. For Australian engineers, working with such Japanese industries on system installation would also help them gain and enhance technical skills, facilitating technology transfer to Australia.
During the offshore production phase, Australia could simultaneously advance its own engineer training and infrastructure development at Henderson Shipyard to prepare for the onshore production of the remaining ships. This hybrid offshore-onshore approach would help accelerate the construction of all 11 frigates and the development of Australia's shipbuilding industrial base.
The Mogami has a projected service life of 40 years. To sustain the long-term operational readiness of the fleet over that period, maintenance and repair capabilities are just as critical as initial construction. Operating common platforms and systems between Australia and Japan could facilitate the shared use and production of spare parts in both countries, thereby supporting long-term sustainability. This would also strengthen supply chain cooperation and aligns with the Pentagon's Partnership for Indo-Pacific Industrial Resilience initiative, which encourages allies and partners to create a trusted ecosystem of technical cooperation, supply chain resilience, and co-production and co-sustainment collaboration.
U.S.-Australia-Japan Trilateral Collaboration
The U.S. shipbuilding sector faces similar hurdles, including skilled workforce shortages. The construction of the Australian Mogami could offer valuable lessons in engineer training and the adoption of new technologies, supporting efforts to rebuild the U.S. maritime industrial base, as advocated in the executive order Restoring America's Maritime Dominance.
Importantly, the United States is a key partner in the construction of the Australian Mogami. As noted above, Australia and Japan prioritize interoperability with U.S. forces. Given Australia's plan to adopt the upgraded Mogami design with minimal specification changes, the Australian version is likewise expected to incorporate many U.S. systems. This presents significant economic opportunities for the U.S. defense industry. Australia and Japan should maintain close coordination with the United States to ensure the timely delivery of these systems.
Enhanced trilateral interoperability will lead to more effective and efficient naval operations among the three countries. For example, it will facilitate the implementation of the new trilateral terms of reference on maritime logistics, signed by the three navies in July 2025. This arrangement includes missile reloading and flexible refueling, enabling faster naval responses in the event of a crisis in the Indo-Pacific.
Conclusion
The security environment in the Indo-Pacific region is deteriorating rapidly as China seeks to shift the regional balance of power in its favor. The challenges posed by Chinese coercion cannot be addressed by any single nation.
The construction of the Australian Mogami through Australia-Japan cooperation stands as a strong example of defense and industrial collaboration among regional partners. It will enhance Australia's naval capabilities, improve interoperability between the two countries, deliver economic and strategic benefits to Australia, Japan, and the United States, and potentially strengthen trilateral shipbuilding and maintenance bases as well as supply chain resilience in the region.
Moreover, a recent media report stated that New Zealand has also expressed interest in the upgraded Mogami, and the Japanese and New Zealand defense ministers have agreed to maintain close communication regarding a possible frigate deal. Members of the U.S. alliance and partner network should continue to strengthen and expand defense cooperation to reinforce integrated deterrence and ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific.
* * *
Moyuru Tanaka is a visiting fellow with the Japan Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., from the Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics Agency (ATLA) in Japan's Ministry of Defense.
The views expressed herein are solely the author's and do not represent the views of Japan's Ministry of Defense, nor the government of Japan.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/mogami-advancing-australia-japan-defense-cooperation
[Category: ThinkTank]
AFPI, Benny Johnson Launch 'Make Housing Great Again' Initiative
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
AFPI, Benny Johnson Launch 'Make Housing Great Again' Initiative
New Partnership Aims to Restore the American Dream for Young Americans
The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) today announced "Restoring the American Dream: Make Housing Great Again," a national initiative led by Benny Johnson, an award-winning media personality and host of "The Benny Show", which has garnered more than 5 billion views worldwide.
Under Johnson's leadership, the initiative will focus on improving
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release on Nov. 21, 2025:
* * *
AFPI, Benny Johnson Launch 'Make Housing Great Again' Initiative
New Partnership Aims to Restore the American Dream for Young Americans
The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) today announced "Restoring the American Dream: Make Housing Great Again," a national initiative led by Benny Johnson, an award-winning media personality and host of "The Benny Show", which has garnered more than 5 billion views worldwide.
Under Johnson's leadership, the initiative will focus on improvingthe lives of young Americans by working to make homeownership and family life accessible and affordable once more.
For generations, strong families, homeownership, and economic stability have defined the American Dream. However, recent polling shows that most Americans, especially Gen Z and Millennials, believe that they will never be able to own a home or afford to build a stable family.
This new initiative aims to reverse these trends with bold, pro-family, pro-growth policies. As national spokesperson, Johnson will bring a powerful voice to the partnership by engaging Americans who feel forgotten.
"Homes are too expensive and totally out of reach for young people. The slow death of the American Dream is happening before our eyes. It is a generational betrayal and we must reverse this trend by Making Housing Great Again," said Johnson. "Today, the average homebuyer in America is 40 years old. That is well past the optimal age for marriage and family creation. The battle for home ownership is a battle for our cultural and civilizational survival. We need more young people to get married and start families and that cannot happen without a culture of homeownership. We must deliver on this promise for our young people. The American Dream hangs in the balance."
"Rising costs, stagnant wages, regulatory burdens, and a culture that too often diminishes traditional aspirations have left millions feeling directionless and forgotten," added Greg Sindelar, AFPI's Interim President and CEO. "AFPI is committed to reversing this trend by advancing meaningful, actionable policy solutions rooted in the principles of the America First movement."
"A home is where families grow strong and the American Dream comes alive," said Ashley Hayek, AFPI's Executive Vice President and Co-Chair of the Initiative. "Young Americans have been told they can't build a future, but under President Trump's leadership and America First policies, anything is possible again. As a mom, I refuse the Left's defeatist narrative and with partners like Benny Johnson, we're fighting to restore hope, opportunity, and a future our kids can believe in."
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/afpi-benny-johnson-launch-make-housing-great-again-initiative
[Category: ThinkTank]
