Follow us on social

Hurricane response: This is ‘national defense’

Hurricane response: This is ‘national defense’

The federal government is missing sight of real US priorities


Analysis | QiOSK

When it comes to protecting the safety and wellbeing of actual American citizens, the most important branch of the U.S. armed forces is not the Air Force, or the Marines, or even the nuclear deterrent. It is the Army Corps of Engineers. It might almost be said that it is the only really valuable branch of the U.S. Army in this regard, unless one is seriously worried about an armed invasion from Mexico or Canada.

This is the lesson of Hurricane Helene, that at the latest count has killed 215 Americans (a number certain to rise), with hundreds still missing and feared dead. The cost of the damage is estimated at over $160 billion dollars, with some estimates rising to $250 billion. Just as New Orleans has never fully recovered from Hurricane Katrina in 2005, so it seems sadly probable that the southern Appalachians will never fully recover from Hurricane Helene.

When it comes to the priorities of the U.S. security establishment (and to a considerable degree the political and media establishments in general), it is necessary to ask: How many American citizens have the Russian or Chinese states killed over the past generation? Have they killed anybody in the United States itself? How much physical damage have they done to the United States? Indeed, how much physical damage could they do, short of nuclear war? How much do they even want to do?

On Friday October 4, with at least 600 Americans feared dead and not yet located, and many towns still cut off from the outside world, the crisis in the southern Appalachians — unlike the crisis in the Middle East, 6,000 miles from the U.S. — did not even make it onto the front page of the online editions of the New York Times, Washington Post or Wall Street Journal, though it would no doubt have been different if the hurricane had hit Washington or New York.

The official response to the disaster has been correspondingly limited (even compared to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina). More than 6,700 state National Guard from all over the country have been deployed, but 27,000 are stationed abroad to compensate for an overstretched regular military. To date, the Federal Government has devoted just $20 million to Helene’s survivors - less than 0.25 percent of the $8.7 billion in only the latest U.S. military aid package to Israel. The U.S. institutions that are in the frontline of disaster response are grossly underfunded compared to the U.S. armed forces.

The most terrifying thing about the U.S. establishment’s inattention to Helene is that it is almost certainly not just a disaster in herself, but also a harbinger of worse to come. Of course, the direct and specific impact of climate change on this particular hurricane cannot be proved; but the science of the origins of hurricanes in warm seas is entirely clear; and so is the rise in ocean temperatures in recent decades.

On basic principles of risk assessment therefore, U.S. administrations must work on the assumption that hurricanes are going to get worse, and plan accordingly. The implications are frightening, in terms not just of the direct physical effects but the impact on the U.S. insurance industry, and people’s access to insurance. It is being suggested that because most of the damage done by Helene has been due to flooding, many of the people affected will find that their insurance policies will not cover their losses. The federal government will have to compensate them — or not. The results for the U.S. economy and the U.S. deficit should be obvious.

Meanwhile masses of people continue to move to Florida to buy property that in future is likely to be both doomed and uninsurable, and the system appears incapable of checking this lunatic process. One can only congratulate lemmings on their wisdom in not buying property before they throw themselves off cliffs.

Hurricane Helene has caused what may be the most widespread and destructive flooding since the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927. That disaster led to a massive state program of flood control led by the Army Corps of Engineers; one of the greatest engineering efforts in U.S. history, including the Tennessee Valley Authority. It is highly probable that similar efforts — but on an even larger scale -— will be needed in the generations to come. America’s capacity to meet this challenge will be a test of the continued cohesion and effectiveness of the state.

If the establishment continues to prioritize foreign wars over the lives of its own citizens, then it will fail that test.


Members of the Indiana Task Force 1 Search and Rescue team search for a missing woman along the Buck Creek in Lake Tahoma, N.C. on Oct. 2, 2024. Her fiancee was also swept into the flood in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, but was rescued. USA TODAY NETWORK via Reuters Connect

Analysis | QiOSK
Iran
Top image credit: An Iranian man (not pictured) carries a portrait of the former commander of the IRGC Aerospace Forces, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, and participates in a funeral for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, Iranian nuclear scientists, and civilians who are killed in Israeli attacks, in Tehran, Iran, on June 28, 2025, during the Iran-Israel ceasefire. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto VIA REUTERS)

First it was regime change, now they want to break Iran apart

Middle East

Washington’s foreign policy establishment has a dangerous tendency to dismantle nations it deems adversarial. Now, neoconservative think tanks like the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and their fellow travelers in the European Parliament are openly promoting the balkanization of Iran — a reckless strategy that would further destabilize the Middle East, trigger catastrophic humanitarian crises, and provoke fierce resistance from both Iranians and U.S. partners.

As Israel and Iran exchanged blows in mid-June, FDD’s Brenda Shaffer argued that Iran’s multi-ethnic makeup was a vulnerability to be exploited. Shaffer has been a vocal advocate for Azerbaijan in mainstream U.S. media, even as she has consistently failed to disclose her ties to Azerbaijan’s state oil company, SOCAR. For years, she has pushed for Iran’s fragmentation along ethnic lines, akin to the former Yugoslavia’s collapse. She has focused much of that effort on promoting the secession of Iranian Azerbaijan, where Azeris form Iran’s largest non-Persian group.

keep readingShow less
Ratcliffe Gabbard
Top image credit: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe join a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and his intelligence team in the Situation Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025. The White House/Handout via REUTERS

Trump's use and misuse of Iran intel

Middle East

President Donald Trump has twice, within the space of a week, been at odds with U.S. intelligence agencies on issues involving Iran’s nuclear program. In each instance, Trump was pushing his preferred narrative, but the substantive differences in the two cases were in opposite directions.

Before the United States joined Israel’s attack on Iran, Trump dismissed earlier testimony by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, in which she presented the intelligence community’s judgment that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” Questioned about this testimony, Trump said, “she’s wrong.”

keep readingShow less
Mohammad Bin Salman Trump Ayatollah Khomenei
Top photo credit: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (President of the Russian Federation/Wikimedia Commons); U.S. President Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr) and Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei (Wikimedia Commons)

Let's make a deal: Enrichment path that both Iran, US can agree on

Middle East

The recent conflict, a direct confrontation that pitted Iran against Israel and drew in U.S. B-2 bombers, has likely rendered the previous diplomatic playbook for Tehran's nuclear program obsolete.

The zero-sum debates concerning uranium enrichment that once defined that framework now represent an increasingly unworkable approach.

Although a regional nuclear consortium had been previously advanced as a theoretical alternative, the collapse of talks as a result of military action against Iran now positions it as the most compelling path forward for all parties.

Before the war, Iran was already suggesting a joint uranium enrichment facility with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Iranian soil. For Iran, this framework could achieve its primary goal: the preservation of a domestic nuclear program and, crucially, its demand to maintain some enrichment on its own territory. The added benefit is that it embeds Iran within a regional security architecture that provides a buffer against unilateral attack.

For Gulf actors, it offers unprecedented transparency and a degree of control over their rival-turned-friend’s nuclear activities, a far better outcome than a possible covert Iranian breakout. For a Trump administration focused on deals, it offers a tangible, multilateral framework that can be sold as a blueprint for regional stability.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.