Heard at Heritage

In order to win the war against the Islamic State and al-Qaeda, the United States must understand the enemy. Yet the problem of knowing the enemy has never been more acute, and the lack of consensus around this issue has never been more debilitating, for American foreign policy.Without a clear vision of who the U.S. is fighting, the government and military will not be able to distinguish ordinary Muslims from the extraordinary extremists, will be incapable of devising effective strategies for military and political efforts, and will not know which allies can be safe partners and which need to be avoided for being too close to the extremists. While there are many reasons for a lack of understanding the enemy, one of the most important is a deep disagreement about the role that Islam plays in motivating al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.This event will explore the notion that while a marginal version of Islam is the driver of extremism, it is possible to distinguish the jihadi-salafists from the majority of Muslims. A close examination of the jihadi- salafists’ belief system and methodologies will help the U.S. and allied governments formulate strategies to stop their spread. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Much controversy and mystery surrounds the use of special counsels. The term “special counsel” is a derivation of earlier roles, that all had the same goal: Removing the potential for a conflict of interest between the administration and an investigation by appointing an independent individual to conduct the investigation. What was referred to as the “Special Prosecutor” in Nixon’s Watergate era, was replaced by the “Independent Counsel” in the 1980s, and finally the “Special Counsel” of today’s Russia investigation. With the Mueller Investigation well into its second year, now is a good time to review the history and use of this independent investigatory and prosecutorial tool. Are special counsels constitutional? Are there limits to their authority? How should we protect against investigations straying too far from their original scope? Join us for a discussion with three expert panelists, including two former Independent Counsels, as we answer these questions, and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The 2019 Index of U.S. Military Strength is The Heritage Foundation’s fifth annual assessment of the United States Armed Forces’ ability to provide for the common defense. The Index assesses the strength of each of the U.S. military services, the status of the threats we face, and the favorability of the environment in which the U.S. and its allies must be prepared to operate. Since the initial publication of the Index five years ago, the military has struggled in its capacity and readiness for operations—brought about by harmful budget caps, underinvestment in research and development, and decades of sustained engagement in the Middle East. Although the FY2018 and FY2019 defense budgets reflect positive growth for defense, military strength remains far below where it needs to be.Join us for the debut of the 2019 Index of U.S. Military Strength as well as a special discussion from noted national security experts who will discuss where we stand, and what we need to protect our national interests in a world where U.S. military superiority is not assured. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Starting in the 1920s, Harvard University discriminated against Jewish students to limit the number of Jews enrolled at the university, with university president A. Lawrence Lowell saying they would “ruin the college.” Today, Harvard University is limiting the number of Asian American students at the university, according to an internal report commissioned by the university itself as well as a lawsuit filed by Students for Fair Admissions and complaints filed with the U.S. Department of Education by numerous Asian American organizations. Supporters of such bias claim it is needed to ensure “diversity” on campus. Does such discrimination violate federal civil rights law and the Constitution? Does Harvard’s “diversity” goal justify such bias? Discussing this will be a number of distinguished experts on civil rights law and the educational process, introduced and moderated by two senior Heritage scholars. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The concept of human dignity is one of Christianity's best gifts to the world. What would it look like for Christians to reclaim this idea and apply it the way we see ourselves and the world? What would a politics of human dignity look like? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When Ronald Reagan took office in January 1981, the United States and NATO were losing the Cold War. The USSR had superiority in conventional weapons and manpower in Europe and had embarked on a massive program to gain naval preeminence. But Reagan already had a plan to end the Cold War without armed conflict.Reagan led a bipartisan Congress to restore American command of the seas by building the navy back to six hundred major ships and fifteen aircraft carriers. He adopted a bold new strategy to deploy the growing fleet to northern waters around the periphery of the Soviet Union and demonstrate that the NATO fleet could sink Soviet submarines, defeat Soviet bomber and missile forces, and strike aggressively deep into the Soviet homeland if the USSR attacked NATO in Central Europe. New technology in radars, sensors, and electronic warfare made ghosts of American submarines and surface fleets. The United States proved that it could effectively operate carriers and aircraft in the ice and storms of Arctic waters, which no other navy had attempted. The Soviets, suffocated by this naval strategy, were forced to bankrupt their economy trying to keep pace. Shortly thereafter the Berlin Wall fell, and the USSR disbanded. In Oceans Ventured, John Lehman reveals for the untold story of the naval operations that played a major role in winning the Cold War. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us for the release of the report, The Federal Estate Tax, Family Businesses and Jobs, 2018 and Beyond: A Study that Will Define the Death Tax Debate and commentary by policy experts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Constitution refers in several provisions to “citizen[s] of the United States,” but no express definition of that term appears in its text. Addressing this omission, the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees U.S. citizenship to “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”Scholars, such as Claremont Senior Fellow Ed Erler writing for the Heritage Guide to the Constitution, have argued that the original understanding of the term “jurisdiction” refers to an individual’s voluntary political allegiance to the United States. This link forms the social compact that lies at the heart of American constitutionalism.The recurring debate over birthright citizenship tends to overlook the critical requirement of social compact, focusing instead on birth alone. Our distinguished panel will elucidate this lost understanding of the Citizenship Clause and explore the historical and legal context behind the proper conception of republican citizenship. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Modern nations rely on the use of the electrical grid for everything from strategic defense to making coffee in the morning. Without a functioning electrical grid, military action, mass transportation, farming, and even the production and refrigeration of vital medicines would be impossible. Over the last few decades, an increased reliance on electronics and lack of preparedness has left the United States electrical grid vulnerable to disruptions, including from effects of solar weather and electromagnetic pulse (EMP). These events could cause widespread failure of and permanent damage to the U.S. electrical grid and have the potential to devastate U.S. infrastructure, economy, and defense sectors. In response to this growing threat, some have sought to further regulate the grid; however other options must be considered. Join us as we discuss the potential impacts of these events on American infrastructure and population, as well as the critical tasks that should be undertaken to minimize such a threat. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The WTO is front and center in much of the debate over trade policy toward China. There are questions about China’s compliance with the terms of its 2001 accession – a frequent target of government and private sector criticisms. There are charges that the WTO has proven useless in addressing Chinese violations of these terms, or that it is simply not equipped to do so. Some of the most hyperbolic commentary questions whether China should have ever been admitted to the WTO in the first place.What are the facts? How should China’s compliance or non-compliance with its obligations be fairly quantified and characterized? Can the WTO be used to address the areas where its compliance continues to lag? What is the WTO’s track-record in this regard? Might the U.S. make better use of the WTO in the current US-China trade impasse? Are there areas where the WTO can be reformed to better address challenges raised by China’s state-led economic model. Former chief judge of the WTO and two representatives from the American business community will help scope out the path ahead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.