Three new industries can change the world more than we ever thought.

Three new business areas are giving great opportunities. And they are also causing big threats.  Those three things are the privatization of the force, privatization of space, and privatization of internet services. Those three things are the most powerful tools in the world. 

1) Privatization of force. 

There are two types of privatization of the force. The military operative companies. Or so-called war companies. Actors like Blackwater and Wagner group are the most well-known private military contractors. Those companies' operators are working as military instructors. But, those mercenaries are also working in front-line duties. 

The official operation sector of those military operative companies is "security". But they offer highly trained military personnel to give their services to customers.  The risk of those operators is that they can offer their services to people who are working against western values. 

And some military contractors can offer their services to other companies that operate in the military sector. So the U.S. or Western European operators can also train Wagner group operators and share information that is harmful to NATO. 

Private military actors are operators whose operators must not follow protocols. That means the real actors behind some strikes cannot connect with some political and business elite. Things like Mafia can also buy or establish private military actors. 

And actors like the Wagner group have connections to the highest level of the Russian government. The owner of that military actor or mercenary army is Putin's chef. When we talk about actors like the Wagner group, nobody knows what kinds of networks those operators have. 

That kind of business is impossible in Russia without the security service and Vladimir Putin's permission. The weapons that those people need are taken straight from the Russian military. The Wagner group offers Putin change to affect the opposition and his enemies without telling those things to FSB. 

That means people like Vladimir Putin. And some other people are using private military actors' services. The problem is that if somebody wants to break the law, that actor doesn't ask for permission for that thing. 

Another problem is the electronic surveillance and other support equipment. Those private security companies operate. That means the official authorities require permission to see things like surveillance tapes and search the location of the people. 

The private operators can search people's locations. And they don't ask permission for surveillance operations if they want to break the law. That kind of thing offers a very big power to the hands of private operators. 

2) Privatizing space.

The space industry is one of the fasters growing industries in the world. And the private satellites are delivering very sharp information from the ground. 

Private radar satellites are enough high accurate. That they can deliver data about the locations of the Russian convoys in Ukraine. The highly accurate satellites can also deliver information about military bases to private actors. 

The GPS allows operators can locate any cell phone or GPS locator on Earth, sea, or airborne in seconds. The GPS is the key component in worldwide positioning. 

 And that kind of system is a very powerful tool in the military world. And is the key component in the most effective weapons that have ever been created before. 

Things like GPS-guided ammunition is the most effective and accurate tool on the battlefield. The GPS control system can use the same location system created to protect weapons against thieves.  The same GPS that locates the weapon's position can also operate as a guidance unit. 

Of course,  it is possible to use some other ways to give accuracy for the ammunition than GPS. But the problem is that if the GPS is not jammed, the GPS ammunition is superior against other weapons. Aiming that ammunition is faster than manual aiming. And that thing gives them pinpoint accuracy. 

But privatization of space makes it possible that private companies can destroy satellites. The small-size shuttles and satellites are capable to carry weapons that can destroy at least other satellites. And those systems can drop small-diameter bombs or quadcopters from the orbiter.

This makes it possible that those systems can destroy individual vehicles and persons from the ground. In that kind of system, the small-diameter bomb is a miniature glider that falls through the atmosphere. Or the quadcopter that can have a similar heat shield to Mars probes can land through the atmosphere. And those quadcopters can have pistol- or rifle-caliber weapons which makes them possible to assassinate individual people. 

3) Privatization of the net.

Privatization of the net is one of the most dangerous things in the world. The problem with that advancement is that private companies own the most powerful information channel in the world. The internet is the network that benefits both civil and military actors. And both actors can use the same applications and mobile tools for making their work. 

But the accumulation of the Internet and other network operators is dangerous. One of the biggest threats is that anybody in the world can buy stocks of those international companies. And two actors who have money are Russia and Arabs. So what would you think about the situation where the channel or network that offers the news and other information is in the hands of Arabs or Russians? These kinds of things are very concerning. 

We saw in Brexit what western political operators can do with things like Facebook. But what if the entire network would go into the hands of the hostile propaganda machine? That kind of thing is one of the most powerful tools to affect people's opinions. 

Private industry is more effective than governmental actors, especially in the R&D process. 

When we are privatizing something we must realize that private corporations' strength is in the R&D process. Private operators must not care about public opinions. And multinational corporations can transform their R&D process to other countries if some country doesn't accept their way of making business. 

That thing is important in the things like genetic engineering. People sometimes have strong opinions of that industry. And the multinational biotech company can simply take their laboratories to some country where no legislation limits their work. Biotechnology can offer very much to humans. But sometimes people are against that kind of technology. 

We must ask, where do we get food for the entire planet? And when we are thinking about malaria and other kinds of things, we should ask ourselves, do we want those diseases ourselves? 

Or why we don't make vaccines against cancer? Would you want cancer yourself? There is the possibility to create vaccines against things like fentanyl and botulinum. So why we don't create those things? 

Private-owned companies must not ask permission to use money as the governmental actors must do. And that makes them effective actors in the R&D sectors. The problem in the R&D process is that thing is required in the innovation. 

Innovation is an important thing for national security. We saw in Ukraine what happens if the military uses old-fashion technology. Of course, the military can use old-fashion technology. 

But if the new technology works as it should, the result is a very sad thing because old-fashion technology is vulnerable to pinpoint accurate attacks. Large-area ammunition storage can be detonated in seconds even if the small warheads hit them. 

Images: From the top. 

Pinterest

https://www.businessinsider.com/private-military-contractor-industry-reinvents-itself-2013-11?r=US&IR=T

https://www.space.com/dream-chaser-space-plane-tenacity-tour.html

https://www.javatpoint.com/internet

https://www.lockheedmartingear.com/proddetail.asp?prod=LM210014-SW

https://designandinnovationtales.blogspot.com/

30 years from Tiananmen

30 years from Tiananmen


1. What we have learned about this case?

When China transformed its economic system to the "socialistic marketing system", that means that the Chinese government has raised the economic level of the people in China, and that helps to keep society peaceful. And the large population of China would make it a good marketing area, would that cause a very embarrassing situation also in the western nations. If western nations would irritate the Chinese government, that would not allow making products in China.

The silence would tell that somebody shames that thing, what is embarrassing in the eyes of other nations because if the people don't stop to talk about Tiananmen, must western leaders follow the people, and transfer the production to some other countries.  The big economic value of China makes human rights and political system with Tienanmen case somehow difficult topic to talk. Because if the western governments would not respect China, they will not market their products to that area.

2. Violence was unnecessary

And otherwise, if the western nations would make trade contracts with China, that is interpreted as the acceptance of the political and human rights situation in China. But as we know, the good and clean facade helps people to forget things, what happened 30 years ago. There is a one really interesting thing about this case and its the violation against protesters were not necessary.

The weather in the summer in Beijing is really hot, and the protesters would not able to stay in their position in the extreme heat. The thing is that the reputation of the military in China gone, and also in other countries has been talking, that the military forces can be used against own people, and that was removed the shield of those organizations, that they could be used only against foreign enemies. Tiananmen was the case, what made Eastern block nations afraid their governments and caused the situation, where people forced to begin the uprising against the communist nations.

3. China would want the same position, what the Soviet Union had in the cold war era. 

Without hygienic abilities, those people would leave from the place, and after that, the police could arrest them without any attention of the foreign countries. The thing, what makes this case a little bit embarrassing is that it would disturb the trade between China and western nations. China needs co-operation with western companies, that it can get new technology for its military systems.

But there are more problems also in the internal politics of that country. When China released markets it dropped the bottom off from the ideological excuse for the one-party policy, what was argued with communism and Marxism-Leninism. But when the markets opened, the thing what remained was the dictatorship.

4. International law is not controlling the internal affairs of nations. 

The thing is that growing economic situation in China guarantees that the society in that country is peaceful and that releases resources for foreign affairs, like strengthen and modernization of the military forces, what are the really good equipment for strengthening own position in the international field of politics.

The problems with the relationship with western nations are that the rulers of China use those relationships as an argument that the western nations support the one party policy of China. And this kind of things is mentioned as the internal affairs of China. In international law is not mentioned about, what kind of political system is allowed in nations.

5. The foreign technology benefits the military forces of China

That means China has juridical right to be a one-party nation, and there is nothing, what would deny that thing. Tiananmen case is a purely internal affair of China, and that's why there is nothing wrong in that case. So the police acts are internal affairs, and if China would not justify those happenings, that is the own business of that nation.

One of the things is that China has grown the export and also opened new military bases including overseas bases tells that it really want to reach the position, what the Soviet Union had in the past world. And this would make it a stronger actor in the international arena, what people have ever thought. This is a very problematic thing in international politics because every nation has the legal right to defend itself and forward own benefit.