View this post on the web at [link removed]

At Politico, Garrett M. Graff [ [link removed] ]reported [ [link removed] ] on the Pentagon’s growing reliance on artificial intelligence to manage nuclear command and control systems, raising concerns about automation in high-stakes military decisions in what one observer called an AI “doomsday machine.”
The article detailed how AI tools were increasingly used to analyze satellite imagery, detect missile launches, and simulate battlefield scenarios. While officials claimed these systems enhanced speed and accuracy, critics warned of risks including false positives, escalation, and loss of human oversight.
The piece traced historical parallels to Cold War-era near-misses and emphasized the ethical dilemmas of delegating life-or-death decisions to machines. Graff highlighted internal debates within the Department of Defense and among defense contractors, noting that some experts feared AI could compress decision timelines to dangerous extremes.
The Pentagon maintained that humans would remain “in the loop,” but the article underscored how rapidly evolving technology might challenge that assurance. The report concluded that the fusion of AI and nuclear strategy could redefine global security norms — and potentially destabilize them.
If You Read One More Thing: Why Can’t the US Change its Gaza Policy?
For The New Republic, Jonathan Guyer [ [link removed] ]argued [ [link removed] ] that US policy on Gaza had become a bipartisan failure, enabling Israeli military aggression while undermining American strategic interests.
Despite a brief ceasefire brokered jointly by Biden and Trump advisers in January, conditions in Gaza worsened, with widespread famine and over 250 starvation deaths by mid-August. Israel’s killing of journalist Anas al-Sharif in an airstrike symbolized the collapse of hope.
Guyer reported that both administrations continued supplying weapons and diplomatic cover to Israel, even as global allies distanced themselves and accused Israel of war crimes. The article covered growing domestic dissent, with progressive Democrats like Zohran Mamdani gaining traction by opposing US support for the war.
Guyer warned that America’s stance jeopardized its credibility, strained relations with Arab nations, and depleted missile defense resources.
Negotiations over Nagorno-Karabakh Neglect Accountability
Samuel Gardner [ [link removed] ]reported [ [link removed] ] for Drop Site News that negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh reignited debates on displacement and the right of return.
The article examined how thousands of ethnic Armenians, previously forced to flee following a war in 2023, remained barred from returning under Azerbaijan’s tightened control.
Gardner focused on the geopolitical stakes, noting Russia’s waning influence and Turkey’s growing role in the region. He also explored how President Trump’s comments — framing the conflict as a “border misunderstanding” — sparked backlash from human rights advocates.
The piece underscored the humanitarian toll, with displaced families facing deteriorating conditions and limited international support.
Deep Dive: Pentagon’s Replicator Initiative Raises Questions
In August 2025, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) published a [ [link removed] ]detailed analysis [ [link removed] ] of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) Replicator Initiative, a high-profile effort to rapidly field thousands of autonomous systems across multiple domains. The report explored the initiative’s strategic ambitions, technological challenges, and congressional oversight concerns, framing Replicator as both a response to Chinese military mass and a test case for future defense innovation.
Launched in August 2023 by former Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks, Replicator aimed to “help [the United States] overcome [the Chinese military’s] advantage in mass: more ships, more missiles, more forces.” It hoped to do this using attritable, or expendable, autonomous systems — low-cost platforms designed to be lost in combat. The initiative was managed by the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), which coordinated with combatant commands and acquisition offices to identify and deploy systems within a two-year timeline.
The first phase, Replicator 1, focused on all-domain attritable autonomy (ADA2), including aerial drones, ground robots, maritime platforms, and space-based systems. According to the report, Replicator 1 seeks “to field thousands uncrewed systems by August 2025.” The second phase, Replicator 2, announced in 2024, targeted counter-small unmanned aerial systems (C-sUAS), reflecting lessons learned from Ukraine’s battlefield use of drones.
CRS noted that Replicator was not a traditional acquisition program but rather a program designed to accelerate fielding through existing authorities and commercial partnerships. Selected systems included AeroVironment’s Switchblade 600, Anduril’s Altius-600 and Ghost-X, and Performance Drone Works’ C-100. The report also mentioned seven unnamed software vendors tasked with enabling swarming, autonomous navigation, and dynamic threat response.
Despite its ambitious goals, the initiative faced scrutiny over transparency and strategic coherence. CRS observed that “[l]ittle information is available publicly about Replicator’s potential total cost and the impact that funding requirements for Replicator could have on funding for other DOD programs.” This makes it difficult for Congress to assess progress or allocate resources. The report emphasized that oversight was complicated by operational security concerns and the classified nature of many program details.
One of the central tensions identified in the report was the balance between speed and accountability. While DIU and senior defense officials touted Replicator’s rapid timelines, CRS warned that accelerated fielding may pose risks to system reliability, interoperability, and long-term sustainment. The report also questioned whether Replicator’s focus on attritable systems aligned with broader force structure and deterrence strategies.
The initiative’s reliance on commercial vendors raised additional concerns. CRS noted that “Replicator’s emphasis on commercial solutions may challenge traditional defense industrial base dynamics,” potentially sidelining established contractors and complicating integration with legacy systems. The report called for further analysis of intellectual property rights, cybersecurity standards, and lifecycle costs associated with these platforms.
Congressional interest in Replicator had grown steadily since its launch, with lawmakers seeking clarity on funding sources, operational metrics, and strategic objectives. CRS recommended that Congress consider several oversight mechanisms, including mandated reporting requirements, independent assessments, and hearings with DIU leadership. The report stated, “Congress has the option, as part of its action on annual DOD budget requests, to legislate reporting requirements for the Replicator initiative or direct the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review and evaluate DOD’s Replicator activities.”
Ultimately, the CRS report portrayed Replicator as a bold but uncertain experiment in defense innovation. It acknowledged the initiative’s potential to reshape military operations and acquisition practices but underscored the need for rigorous oversight and strategic alignment. “Replicator represents a significant departure from traditional DOD acquisition models,” the report concluded, “and its success may hinge on the department’s ability to balance speed, transparency, and long-term viability.”
As the August 2025 deadline for Replicator 1 approached, lawmakers and defense analysts continued to debate whether the initiative would deliver on its promise — or serve as a cautionary tale in the era of autonomous warfare.
Show Us the Receipts
Hanan Zaffar [ [link removed] ]reported [ [link removed] ] for Inkstick on Indian authorities in Kashmir banning 25 books, including journalist Anuradha Bhasin’s A Dismantled State, citing “secessionism” and “false narratives.” The crackdown has drawn sharp criticism from rights groups and scholars who warned of escalating censorship. Police have raided bookstores and homes, seizing titles by prominent authors like Arundhati Roy. Critics argued the move extended repression from journalism to literature, deepening fear and self-censorship in the region. The ban coincided with a state-sponsored book festival, highlighting what observers called a political paradox.
In July 2025, Russia sought to replace Wagner mercenaries in the Central African Republic (CAR) with Africa Corps, a paramilitary unit under direct Kremlin control, Dan M. Ford [ [link removed] ]wrote for Inkstick [ [link removed] ]. The Kremlin hoped to exert more control over Wagner, but CAR officials resisted the shift, citing Wagner’s operational dominance and established ties. The Kremlin demanded cash payments for Africa Corps services, straining CAR’s limited budget. Since 2017, Wagner has secured government officials and suppressed dissent, notably during the 2023 constitutional referendum. Following Yevgeny Prigozhin’s failed coup and death, Moscow moved to consolidate control over its foreign security operations. The transition reflected Russia’s broader strategy to recalibrate its African footprint amid growing instability and financial constraints.
At The World, Adeline Sire [ [link removed] ]reported [ [link removed] ] that new visa restrictions imposed by the Trump administration could cost the US economy $7 billion and eliminate 60,000 jobs. According to NAFSA CEO Fanta Aw, delays in visa interviews and increased vetting — especially for students from India and China — disrupted fall enrollment, threatening higher education and local economies. International students, who contribute some $44 billion annually, faced barriers that prompted many to seek education in Europe and Asia. Aw warned of a long-term “brain drain” and loss of STEM talent, emphasizing that these students not only fuel innovation but also subsidize American education without receiving federal aid.
Call for US Pitches
Inkstick is on the lookout for pitches from the US. We’re especially interested in reported features and personal essays that examine issues like the weapons industry, the increasing militarization on the border and within the country, domestic extremism, and the people in power pushing for more wars abroad.
Critical State is written by Inkstick Media in collaboration with The World.
The World is a weekday public radio show and podcast on global issues, news, and insights from PRX and GBH.
With an online magazine and podcast featuring a diversity of expert voices, Inkstick Media is “foreign policy for the rest of us.”
Critical State is made possible in part by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?