Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

@SpiesVespers: #OTD July 1 2023 #Cuban_spy #Ana_Montes aka #25037-016 released from prison. Said to currently reside in Puerto Rico


#OTD July 1 2023 #Cuban_spy #Ana_Montes aka #25037-016 released from prison. Said to currently reside in Puerto Rico pic.twitter.com/OK9n1zznIW

— SPIES&VESPERS (@SpiesVespers) July 1, 2024


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

Allies and Open Sources: Lessons from Northern Raven, the Largest OSINT Collection Operation in NATO’s History – Modern War Institute


“It’s not my work. It is my existence.”

This simple statement from a Latvian captain participating in the Northern Raven combined collection operation clarified the grave importance he, and many of his fellow analysts from the Baltics, placed on this particular mission. To them, Russia is an existential threat, and the insight this week-long combined open-source intelligence collection operation—the largest in NATO’s history—provided was critical to understanding Russian actions and intentions. Under the auspices of Northern Raven—US Army Europe and Africa’s multinational open-source intelligence (OSINT) program—thirty analysts representing eleven countries had gathered in Finland to collect OSINT, guided by a collection plan developed six months earlier.

While this operation marked the culmination of months of work, its roots stretched back to 2019 when Soldiers from the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater) met with Polish partners in Bydgoszcz, Poland to collect OSINT on Russian cyberattacks. The operation demonstrated the powerful effect partners can achieve when they align their capabilities: the Poles provided linguistic knowledge while the Americans employed data-mining tools to streamline collection. More bilateral exchanges followed with Canadian, Finnish, Croatian, and Romanian partners. By 2023, Northern Raven had expanded to include staff visits as well as training events and seminars in OSINT tradecraft best practices.

Though Northern Raven had grown in number of participants, its members were not collaborating with one another, just with their American partners. The program’s hub-and-spoke structure—with the United States at the center—didn’t encourage communication among other participants. To maximize its effectiveness and leverage partners’ collection strengths, Northern Raven needed to expand its charter. The solution was to provide a common purpose and operationalize the network—to bring everyone under one roof for a combined collection operation that would harness the expertise of all members and incorporate each step of the intelligence cycle: plan and direct, collect, process and exploit, analyze and produce, disseminate, and assess.

Merging the intelligence priorities, collection methods, and analytic techniques of eleven countries required careful planning. In December 2023, the Army Europe Open Source Center (AEOSC)—the OSINT cell of the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater)—hosted partners in Wiesbaden for a working group to define and direct collection requirements. This led to the creation of the first standing Northern Raven collection plan, which set requirements for fiscal year 2024. Rather than attempting during the operation to temporarily synchronize collection efforts designed to address divergent priorities, partners hardwired interoperability into their intelligence activities from the start.

In the months after the working group, partners communicated regularly on the results of their collection. They shared requests for information, refined the collection plan, and uploaded relevant products to the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s Protected Internet eXchange (PIX) website, a secure but unclassified US government-sponsored information dissemination and sharing tool. Such routine collaboration transformed intelligence sharing from ad hoc exchanges—uncoordinated and often reliant on strong personal relationships—to formalized practice. Cooperation was persistent and focused on shared requirements, rather than episodic.

Eleven NATO nations gathered in Riihimäki, Finland in May 2024 for the culminating combined collection operation. Once in Finland, the group divided into five collection teams based on preassigned requirements. Each was structured to reflect a range of skills, nationalities, and collection capabilities. Partners with access to nonstandard tools such as the AI-powered Babel Street Insights platform were placed on different teams while each team was allocated at least one Russian speaker. The fact that most European partners were permitted to use burner phones to create accounts on social media platforms significantly enhanced the group’s ability to provide critical information to commanders. The organizational structure was decidedly flat: participants operated as a constellation of dynamic teams, experimenting and improvising with the best techniques for collection, processing, and exploitation.

For example, when a partner stumbled across a Telegram post by a Ukrainian milblogger that listed towns where Russian forces were alleged to be unloading equipment, he passed the locations to a member of his team currently serving in a cyber defense unit. Using a Python script he developed, the programmer-turned-intel officer was able to extract usernames and photos associated with Telegram accounts in the area. (Several photos featured soldiers posing in uniform, their unit patches clearly visible.) The partner plugged the usernames into other Russian social media platforms to gather more information before passing the photos to another colleague who proceeded to geolocate some of the buildings. After performing additional searches, the partner discovered videos of the same unit in three of the identified locations, corroborating his colleagues’ earlier findings. With this information, the team was able to map the logistical and transit routes taken by units moving toward Kharkiv.

By leveraging partners’ complementary strengths—whether regional knowledge, language ability, or access to specialized tools—Northern Raven created powerful synergies. Months of planning had bred trust and a shared sense of the operation’s overarching purpose. Everyone owned the mission. This made the teams agile and adaptive, able to craft a coordinated response to real-time developments.

Pooling partners’ skill sets and best practices expanded and sharpened the collection and processing of intelligence. It also reinforced the need to better integrate emerging technologies into OSINT operations. Northern Raven presents a unique opportunity to combine these activities: improving interoperability with partners and embracing new technologies to collect and evaluate open-source information. To that end, partners are creating a repository on a software developers’ platform that allows members to create, store, manage, and share their code. This enables partners to exchange tools and technical data, including software, map layers, AI models, and OSINT source lists. Its goals are twofold: to improve efficiency by sharing resources and increase interoperability through the use of common formats for data exchange. The platform could also serve as a test bed for technologies that hold the potential to unlock deeper and wider data-driven insights. By tapping the rich vein of Northern Raven’s growing network, NATO allies can capitalize on existing efforts to develop and adopt new capabilities.

While it is too soon to draw firm conclusions about the impact of Northern Raven’s approach to partner relationships, several initial takeaways emerge. First, it is not enough to set requirements and build collection plans together; to increase buy-in, the United States must empower partners to shape the collection effort in areas of particular importance to their intelligence enterprises. An approach that centers partners in the pursuit of their own priorities—areas where they are likely to possess special expertise—also optimizes collection capabilities, allowing for greater burden-sharing.

Second, partners must build ownership for Northern Raven among their leadership and secure resources. While AEOSC has lent structure and predictability to multinational OSINT—formalizing its processes and programming—long-term success will depend on sustained funding and organizational buy-in. As NATO members establish permanent OSINT organizations within their militaries, Northern Raven can serve as a unifying operation by which all analysts regularly coordinate and communicate, but that will also require programmed, predictable budgets.

Next, from a US Army perspective, Army OSINT must develop a rigorous framework for assessing the effectiveness of Northern Raven’s burgeoning suite of programs. Doing so will require the AEOSC to articulate what it wants to accomplish and identify the causal relationships that link Northern Raven’s activities to those outcomes. The team’s members must continuously ask themselves: What is working, what is not, and how does this achieve commanders’ requirements?

To meet the demands of this comprehensive approach to partner engagement, OSINT teams may also need to create new roles and responsibilities for their soldiers. The AEOSC created a new position, the partner integration lead, responsible for securing PIX and Digital Globe accounts for partners, as well as a dissemination manager to improve the reach—and track the circulation—of multinational products. To mitigate training shortfalls among partners, the AEOSC developed an exportable OSINT course, tailored for both in-person and virtual learning environments, which noncommissioned officers on the team instruct.

These types of activities not only present US soldiers with unique and meaningful opportunities, but also provide a purpose that increases their commitment to Army service. Exposure to new tools and data practices deepens their OSINT tradecraft knowledge while frequent interactions with partners prepare them to operate in culturally diverse coalition environments. Northern Raven also serves as a retention incentive. As one soldier remarked recently, “If I got out of the Army, I wouldn’t be able to call my mom and say, ‘Today I helped Sweden stand up its OSINT shop.’”

In less than a year, Northern Raven has evolved from a series of bilateral engagements into persistent cooperation across the entire intelligence cycle. Northern Raven enhances units’ readiness, preparing soldiers from all nations to write OSINT products that can be quickly released for consumption across the coalition. Training between partners, with real data on real networks, builds OSINT capacity across Europe, bringing us closer to a world in which every ally is a sensor. Finally, Northern Raven’s evolution into a multifaceted program integral to day-to-day operations creates opportunities for professional growth while exposure to partners’ analytic techniques upskills every analyst in the operation.

Though barriers to cooperation remain, relationships are no longer confined to physical engagement. Partners plan, train, and operate as one multinational team. With US and NATO military planning increasingly integrated, the ability to merge national-level processes into a single operation that capitalizes on partner expertise has never been more important. Knowing the enemy through open-source intelligence is not just our work, it is our intelligence team’s central purpose.

Colonel Christina Bembenek is the commander of the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater). She has served in multiple tactical, operational, and strategic intelligence assignments and was the first commandant of the Military Intelligence Corps.

Captain Chels Michta was the former officer in charge of the Army Europe OSINT Center and currently serves as an intelligence officer in the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater) All Source Control Element. She is also a 2023 Atlantic Council Millenium Fellow.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.

Image credit: Staff Sgt. Chad Menegay, US Army


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

Most voters want Biden to step down, but don’t agree on suitable alternative – poll


3256.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=8

A majority of voters want Joe Biden to stand down following his dismal debate performance, yet aren’t convinced there is a suitable alternative Democratic candidate, new polls have found.

In a Morning Consult poll, 60% of respondents, Republicans and Democrats, said the president should be replaced by his party for November’s election, while another 11% were unsure.

But the same poll also found that Biden’s popularity, initially at least, appeared to be unaffected by his stumbles and gaffes during Thursday night’s debate with Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump.

He retained a one-point advantage, 45-44% over Trump, the same margin as Morning Consult found the day after the former president was convicted in May on 34 charges of falsifying business records to try to influence the 2016 election.

Another apparent glimmer of hope for the incumbent came in a separate Data for Progress post-debate poll that found no indication any other Democrat would perform better against Trump in November.

While Biden trails Trump 48-45 among respondents, all other leading Democratic figures would perform the same or worse in a head-to-head match-up. Prominent names that voters were asked about included vice-president Kamala Harris (45-48), transport secretary Pere Buttigieg (44-47), California governor Gavin Newsom (44-47) and Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer (44-46).

A YouGov poll, meanwhile, found respondents overwhelmingly thought Trump won the debate, and that 30% of Democrats believed somebody other than Biden would give the party the best chance of winning in November.

The figure rises to 49% among all US voters, including Republicans and independents. Conversely, only 13% of Republicans believe their party’s best chance of victory would come by nominating somebody other than Trump.

One of the most devastating polls for Biden, however, was a Democracy Corps survey of Democratic-leaning voters, who used words such as “confused”, “frail”, and “dementia” to describe the president’s debate performance, Politico reported.

Voters were surveyed before and after the debate. While 65% said they would vote for Biden before the debate, only 54% said he won the debate once it ended, according to the survey.

Harris, 59, is the obvious choice to replace Biden, if he stands down, and has been the subject of increasing speculation in the days since the debate.

But Biden allies have insisted the president is standing firm and will contest and win the election, despite anguished calls from senior party officials and media heavyweights, including the New York Times, for him to step aside.

According to the Data for Progress poll, most voters consider Biden, who will be 82 at the start of a second term, too old to run again. 53% said they were concerned about his age, and physical and mental health, while 42% said they were more concerned by Trump’s criminal conviction, other upcoming trials and threats to democracy.

A CBS poll released Sunday, recorded in the two days following the debate, appears to echo the findings of the other surveys. It found 72% of registered voters did not believe Biden possessed the mental or cognitive health necessary to be able to fulfil the obligations of office, up from 65% at the beginning of the month.

A breakdown of the Morning Consult poll, meanwhile, shows that almost half of Democrats, 47%, want Biden out of the race, compared to 59% of independents, and 74% of Republicans. The figure among Democrats rises to 50% when limited to those who actually watched the debate.

That poll also suggests there is no clear replacement for Biden. Harris leads the field, but with only 30% support of Democratic voters, with Newsom the only other potential candidate in double figures, at 20%.

Others listed include Buttigieg at 9% and Whitmer at 5%, with a string of other Democratic state governors, Andy Beshear, Roy Cooper, JB Pritzker and Wes Moore at 3% or below.

Since the debate, Newsom has forcefully defended Biden and insisted he will not challenge the president. Harris has also expressed confidence in Biden, stating after the debate that the November presidential election “will not be decided by one night in June”.


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

Top Democrats rule out replacing Biden amid calls for him to quit 2024 race


36DS5YL3YFIUNDNZA2JLM4EDFM.jpg?auth=3928

WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) – Top Democrats on Sunday ruled out the possibility of replacing President Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee after a feeble debate performance and called on party members to focus instead on the consequences of a second Donald Trump presidency.
After days of hand-wringing about Biden’s poor night on stage debating Trump, Democratic leaders firmly rejected calls for their party to choose a younger presidential candidate for the Nov. 5 election.

Biden, 81, meanwhile, was huddling with family members at the Camp David presidential retreat on Sunday.

The New York Times cited people close to the situation as saying that Biden’s family were urging him to stay in the race and keep fighting. The paper said some members of his clan privately expressed exasperation at how his staff prepared him for Thursday night’s event.

A drumbeat of calls for Biden to step aside has continued since Thursday and a post-debate CBS poll showed a 10-point jump in the number of Democrats who believe Biden should not be running for president, to 46% from 36% in February.

“The unfortunate truth is that Biden should withdraw from the race, for the good of the nation he has served so admirably for half a century,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said in an editorial on Sunday. “The shade of retirement is now necessary for President Biden.”

Democratic leaders rejected this.

“Absolutely not,” responded Georgia Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock, one of several Democrats seen as a possible replacement for Biden.

“Bad debates happen,” he told NBC’s Meet the Press program. “The question is, ‘Who has Donald Trump ever shown up for other than himself and people like himself?’ I’m with Joe Biden, and it’s our assignment to make sure that he gets over the finish line come November.”

House of Representatives Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, who could become speaker next year if his party can take control of the House in November, acknowledged that Biden had suffered a setback, but this was “nothing more than a setup for a comeback.”

“So the moment that we’re in right now is a comeback moment,” he told MSNBC.

Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a leading Biden surrogate, told ABC’s This Week program Biden needed to stay in the race to ensure Trump’s defeat.

“I think he’s the only Democrat who can beat Donald Trump,” Coons said.

With Democratic leaders rallying around him, it will be up to Biden to decide whether he wants to end his re-election bid.

But other Democrats held open the possibility of choosing a different presidential candidate.

Representative Jamie Raskin, a prominent Democrat in Congress, told MSNBC that “very honest and serious and rigorous conversations” were taking place within the party.

“Whether he’s the candidate or someone else is the candidate, he’s going to be the keynote speaker at our convention. He will be the figure that we rally around to move forward,” Raskin said.

During the debate, a hoarse-sounding Biden delivered a shaky, halting performance in which he stumbled over his words on several occasions. Some Democrats later said privately that the showing could prove to be a disqualifying factor.

For his part in the debate, Trump made a series of well-worn falsehoods, including claims that migrants have carried out a crime wave, that Democrats support infanticide and that he actually won the 2020 election.

Trump’s daughter-in-law Lara, co-chair of the Republican National Committee, told Fox News that Trump was feeling “great” after “probably the best debate of his political career.”

Biden headed to Camp David after a frenzied run of seven campaign events across four states following the debate.

While the Camp David trip had been planned for months, the timing and circumstances of Biden being surrounded by family members who have weighed heavily in his past decisions to run for the presidency have added to the scrutiny around the visit.

Two people familiar with the scheduling said the gathering would include a family photo shoot. The attendees include his wife Jill, as well as the Biden children and grandchildren.

The New York Times said one of the strongest voices imploring Biden to resist pressure to drop out was his son Hunter, who on June 11 became the first child of a sitting president to be convicted of a felony after a jury found him guilty of lying about illegal drug use when he purchased a handgun in 2018.

DNC Chairman Jaime Harrison and Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez held a Saturday afternoon call with dozens of committee members across the country, a group of some of the most influential members of the party.

The call was part pep talk, part planning meeting for the upcoming national convention, according to two people who were on the call who requested anonymity to discuss private discussions.

Sign up here.

Reporting by David Morgan, Jarret Renshaw, Eric Beech, Tyler Clifford, Ted Hesson and David Brunnstrom; Editing by Ross Colvin, Mark Porter and Don Durfee

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

Behind the Curtain: Biden oligarchy will decide fate


S. President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden wave as they exit the stage during a campaign rally in Raleigh

President Biden and Dr. Jill Biden leave a campaign rally in Raleigh, N.C., on Friday. Photo: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

Forget the pundits. Ignore New York Times editorials and columnists. Tune out people popping off on X.

  • The only way President Biden steps aside, despite his debate debacle, is if the same small group of lifelong loyalists who enabled his run suddenly — and shockingly — decides it’s time for him to call it quits.

Why it matters: Dr. Jill Biden; his younger sister, Valerie Biden; and 85-year-old Ted Kaufman, the president’s longtime friend and constant adviser — plus a small band of White House advisers — are the only Biden deciders.

This decades-long kitchen cabinet operates as an extended family, council of elders and governing oligarchy. These allies alone hold sway over decisions big and small in Biden’s life and presidency.

  • The president engaged in no organized process outside his family in deciding to run for a second term, the N.Y. Times’ Peter Baker reports.
  • Then Biden alone made the decision, people close to him tell us.

Behind the scenes: If Biden stays in, it’s for the same reason he decided to run again: He and the oligarchy believe he has a much better chance of beating former President Trump than Vice President Harris does.

  • Biden allies have played out the scenarios and see little chance of anyone besides Harris winning the nomination if he stepped aside.
  • Is the Democratic Party going to deny the nomination to the first woman, the first Black American, and the first South Asian American to be elected V.P.? Hard to see.
  • These allies privately think Harris would struggle to pull moderate and swing voters, and would enhance Trump’s chances. (Harris “fares only one or two points worse than Biden in polls with margins of sampling error that are much larger than that,” The Washington Post found.)

The intrigue: We’re told Democratic congressional leaders are one outside force that could bring pressure on Biden.

  • They’re getting calls and texts from panicked lawmakers who fear Biden’s weakness could cost the party House and Senate seats in November.

“This is no longer about Joe Biden’s family or his emotions,” said an adviser in constant touch with the West Wing. “This is about our country. It’s an utter f***ing disaster that has to be addressed.”

  • It’ll take a while for the oligarchy to process the stakes, this adviser argued, “but there will be a reckoning.”

Behind the scenes: Biden insiders are already finding it easier than many realized to rationalize staying in. They argue: Yes, he had a poor debate performance. But Biden also can dial up vigorous appearances like he did in Raleigh on Friday afternoon.

  • That behind-the-scenes juxtaposition plays out daily: Sometimes he’s on his game, sharper than people would think, and quicker on his feet.
  • But often it’s the Biden you saw on the debate stage: tired, slow, halting.

Top Democrats saw what America saw live, on national TV, vividly and unforgettably. They can’t unsee it. And they fear voters won’t unsee it.

  • No longer can they blame critics or edited footage or media exaggeration.
  • Every misstep, verbal hiccup or frozen face will zip across social media and TV, reminding voters Biden will be 86 years old at the end of his second term.

“They need to tell him the absolute truth about where he is,” said a well-known Democrat who often talks to the president. “Loyalty doesn’t mean blind loyalty.”

  • “Candidates for House, Senate, governor, state legislature are going to be in survival mode,” the well-known Democrat added. “They’re not going to go down with the ship. And the ship is in a bad place.”

What we’re hearing: Some Biden family members are digging in — squinting at overnight polls for signs that undecided voters moved Biden’s way because of Trump statements at the debate.

  • “They know it was a disaster,” said a source close to the family. “But they think there’s a glimmer of survival/hope.”
  • In a Biden campaign memo, “Independent Voters Move to Biden in Debate,” officials wrote: “Based on research we conducted during [the] debate, it is clear that the more voters heard from Donald Trump, the more they remembered why they dislike him.”

Biden — bolstered by a tweet from former President Obama (“Bad debate nights happen. Trust me, I know”) — sounds like he wants to stick it out.

  • “When you get knocked down, you get back up,” Biden said to applause, reading from a teleprompter during a rally Friday at the North Carolina State Fairgrounds.
  • “Folks, I don’t walk as easy as I used to. I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to. I don’t debate as well as I used to. But … I know how to tell the truth.”

What we’re watching: The public backing of former presidents and current members of Congress says little about Biden’s future.

  • Most know him too well and for too long to humiliate him in public.
  • Instead, if he decides to go, it’ll follow private conversations with them — then a decision with this oligarchy. Remember, it’s under eight weeks until Biden is ratified as the official nominee. That’s the clock to watch.

What they’re saying: James Carville — the “Ragin’ Cajun” who masterminded Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign in 1992, and now is a frequent TV pundit — will be 80 in October. He told us that if he appeared like Biden did during the debate, he’d want to be pulled off the tube.

  • “I never thought this was a nifty idea,” Carville said of Biden’s run. He said there are few people the president really listens to: “He doesn’t have advisers. He has employees.”

When we pressed Carville on whether he thinks Biden will be off the ticket by Election Day, he said he thinks so. He invoked a famous quote by the late economist Herb Stein, which Carville paraphrased as: “That which can’t continue … won’t.”


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

Can Democrats Replace Biden? Here’s What Would Happen If Biden Leaves 2024 Race.


0x0.jpg?format=jpg&height=900&width=1600

President Joe Biden’s shaky performance in Thursday’s debate has prompted calls from some left-wing pundits for him to drop out of the race and allow Democrats to appoint another candidate in his place—an unprecedented scenario that would require Biden loyalists to spurn the president, who has so far said he will continue his campaign.

President Joe Biden looks down as he participates in the first presidential debate of the 2024 … [+] election with former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at CNN’s studios in Atlanta, Georgia, on June 27, 2024. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)

AFP via Getty Images

There’s no official mechanism to kick Biden off the ticket if he doesn’t step down voluntarily, but the delegates who will vote to formally select a nominee at the party’s convention in August could revolt against him and select another candidate in his place.

Biden has swept the primaries, winning nearly 3,900 of the party’s 4,000 “pledged” delegates who will vote to formalize the nominee, and party rules require them to “in good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.”

A revolt is unlikely: Pledged delegates are not legally beholden to voting for Biden, but they’re generally loyalists of the party’s chosen nominee who are elected at state party conventions, in primaries or caucuses with heavy influence from the campaign of the party’s preferred candidate.

If Biden, or any candidate, fails to win a majority of pledged delegates on the first ballot at the convention, voting will continue until somebody wins an outright majority, with pledged delegates free to vote for whoever they want in later ballots.

The 700-some unpledged “superdelegates,” elected officials and party leaders who can vote for anyone they please, will also be allowed to vote on the second ballot (party rules prohibit them from voting on the first ballot).

If Biden voluntarily steps aside before the convention, his pledged delegates would be free to vote for an alternative candidate in an “open convention”—likely setting the stage for intense negotiations as other Democratic politicians angle to replace Biden.

If Biden steps aside after the convention, the Democratic National Committee’s approximately 500 members could call a special meeting to choose a new presidential and vice presidential nominee by majority vote.

The party plans to vote for a nominee before the convention begins on Aug. 19 via virtual roll call to allow Biden to be on the ballot in Ohio, which requires presidential candidates be nominated at least 90 days before the November election (in this case Aug. 7). The party has not announced an official date for the virtual roll call.

Contra

Biden rejected suggestions that he should step aside in speaking to reporters after the debate, answering “no” when asked about the prospect and blaming his poor performance on former President Donald Trump. “It’s hard to debate a liar,” Biden said, before telling supporters in Atlanta in a post-debate speech “let’s keep going.” On Friday, Biden delivered a fiery speech from Raleigh, North Carolina, in which he sounded notably more energetic than he did the previous night and reiterated his plans to keep running, admitting “I don’t debate as well as I used to.”

Any candidate who were to challenge Biden at the convention would need to first select a running mate.

Tangent

Speculation has swirled for months about who could replace Biden as the Democratic nominee amid concerns about the 81-year-old president’s age. Vice President Kamala Harris is the most obvious choice to replace him, though she has an uphill battle in winning over voters given her 39% approval rating. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is another name commonly floated, but he’s repeatedly dismissed the prospects of replacing Biden, voicing his allegiance to the president in interviews after the debate. As of Friday morning, no prominent Democrats had openly called on him to step down and there is no public consensus within the party about who would replace Biden if he did.

Key Background

Biden stammered through Thursday’s debate, losing his train of thought minutes after it began, speaking with a hoarse voice throughout the 90-minute program, and giving incoherent responses to several questions. Abysmal reviews poured in on social media, even from some of Trump’s staunchest critics, and by the end of the debate, Democratic operatives, donors and elected officials were reportedly discussing replacing Biden. By Friday morning, Biden-friendly pundits, including MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” host, Joe Scarborough, and New York Times’ columnist Thomas Friedman were openly suggesting Biden should drop out, predicting that if Democrats don’t replace him now, they’re effectively handing Trump another term.

Morning Joe’s Joe Scarborough Gently Suggests Biden Should Drop Out Amid Dem Freak Out Over Debate Performance (Forbes)

Biden Loses Train Of Thought And Corrects Himself Repeatedly In Debate With Trump (Forbes)

Biden’s Debate Performance Torched—Even By Trump Foes—Over Weak Voice And Verbal Stumbles: ‘Hard To Watch (Forbes)


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

Havana syndrome


Affliction affecting US officials abroad
Medical condition

220px-Hotelnacionale.jpgHavana syndromeOther namesAnomalous health incidents[1]
Unexplained health incidents[2]
Unidentified health incidents[3]The Hotel Nacional in Havana is one of the locations where the syndrome has reportedly been experienced.[4]Symptoms

Acute[5]
  • Sudden onset of a perceived loud sound
  • Visual disturbances
  • Sensation of intense pressure or vibration in the head
  • Pain in the ear or more diffusely in the head
  • Cognitive problems
Chronic[5]
  • Balance and vestibular problems
  • Vision and oculomotor problems
  • Auditory problems
  • Insomnia

CausesNot determined[5][6]

Havana syndrome (also known as “anomalous health incidents[1][7]) is a disputed medical condition reported primarily by U.S. diplomatic, intelligence, and military officials stationed in overseas locations. Most of the affected individuals reported an acute onset of symptoms associated with a perceived localised loud sound, followed by chronic symptoms that lasted for months, such as balance and cognitive problems, insomnia, and headaches.[5][6] The first cases were reported by U.S. and Canadian embassy staff in Havana, Cuba, though earlier incidents may have occurred in Frankfurt, Germany.[8] Starting in 2016 through to 2021, several hundred U.S. intelligence and military officials and their families reported having symptoms in overseas locations including China, India,[9] Europe, Hanoi, as well as in Washington, D.C., USA.[10]

The cause of Havana syndrome remains unknown and controversial.[5][6] In 2019 and 2020, some U.S. government representatives attributed the incidents to attacks by unidentified foreign actors,[11] and various U.S. officials blamed the reported symptoms on a variety of unidentified and unknown technologies, including ultrasound or microwave weapons.[12] The U.S. intelligence services could not determine the cause of the symptoms; however, U.S. intelligence and government officials expressed suspicions to the press that Russian military intelligence was responsible.[13][14][15]

Beginning in 2022, several major studies were published with none finding any evidence of the reported conditions being the result of actions by a hostile power; some cited psychogenic factors, environmental causes, or pre-existing medical conditions as potential causes of the disease. In January 2022, the Central Intelligence Agency issued an interim assessment concluding that the syndrome is not the result of “a sustained global campaign by a hostile power.” Foreign involvement was ruled out in 976 cases of the 1,000 reviewed.[16][17] In March 2023, seven U.S. intelligence agencies completed a review of the proposed cases of Havana syndrome and released an unclassified report with the consensus that “available intelligence consistently points against the involvement of US adversaries in causing the reported incidents” and that a foreign adversary’s involvement was “very unlikely”.[18][19] This stance was reiterated in a March 2024 report by the National Intelligence Council.[20]

Signs and symptoms

Most of the affected individuals reported an acute onset of neurological symptoms associated with a perceived localized loud sound such as screeching, chirping, clicking, or piercing noises.[5][6] Two-thirds experienced visual disturbances such as blurred vision and sensitivity to light. More than half reported intense pressure or vibration in the head, ear pain, diffuse head pain, and cognitive problems such as forgetfulness and poor concentration. Tinnitus and hearing loss occurred in one-third of cases, and dizziness or unsteady gait affected one-quarter.[5] Physical examinations have revealed abnormalities with balance and other neurological tests.[5][6]

Some affected individuals develop chronic symptoms that last for months, such as balance and cognitive problems, insomnia, and headaches. The longevity of symptoms is not yet clear, and they are less specific than are the acute symptoms.[5][6]

Causes

A review article published on August 2022 by Asadi-Pooya AA explored the scientific literature on Havana syndrome, proposing several possible causes for the condition. The review stated that a plausible explanation given was the use of a directed-energy or radio frequency weapon, with other potential causes including functional disorders, psychogenic disease, or exposure to chemicals/neurotoxins.[5]

A subsequent review in December 2023 by Bartholomew RE and Baloh RW stated that Havana syndrome is a health scare fueled by “moral panic”. They suggested it was “a socially constructed catch-all category for an array of pre-existing health conditions, responses to environmental factors, and stress reactions that were lumped under a single label”.[21]

Locations

Cuba

220px-U.S._Flag_Flaps_Outside_U.S._EmbasThe U.S. Embassy in Havana, Cuba

In August 2017, reports began surfacing that American and Canadian[22] diplomatic personnel in Cuba had experienced unusual, unexplained health problems dating to late 2016.[23][24] As of June 2018, the number of American citizens experiencing symptoms was 26.[25]

Events

The original 21 events in Cuba were characterized as starting with strange grating noises coming from a specific direction. Some people experienced pressure, vibration, or a sensation comparable to driving a car with the window partly rolled down. These noises lasted from 20 seconds to 30 minutes and happened while the diplomats were either at home or in hotel rooms. Other people nearby (including family members and guests in neighboring rooms) did not experience the same symptoms.[26]

Impact on American diplomats

Some U.S. embassy workers have experienced lasting health problems, including an unidentified diplomat who now needs a hearing aid.[27] In 2017, the U.S. State Department concluded that the health problems were either the result of an attack or due to exposure to an unknown device,[28] but that it was not blaming the Cuban government, and would not say who was to blame.[29] Affected people described symptoms such as hearing loss, memory loss, and nausea.[28] Speculation centered around a sonic weapon,[30] with some researchers pointing to infrasound as a possible cause.[31]

In August 2017, the United States expelled two Cuban diplomats in retaliation for perceived Cuban responsibility.[23] The next month, the U.S. State Department stated that it was removing non-essential staff from the U.S. embassy and warned U.S. citizens not to travel to Cuba.[32] In October 2017, President Donald Trump said he believed that Cuba was responsible for the occurrences,[33] calling them a “very unusual attack”.[34]

In response to the incidents, the U.S. State Department announced in March 2018 that it would continue to staff its embassy in Havana at the minimum level required to perform “core diplomatic and consular functions”; the embassy had been operating under “ordered departure status” since September 2017, but the status was set to expire. This announcement served to extend the staff reductions indefinitely.[35]

Impact on Canadian diplomats

In March 2018, some Canadian diplomats traveled to Pittsburgh to consult with the neurologist that had previously diagnosed brain issues in US diplomats. The neurologist concluded that MRIs of the Canadians showed evidence of brain damage that was similar to what the neurologist reported for the American counterparts. In early 2018, Global Affairs Canada ended family postings to Cuba and withdrew all staff with families. Several of the Canadians who were affected in 2017 were reported to still be unable to resume their work due to the severity of their ailments. The lack of knowledge of the cause of Havana syndrome, as of February 2019[update], had made it challenging for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to investigate.[36]

In 2019, the Canadian government announced that it was reducing its embassy staff in Havana after a 14th Canadian diplomat reported symptoms of Havana syndrome in late December 2018.[37] In February 2019, several Canadian diplomats sued the Canadian government, arguing that it failed to protect them or promptly address serious health concerns.[38][39] The government has sought to dismiss the suit, arguing in November 2019 that it was not negligent and did not breach its duties to its employees. In court filings, the government acknowledged that several of the 14 plaintiffs in the suit had concussion-like symptoms but said that no definitive cause or medical diagnosis had been ascertained.[40] In a November 2019 statement, Global Affairs Canada said, “We continue to investigate the potential causes of the unusual health symptoms.”[40]

Cuban government reactions

After the incident was made public, the Cuban foreign minister accused the U.S. of lying about the incident and denied Cuban involvement in or knowledge of the cause of the health problems the diplomats experienced.[41][42]

The Cuban government offered to cooperate with the U.S. in an investigation of the incidents.[43] It employed about 2,000 scientists and law enforcement officers who interviewed 300 neighbors of diplomats, examined two hotels, and medically examined non-diplomats who could have been exposed. NBC reported that Cuban officials stated that they analyzed air and soil samples and considered a range of toxic chemicals. They also examined the possibility that electromagnetic waves were to blame, and even looked into whether insects could be the culprit, but found nothing they could link to the claimed medical symptoms. The FBI and Cuban authorities met to discuss the situation; the Cubans stated that the U.S. neither agreed to share the diplomats’ medical records with Cuban authorities nor allowed Cuban investigators access to U.S. diplomats’ homes to conduct tests.[44] In 2021, a panel of 16 scientists affiliated with the Cuban Academy of Sciences and convened by the Cuban government reported that “the narrative of the ‘mysterious syndrome’ is not scientifically acceptable in any of its components.” The panel addressed the microwave hypothesis directly, writing, “No known form of energy can selectively cause brain damage (with laser-like spatial accuracy) under the conditions described for the alleged incidents in Havana.”[45]

Upon release of the March 2023 U.S. intelligence agencies’ unclassified report which concluded that “available intelligence consistently points against the involvement of US adversaries in causing the reported incidents” and that a foreign adversary’s involvement was “very unlikely”, Cuba’s Vice Foreign Minister Carlos Fernandez de Cossio told Reuters, “The unfortunate thing is the U.S. government leveraged [Havana syndrome] to derail bilateral relations … and discredit Cuba.” Reuters went to report that “Cuba has for years labeled as ‘science fiction’ the idea that ‘Havana Syndrome’ resulted from an attack by a foreign agent, and its top scientists in 2021 found no evidence of such allegations.”[46]

Beyond Cuba

Beginning in late 2017, suspected attacks targeting U.S. intelligence personnel were reported in an expanding set of locations around the world,[10] including Moscow, Russia; Tbilisi, Georgia; Poland; Taiwan; and Australia.[47] Other reports came from Colombia, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Austria,[15] among other countries.[15][48][49][12][50][51][52]

The U.S. government has not released the number of affected persons, but media reporting indicated a total of 130 possible cases by the end of May 2021,[15] rising to more than 200 by mid-September 2021.[13] The cases variously affected CIA, U.S. military, and State Department personnel and their family members.[15] Some reports, after investigation, were determined to be possibly related to Havana syndrome, while others were determined to be unrelated; BBC News reported in 2021 that “One former official reckons around half the cases reported by US officials are possibly linked to attacks by an adversary.”[53]

China

220px-Consulate_General_of_the_United_StConsulate General of the United States in Guangzhou

Starting in early 2018, U.S. diplomats in China began reporting symptoms consistent with Havana syndrome. The first such incident was reported by an American diplomat in China in April 2018 at the Guangzhou consulate, the largest U.S. consulate in China. The employee reported that he had been experiencing symptoms since late 2017. Several individuals were taken to the U.S. for medical examination.[54][55][56] A USAID employee at the U.S. embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, reported a different incident in September 2017; the employee’s report was discounted by the U.S. State Department.[57]

Answering questions from the House Foreign Affairs Committee in May 2018, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo testified that U.S. diplomatic staff in Guangzhou had reported symptoms “very similar” to, and “entirely consistent” with, those reported from Cuba.[58][59] On June 6, 2018, The New York Times reported that at least two additional U.S. diplomats stationed at the Guangzhou consulate had been evacuated from China and reported that “it remains unclear whether the illnesses are the result of attacks at all. Other theories have included toxins, listening devices that accidentally emitted harmful sounds, or even mass hysteria.”[55] In June 2018, the State Department announced that a task force had been assembled to investigate the reports[60] and expanded their health warning to all of mainland China amid reports some US diplomats outside of Guangzhou had experienced the same symptoms resembling a brain injury.[61] The warning told anyone who experienced “unusual acute auditory or sensory phenomena accompanied by unusual sounds or piercing noises” to “not attempt to locate their source”.[62]

Elsewhere in Asia

In August 2021, it was reported that two American diplomats were evacuated from the U.S. Embassy in Hanoi, Vietnam, after incidents of Havana syndrome were reported.[63] These reported cases also delayed Vice President Kamala Harris‘s visit to Vietnam.[64][65]

In September 2021, an aide-de-camp of CIA director William J. Burns reported symptoms consistent with those of Havana syndrome on a diplomatic visit to India.[52]

Washington, D.C. area

In 2019, a White House official reported experiencing debilitating symptoms while walking her dog in a Virginia suburb of Washington; the incident was publicly reported in 2020.[12] In November 2020, a similar incident was reported on The Ellipse, a lawn adjacent to the south side of the White House.[12][66] Both incidents were similar to those that were reported to have struck dozens of U.S. personnel overseas, including CIA and State Department personnel.[12] Federal agencies investigated the incident at The Ellipse, and Defense Department officials briefed members of the Senate Armed Services Committee and House Armed Services Committee in April 2021.[12] Investigators told members of Congress that they had not been able to determine the cause of the events or who was responsible.[12]

Europe

220px-US-Botschaft_Wien.JPGU.S. embassy in Vienna, Austria

In 2021, dozens of U.S. personnel stationed in Vienna, including diplomats, intelligence officials, and some children of U.S. employees, had Havana syndrome-like symptoms.[11]
The State Department confirmed in July 2021 that it was investigating the reports.[67] The Austrian foreign ministry stated it was collaborating with American investigators. Aside from Havana, Vienna has reported the most incidents. While no suspects were named for the Vienna cases, it has been noted that Vienna was hosting indirect talks between the United States and Iran on reviving the 2015 Iran deal.[68] In September 2021, the CIA station chief in Vienna (the top U.S. intelligence officer in the country) was recalled over concerns over his management; he had been criticized for not taking quicker action in response to the Havana syndrome cases at his post.[13][11]

In the months preceding August 2021, cases of Havana syndrome were reported at the U.S. embassy in Berlin, Germany, including from two U.S. officials who sought medical treatment.[69] Several new cases were reported at the embassy in October 2021.[70]

In 2021, the CIA evacuated an intelligence officer serving in Serbia suspected of being a victim of the neurological attack.[10]

Three White House staffers reported symptoms at the InterContinental London Park Lane in late May 2019.[15]

Elsewhere

One of the CIA officials with symptoms in Australia and Taiwan was one of the agency’s top five officials.[47] The Russian embassy in Australia dismissed reports of Russian operatives targeting CIA personnel in Australia.[71]

In October 2021, it was reported that U.S. embassy personnel and their families in Bogota, Colombia, had developed symptoms consistent with Havana syndrome.[72][73]

Chronology of investigation

2018

In January 2018, at Secretary of State Rex Tillerson‘s direction, the State Department convened an accountability review board,[74] which is “an internal State Department mechanism to review security incidents involving diplomatic personnel”.[75] Retired United States Ambassador to Libya Peter Bodde was chosen to lead the board.[75] Also in January, the Associated Press reported that a non-public FBI report found no evidence of an intentional sonic attack.[76]

In March 2018, Kevin Fu and a team of computer scientists at the University of Michigan reported in a study that ultrasound—specifically, intermodulation distortion from multiple inaudible ultrasonic signals—from malfunctioning or improperly placed Cuban surveillance equipment could have been the origin of the reported sounds.[77][78][79]

A 2018 State Department report was declassified and posted on the George Washington University‘s National Security Archive after Freedom of Information Act litigation brought by the James Madison Project. The documents indicate that the State Department botched the handling of the initial reports. Peter Kornbluh of the National Security Archive noted that the 2018 report concluded that the department’s “initial investigation assessment of what was going on” was marred by chaos, disorganization, and excessive secrecy.[80]

A November 2018 report in The New Yorker found that the FBI’s investigation into the incidents was stymied by conflict with the CIA and the State Department; the CIA was reluctant to reveal, even to other U.S. government agencies, the identities of affected officers because of concern about possible leaks. Federal rules on the privacy of employee medical records also hindered the investigation.[48]

JAMA report

At the U.S. government’s request, University of Pennsylvania researchers examined 21 affected diplomats posted to Cuba, and the preliminary results were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in March 2018. The researchers found “no evidence of white matter tract abnormalities” in affected diplomats beyond what might be seen in a control group of the same age, but described “a new syndrome in the diplomats that resembles persistent concussion“.[81][82] While some of those affected recovered swiftly, others had symptoms for months. The study concluded that “the diplomats appear to have sustained injury to widespread brain networks.”[81][82]

In 2018, Douglas H. Smith, the lead author of a University of Pennsylvania study of 21 affected diplomats in Havana published in JAMA, said in an interview that microwaves were “considered a main suspect” underlying the phenomenon.[83] A 2018 study published in the journal Neural Computation by Beatrice Alexandra Golomb rejected the idea that a sonic attack was the source of the symptoms and concluded that the facts were consistent with pulsed radiofrequency[84]/microwave radiation (RF/MW) exposure. Golomb wrote that (1) the nature of the noises the diplomats reported was consistent with sounds caused by pulsed RF/MW via the Frey effect; (2) the signs and symptoms the diplomats reported matched symptoms from RF/MW exposure (problems with sleep, cognition, vision, balance, speech; headaches; sensations of pressure or vibration; nosebleeds; brain injury and brain swelling); (3) “oxidative stress provides a documented mechanism of RF/MW injury compatible with reported signs and symptoms”; and (4) in the past, the U.S. embassy in Moscow was subject to a microwave beam called the Moscow Signal.[85] The Moscow Signal was inferred to be a Soviet espionage technique that might have also had health effects.[86] Neuroscientist Allan H. Frey, for whom the Frey effect is named, considers the microwave theory viable.[83]

A March 2018 editorial in JAMA by two neurologists argued that a functional disorder such as persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (“a syndrome characterized primarily by chronic symptoms of dizziness and perceived unsteadiness, often triggered by acute or chronic vestibular disease, neurological or medical illness or psychological distress”) could explain some of the symptoms the diplomats in Cuba experienced.[87]

The editorial board of the journal Cortex published an editorial referring to the JAMA research’s “gross methodological flaws” and registering concern that it had been published. In the board’s view, “Allowing such confused and conflicting explanations of methodology and analysis to pass unchallenged is a slippery path for science, and dangerous for society at large”.[88]

As early as 2018, some scientists, including physicist Peter Zimmerman, bioengineers Kenneth R. Foster, and Andrei G. Pakhomov, and UCLA neurologist Robert Baloh, said that the microwave hypothesis was implausible; Baloh called the JAMA conclusion “science fiction”.[89][90]

JASON report

In 2018, JASON, a group of physicists and scientists who advise the U.S. government, analyzed audio recordings from eight of the original 21 incidents of Havana syndrome and two cellphone videos taken by one patient from Cuba. It concluded that the sounds in the eight recordings were “most likely” caused by insects and that it was “highly unlikely” that microwaves or ultrasound beams were involved, because “No plausible single source of energy (neither radio/microwaves nor sonic) can produce both the recorded audio/video signals and the reported medical effects.”[91] The group determined with “high confidence” that the two videos were sounds from the Indies short-tailed cricket, and also noted a “low confidence” hypothesis that the noises may have been from a concrete vibrating machine with worn bearings.[91] The report’s findings were first reported by Reuters in July 2019.[92] Parts of JASON’s report were declassified in September 2021.[91] While biomedical engineer Kenneth Foster (an opponent of the microwave theory) cited the findings as evidence against the theory, biomedical engineer James Lin (a proponent of the microwave theory) wrote in an email to BuzzFeed News that the recordings the JASON report analyzed could not represent actual cases of Havana syndrome, since sound recorders cannot record microwaves.[91] The JASON report also concluded, “It cannot be ruled out that while the perceived sounds, while not harmful, are introduced by an adversary as deception so as to mask an entirely unrelated mode of causing illness.”[91] The report also concluded that while the cause of the condition was unknown, “psychogenic effects may serve to explain important components of the reported injuries”.[91]

2019

In January 2019, biologists Alexander L. Stubbs of the University of California, Berkeley and Fernando Montealegre-Z of the University of Lincoln analyzed audio recordings made by American personnel in Havana during incidents associated with Havana syndrome.[93] The conclusion was that the sounds were the calling song of the Indies short-tailed cricket (Anurogryllus celerinictus) rather than those of a technological device. Stubbs and Montealegre-Z matched the song’s “pulse repetition rate, power spectrum, pulse rate stability, and oscillations per pulse” to the recording.[94][95] Stubbs and Montealegre wrote, “the causes of the health problems reported by embassy personnel are beyond the scope of this paper” and called for “more rigorous research into the source of these ailments, including the potential psychogenic effects, as well as possible physiological explanations unrelated to sonic attacks.”[95] This conclusion was comparable to a 2017 hypothesis by Cuban scientists that the sound on the same recording is that of Jamaican field crickets.[94][96][97][98]

In response to a December 2017 State Department request, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted a “Cuba Unexplained Events Investigation”.[99][100] The two-year investigation of the medical records of 95 American diplomats and family members in Havana who reported symptoms resulted in a final report, marked for official use only, dated December 2019.[101]

In a 2019 paper, Robert Bartholomew and Robert Baloh proposed that the syndrome represents mass psychogenic illness rather than a “novel clinical entity”.[102] They cite the vagueness and inconsistency of symptoms as well as the circumstances they developed in (affected staff would have been under significant stress as the U.S. had just reopened its embassy in Cuba) as a cause.[102][103]

2020

In October 2020, the New York Times reported that U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers, including senior leaders, had clashed with Trump administration appointees, including CIA director Gina Haspel and State Department leaders, over the nature and causes of the suspected attacks.[80] A New York Times investigation found that the State Department had “produced inconsistent assessments of patients and events, ignored outside medical diagnoses and withheld basic information from Congress”.[80] Despite the general view within the U.S. government that Russia was responsible, two U.S. officials told The New York Times that Haspel was not convinced of Russia’s responsibility, or even whether an attack occurred.[80]

Many current and former U.S. officials stated that Russia was likely responsible for the alleged attacks,[104] a suspicion shared by both Trump and Biden administration officials.[15] This view was shared by CIA analysts on Russia, State Department officials, outside science experts, and several of the alleged victims.[80] Russia has a history of researching, developing, and using weapons that cause brain injuries, such as the Cold War-era “Moscow Signal” targeting the American embassy in Moscow.[80][105]

In 2020 it was reported that a 2014 NSA report raised suspicions that Russia used a microwave weapon to target a person’s living quarters, causing nervous system damage; and Russia has an interest in disrupting cooperation among the U.S., China, and Cuba.[80] The U.S. diplomats stationed in China and Cuba who reported ailments were working to increase cooperation with those countries, and some CIA analysts voiced suspicion Russia thus sought to derail their work.[80]

A U.S. Office of Special Counsel investigation resulted in an April 2020 determination that there was “a substantial likelihood of wrongdoing” by State Department leadership.[80] Mark Lenzi, who was a State Department diplomatic security officer stationed in Guangzhou, accused the department of a “deliberate, high-level cover-up” and of failing to protect their employees.[80] Marc Polymeropoulos, a 26-year CIA veteran, who retired in 2019, similarly felt betrayed by CIA leadership, accusing the agency of failing to respond appropriately to a vertigo-inducing incident in Moscow in December 2017 (Polymeropoulos said the event was an attack and “the most terrifying experience of my life”, worse than experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan).[104] Polymeropoulos fought with the CIA for years to obtain specialized medical treatment, after the agency cast doubt on the similarities between the symptoms he experienced and those experienced by the diplomats in Havana.[104] Polymeropoulos was ultimately diagnosed at the U.S. government’s Walter Reed Medical Center with traumatic brain injury; attorney Mark Zaid, who represented almost a dozen clients who had also become ill under similar circumstances, said that Polymeropoulos was the only one of his clients who had received treatment at Walter Reed, with others obtaining treatment only from personal doctors or academic medical centers.[104]

Near the end of the Trump administration, the Defense Department established a task force to investigate reports of attacks on DoD personnel abroad.[12] The DoD established the task force partly due to frustration over what DoD officials considered to be a sluggish and lackluster response by the CIA and Department of State.[12] Christopher C. Miller, who was acting defense secretary at the time, said in 2021 that “I knew CIA and Department of State were not taking this shit seriously and we wanted to shame them into it by establishing our task force.”[12] Miller said that he began to consider the reports of mysterious symptoms to be a high priority in December 2020, after he conducted an interview with a person with major combat experience who detailed symptoms.[12]

In December 2020, the CIA established a task force to investigate.[12][104] The agency set up the task force after continued reports of debilitating attacks against CIA officers in various places around the world.[104] The CIA expanded its investigation under Director William J. Burns, who took office in 2021;[12] Burns appointed a senior CIA officer who had previously led the manhunt for Osama bin Laden to lead the agency’s investigation.[13]

In 2020, a book by Bartholomew and Baloh, Havana Syndrome: Mass Psychogenic Illness and the Real Story Behind the Embassy Mystery and Hysteria, was published; it argued in support of the psychogenic illness hypothesis.[106]

NASEM report

In December 2020, a study by an expert committee of the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) commissioned by the State Department released its report, concluding, “Overall, directed pulsed RF energy … appears to be the most plausible mechanism in explaining these cases among those that the committee considered”,[107] but that “each possible cause remains speculative” and that “the report should not be viewed as conclusive”.[84][108][109][110] Chaired by David Relman, the committee included Linda Birnbaum, Ronald Brookmeyer, Caroline Buckee, Joseph Fins, David A. Whelan, and others.[110] The panel said that lack of information and direct evidence (such as medical testing data about affected persons) limited what it could conclude about the phenomenon.[110][111][112] In a 2021 interview with NPR’s Sarah McCammon, Relman said that the committee identified “microwave radiation that occurs in a pulsed or intermittent form” as “the most plausible” mechanism for the injuries, but that it could not confidently identify any cause given the lack of “direct evidence that this could explain the entire story for sure or even parts of it”.[112] Relman said that the committee lacked information to assess “what the various sources of such pulsed microwave energy might be” but that the facts left the committee “with this very sort of disconcerting notion that it had been produced deliberately by other actors whose purposes we really weren’t in a position to fathom”.[112] Relman said that “the bottom line is that this is still a perplexing story that still needs further investigation.”[112]

The 2020 NASEM study found that it was unlikely that “acute high-level exposure to OPs and/or pyrethroids contributed” to the illnesses, due to a lack of evidence of exposures to those pesticides or clinical histories consistent with such exposure,[110]: 23  but the study committee “could not rule out the possibility, although slight, that exposure to insecticides, particularly OPs, increased susceptibility to the triggering factor(s) that caused the Embassy personnel cases”.[110]: 23  NASEM also found it “highly unlikely” that an infectious disease (such as Zika virus, which was an epidemic in Cuba in 2016–17) caused the illnesses.[110]: 23–24 

The 2020 NASEM analysis appeared to show that psychological issues were not the likely cause of the injuries,[113] but the different ways in which people were affected left open the possible influence of psychological and social factors.[114] The report reads, “the likelihood of mass psychogenic illness as an explanation for patients’ symptoms had to be established from sufficient evidence” and “could not be inferred merely by the absence of other causal mechanisms or the lack of definitive structural injuries”.[110]: 26  In its assessment of potential social and psychological causes, the committee notes the possibility of stress-based psychological responses, and that these were more likely to be triggered by potential threats attributed to human sources than other stressors. It concludes that these could not have caused the acute “audio-vestibular” symptoms some patients experienced, such as sudden unexplained sounds.[110]: 25  The scope of the provided data limited the committee’s ability to investigate psychological and social factors.[110]: 26–27 

2021

This section may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. Consider splitting content into sub-articles, condensing it, or adding subheadings. Please discuss this issue on the article’s talk page. (March 2024)

2018 CDC report

In January 2021, both BuzzFeed News and George Washington University‘s National Security Archive obtained the 2018 CDC report, pursuant to Freedom of Information Act requests. (Some material in the released report was redacted for medical privacy reasons.)[99][101] The CDC developed a “case definition” of Havana syndrome, consisting of a biphasic (two-stage) syndrome.[100][101] The first phase of symptoms (sometimes closely after an auditory or sensory event) consisted of one or more of the following symptoms: head pressure, disorientation, nausea or headache, vestibular disturbance, or auditory or visual syndromes.[100] The second phase of symptoms, occurring sometime later, consisted of cognitive deficits, vestibular disturbances, or both.[100][101] The report concluded, “Of the 95 persons whose medical records CDC evaluated, 15 had illnesses that met the criteria for a presumptive case definition. CDC classified 31 others as possible cases and the remaining 49 as not likely to be a case.”[100] Two years later, six of the subjects in the CDC investigation were still being rehabilitated for their injuries, and four were still unable to return to work.[99] The CDC decided not to conduct a retrospective case–control study because of the length of time between the event and the onset of symptoms, which could lead to recall and selection biases that “could generate misleading or obscured findings”.[99] The CDC concluded, “The evaluations conducted thus far have not identified a mechanism of injury, process of exposure, effective treatment, or mitigating factor for the unexplained cluster of symptoms experienced by those stationed in Havana.”[100]

U.S. State Department

In February, the U.S. State Department said that its ongoing investigation was “a high priority” for the department.[104] Also in February, sources familiar with the various ongoing investigations told CNN that a primary obstacle to progress by the U.S. government in investigating the syndrome was a lack of coordination among the CIA, FBI, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and State Department, which conducted separate and “largely siloed” investigations.[104] The limited coordination among the agencies was due in part to “the highly classified nature of some details and the privacy restrictions of health records, and that has hampered progress”.[104]

In March 2021, the State Department appointed ambassador Pamela L. Spratlen, a career foreign service officer, to oversee the department task force charged with responding to the incidents.[12][115] Six months later, Spratlen left her position as coordinator of the task force because she “reached the threshold of hours of labor” that she could perform as a retiree. Her resignation had been demanded by people angered by her handling of a conference call with affected employees. During the call with employees (in which Secretary of State Antony Blinken also took part), Spratlen did not take a position on whether the syndrome was psychogenic, a response that affected diplomats called “invalidating”.[11][116]

New Yorker reporting

Also in May, The New Yorker reported that the U.S. government’s “working hypothesis” was that GRU agents “have been aiming microwave-radiation devices at U.S. officials to collect intelligence from their computers and cell phones, and that these devices can cause serious harm to the people they target”.[15] The U.S. government has not publicly accused Russia; U.S. intelligence officials privately call the events “attacks” but publicly call them “anomalous health incidents”.[15] According to two officials interviewed by Politico, “While investigators have not determined definitively that these incidents are caused by a specific weapon, some believe any such device would be primarily transported by vehicle”, and “Some could be small enough to fit into a large backpack, and an individual can be targeted from 500 to 1,000 yards away.”[14] James Lin of the University of Illinois, an expert on the biological effects of microwave energy, agreed that a Havana syndrome attack could be caused by a small apparatus that could fit in a van or SUV.[105]

A May 2021 report in The New Yorker cited a number of incidents recounted by Mark Vandroff, who served as the senior director for defense policy at the National Security Council: “One of the most dramatic episodes involved a U.S. military officer stationed in a country with a large Russian presence. As the officer pulled his car into a busy intersection, he suddenly felt as though his head were going to explode. His two-year-old son, in a car seat in the back, started screaming. As the officer sped out of the intersection, the pressure in his head ceased, and his son went quiet. A remarkably similar incident was reported by a CIA officer who was stationed in the same city, and who had no connection to the military officer.”[15]

Developments

Citing unnamed intelligence and government officials, The New York Times reported in July 2021 that the National Security Council, Central Intelligence Agency, and Director of National Intelligence established two outside panels, one to investigate potential causes and the other to develop defensive countermeasures for personnel protection; cleared external scientists would be permitted to view relevant classified intelligence in their investigations.[117]

In September 2021, it was reported that within the U.S. government, analysts had debated whether the alleged attacks reflected a deliberate attempt to cause injury, or whether the reported symptoms were “a consequence of a high-tech attempt to steal classified information from phones and computers of U.S. officials”.[13] Also in September, CIA Deputy Director David S. Cohen said that the investigation had “gotten closer” to making a determination, “but not close enough to make the analytic judgment that people are waiting for”.[13] Also in September, it was reported that multiple anecdotes from various Western diplomats stationed overseas, including in Russia, describe mysterious ailments during past decades that might be due to microwave devices.[53][86] Also in September, a panel of 16 scientists affiliated with the Cuban Academy of Sciences and convened by the Cuban government addressed the microwave hypothesis, writing, “No known form of energy can selectively cause brain damage (with laser-like spatial accuracy) under the conditions described for the alleged incidents in Havana.”[45]

In October 2021, it was reported that an unclassified NSA report from 2014 indicated a hostile country in the 1990s possessed a “high powered microwave system weapon that may have the ability to weaken, intimidate or kill an enemy over time and without leaving evidence”.[86] Also in October, Cheryl Rofer, a former chemist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, said that there were no microwave experts on the NAS committee and that “No evidence has been offered that such a weapon has been developed by any nation.” Rofer also cited a 1978 study that found no adverse health effects from the Moscow Signal.[118]

In November 2021, Secretary of State Blinken appointed two senior U.S. diplomats to oversee the department’s internal Health Incident Response Task Force: career foreign service officer Ambassador Jonathan M. Moore as overall coordinator[119] and retired Ambassador Margaret Uyehara.[120][121]

The Senate Intelligence Committee leadership (chair Mark Warner and vice chair Marco Rubio) said in 2021 that it was working with Burns and the CIA on connection with the investigation, saying, “We have already held fact finding hearings on these debilitating attacks, many of which result in medically confirmed cases of Traumatic Brain Injury, and will do more.”[122]

In September 2021, the BBC wrote the syndrome has “a real impact on the country’s ability to operate overseas”, reporting that one official called the deciphering of the cause “the most difficult intelligence challenge they have ever faced”.[53]

After the reports of the incident at The Ellipse nearby the White House in Washington, Defense Department investigators briefed members of Congress, even though it occurred within the U.S.; this was because the DoD investigation was more advanced than the FBI or the intelligence community investigations.[12]

FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit

After the initial reports of the incidents in Havana, the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit visited the city and came to the assessment that the individuals were experiencing a mass psychogenic illness.[123] The Behavioral Analysis Unit profilers did not speak to any of the affected people directly, instead relying on transcripts of previous interviews that the FBI had conducted with patients.[123] The unit reviewed the patient histories compiled by the patients’ neuropsychologists and other physicians, who had already ruled out mass psychogenic illness, noting that “many of the victims didn’t know about the other people who were sick, and their bodies couldn’t have feigned some of the symptoms they were exhibiting.”[123]

2022

In January 2022, having performed a comprehensive study of 1,000 cases, the Central Intelligence Agency issued an interim assessment concluding that the syndrome is not the result of “a sustained global campaign by a hostile power” and that 976 of the 1000 reviewed cases could be explained by natural causes such as environmental causes, undiagnosed medical conditions, or stress, although it could not rule out foreign involvement in 24 cases, many of those from Havana.[17][124]

On February 1, 2022, a declassified US intelligence report (IC Experts Panel on Anomalous Health Incidents) called pulsed electromagnetic energy and ultrasound plausible causes and said that concealable devices exist that could produce the observed symptoms.[125]

In late 2022 the US Defense Health Agency issued Form 244, Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) Acute Assessment, described as “a multi-domain assessment that should be used to evaluate patients for potential AHI”.[126]

2023

2023 U.S. intelligence report

On March 1, 2023, the House Intelligence Committee released a report, titled “Intelligence Community Assessment”, which was jointly prepared by seven U.S. intelligence agencies. The report concluded “that there is no credible evidence that a foreign adversary has a weapon or collection device that is causing AHIs”. The agencies preparing the report reviewed thousands of possible cases of Havana syndrome. The reported stated that there continues to be scientific debate about whether a weapon could produce such health effects.[127]

Five of the seven agencies involved in generating the report concluded “the available intelligence consistently points against the involvement of US adversaries in causing the reported incidents” and that a foreign adversary’s involvement was “very unlikely”. One of the other agencies concluded that foreign involvement was “unlikely”, and the seventh agency declined to make a finding.[127][18][19]

Two of the seven agencies had “high confidence in this judgment while three agencies have moderate confidence”. Two other agencies judged “that deliberate causal mechanisms are unlikely to have caused AHIs” but those agencies had “low confidence because they judge(d) that radiofrequency (RF) energy is a plausible cause for AHIs, based in part on the findings of the IC Expert Panel and the results of research by some US laboratories.”[127]

CNN reported that in its 2023 Assessment, government officials said: “There is no one explanation for these incidents. Instead, there are many different possible causes including environmental as well as social factors and preexisting medical conditions.” The officials also told CNN that “The investigative efforts were ‘extremely aggressive’ and involved ‘a high degree of risk” and “Intelligence officers vigorously studied what happened in the hours, days and weeks surrounding the incidents… In some instances they found malfunctioning HVAC systems, which can cause discomfort to humans, and in other cases there were computer mice that created surprising disruptions… We weren’t finding what we expected to find… There is no one explanation for any of this.”[128]

Of the report, CIA Director Bill Burns said, “The intelligence community assessment released today by ODNI reflects more than two years of rigorous, painstaking collection, investigative work, and analysis by IC agencies including CIA… We applied the agency’s very best operational, analytic, and technical tradecraft to what is one of the largest and most intensive investigations in the agency’s history.”[citation needed]

Politico summarized the results by saying, “The finding undercuts a years-long narrative, propped up by more than a thousand reports from government employees, that a foreign adversary used pulsed electro-magnetic energy waves to sicken Americans.”[129]

Reactions

Following release of the March 2023 report, Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton revealed that when the Cuban attack reports began, he “pretty quickly” came to believe that this was not in Cuba’s interest, and in any case thought it was beyond that nation’s capabilities. He assumed Russia was involved, but said that he chose not to brief the president on that belief as he did not think Trump would support that theory due to his prior associations with Vladimir Putin.[130]

Upon release of the report, Cuba’s Vice Foreign Minister Carlos Fernandez de Cossio told Reuters, “The unfortunate thing is the U.S. government leveraged [Havana Syndrome] to derail bilateral relations… and discredit Cuba.” Reuters also reported that “Cuba has for years labeled as ‘science fiction’ the idea that ‘Havana Syndrome’ resulted from an attack by a foreign agent, and its top scientists in 2021 found no evidence of such allegations.”[46]

Despite the report’s conclusion, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, issued a statement on March 2 rejecting the finding, saying, “Something happened here, and just because you don’t have all the answers doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen.” Rubio said his panel would continue an independent review of the claims.[131]

Attorney Mark Zaid, founder of the James Madison Project, who represents some Havana syndrome patients, disputed the report’s conclusions. In a March 2023 Salon interview, he maintained that “these events were perpetrated either by foreign actors, or it is an experiment gone horribly wrong”. He suggested that the truth was “buried in the information they’ve classified”.[132]

2024

NIC report

On March 1 2024, a report by the National Intelligence Council concluded that it is “very unlikely” that a foreign adversary was responsible for Havana syndrome.[20] The comprehensive assessment aligned with previous CIA reports and emphasized a lack of credible evidence linking these health incidents to any hostile foreign actions. Despite the ongoing debate and varying opinions within the intelligence community, the report held that official stance is that the symptoms are likely caused by a combination of environmental factors, pre-existing conditions, or conventional illnesses, rather than any form of directed energy attack by a foreign nation.[133][134]

Insider investigative report

On March 31 2024, The Insider, in collaboration with 60 Minutes and Der Spiegel, published an investigative report claiming that the syndrome was potentially caused by actions of Russian military intelligence.”[135][136] [137] The report states that members of the GRU Unit 29155, known for undertaking foreign operations,[136] received awards and promotions for work related to the development and deployment of “non-lethal acoustic weapons“, and that telephone and travel data pinpointing the locations of these agents correlated with the timings and locations of Havana syndrome incidents worldwide.[138][139][140]

The Kremlin Press Secretary dismissed the report as “nothing more than baseless, unfounded accusations by the media.”[135] In response to the report, the White House Press Secretary said that a “foreign adversary is very unlikely.”[141]

Following the report, in a letter addressed to the President several U.S. Senators called for further investigations into the causes of the anomalous health incidents.[142] Anomalous health incidents’ victims lawyer Mark Zaid and one of the report’s authors, Christo Grozev, later testified on the subject of the report at the United States Congress.[143][144]

Legislative responses

In response to Havana syndrome, senator Susan Collins introduced a bill (S. 1828), cosponsored by a bipartisan group of nine other senators, that would close a loophole in the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act that would normally not cover damage to organs such as the brain and heart.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, passed by Congress in December 2021, included a section directing the president to designate a senior official as “anomalous health incidents interagency coordinator” to oversee efforts across the federal government and to coordinate with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, required relevant federal agencies to designate a specific high-level “anomalous health incident agency coordination lead” and directed agencies to develop guidance to employees considered to be at risk of exposure.[145]

Financial compensation

In 2021, Congress passed the Helping American Victims Afflicted by Neurological Attacks (HAVANA) Act, which authorized the CIA director and the secretary of state to provide financial support for personnel with brain injuries. The bill passed the House and Senate unanimously and was signed into law by president Joe Biden on October 8, 2021, becoming Public Law No. 117-46.[146][147][148]

The HAVANA Act gives an untaxed lump-sum payment of up to one year’s full salary ($187,300 for higher-ranking employees) to government employees that provide evidence of neurological injury. The payment is in addition to workers’ compensation or disability payments.[149][150][151]

Animal experimentation

In March 2023, Politico reported that the U.S. Army funded a $750,000 grant to Wayne State University for a study to expose 48 ferrets to RF waves, comparing the effects to those from a control group of ferrets; the Department of Defense described the project as an attempt to “develop and test a novel laboratory animal model to mimic mild concussive head injury” similar to those reported by the embassy personnel in Havana and China.[152] Politico also reported that the U.S. Department of Defense had recently tested RF waves on primates.[152] The animal rights group PETA demanded that the Pentagon end live-animal testing in relation to Havana syndrome.[152][153][154]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b “Anomalous Health Incidents and the Health Incident Response Task Force”. United States Department of State. November 5, 2022. Archived from the original on December 17, 2022. Retrieved December 11, 2022.
  2. ^ Borger, Julian (April 29, 2021). “White House investigating ‘unexplained health incidents’ similar to Havana syndrome”. The Guardian. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
  3. ^ Rubin, Eric (November 2, 2021). “We’re All in This Together”. American Foreign Service Association. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
  4. ^ “Cuba Travel Advisory”. Travel.state.gov. Department of State. January 10, 2018. Archived from the original on January 30, 2018. Retrieved June 22, 2018.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Asadi-Pooya AA (December 2023). “Havana syndrome: a scoping review of the existing literature”. Rev Environ Health (Review). 38 (4): 655–661. doi:10.1515/reveh-2021-0182. PMID 35962646.
  6. ^ a b c d e f Connolly, Matthew; Hawkshaw, Mary J.; Sataloff, Robert T. (July 1, 2024). “Havana syndrome: Overview for otolaryngologists”. American Journal of Otolaryngology. 45 (4): 104332. doi:10.1016/j.amjoto.2024.104332. ISSN 0196-0709.
  7. ^ “FY2022 NDAA: Care for Anomalous Health Incident Victims”. Congressional Research Service. February 7, 2022. Archived from the original on December 12, 2022. Retrieved December 12, 2022.
  8. ^ Dobrokhotov, Roman; Grozev, Christo; Weiss, Michael (March 31, 2024). “Unraveling Havana Syndrome: New evidence links the GRU’s assassination Unit 29155 to mysterious attacks on U.S. officials and their families”. The Insider. Retrieved April 1, 2024.
  9. ^ “Explained: CIA officer on India trip reports Havana Syndrome; what is known about its symptoms and causes so far”. September 24, 2021. Archived from the original on July 11, 2022. Retrieved February 21, 2022.
  10. ^ a b c Strobel, Warren P. (September 28, 2021). “Havana Syndrome Attacks Widen With CIA Officer’s Evacuation From Serbia”. The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Archived from the original on August 9, 2022. Retrieved September 28, 2021.
  11. ^ a b c d John Hudson & Shane Harris, CIA station chief in Vienna recalled amid criticism of management and handling of mysterious ‘Havana Syndrome’ incidents Archived September 27, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, Washington Post (September 23, 2021).
  12. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Katie Bo Williams & Jeremy Herb, US investigating possible mysterious directed energy attack near White House Archived April 29, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, CNN (April 29, 2021).
  13. ^ a b c d e f Greg Myre, CIA Recalls Vienna Station Chief In Move Related to Handling of ‘Havana Syndrome’ Archived November 20, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, NPR (September 24, 2021).
  14. ^ a b Seligman, Lara; Desiderio, Andrew (May 10, 2021). “Russian spy unit suspected of directed-energy attacks on U.S. personnel”. Politico. Archived from the original on May 11, 2021. Retrieved May 11, 2021.
  15. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Adam Entous (May 31, 2021). “Are U.S. Officials Under Silent Attack?”. The New Yorker. Archived from the original on June 1, 2021. Retrieved June 4, 2021. Top officials in both the Trump and the Biden Administrations privately suspect that Russia is responsible for the Havana Syndrome. Their working hypothesis is that agents of the G.R.U., the Russian military’s intelligence service, have been aiming microwave-radiation devices at U.S. officials to collect intelligence from their computers and cell phones, and that these devices can cause serious harm to the people they target.
  16. ^ Barnes, Julian E. (January 20, 2022). “Most ‘Havana Syndrome’ Cases Unlikely Caused by Foreign Power, C.I.A. Says”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 29, 2022. Retrieved January 21, 2022.
  17. ^ a b “CIA says ‘Havana Syndrome’ not result of sustained campaign by hostile power”. NBC News. January 20, 2022. Archived from the original on January 28, 2022. Retrieved January 20, 2022.
  18. ^ a b Wong, Julia Carrie (March 1, 2023). ‘Havana syndrome’ not caused by foreign adversary, US intelligence says”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on March 2, 2023. Retrieved March 2, 2023.
  19. ^ a b Harris, Shane; John, Hudson (March 1, 2023). ‘Havana syndrome’ not caused by energy weapon or foreign adversary, intelligence review finds”. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on March 1, 2023. Retrieved March 2, 2023.
  20. ^ a b https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/IC_Targeting_and_Collection_Efforts_Point_Away_From_Adversary_Involvement_in_Anomalous_Health_Incidents.pdf
  21. ^ Bartholomew RE, Baloh RW (December 2023). ‘Havana Syndrome’: A post mortem”. Int J Soc Psychiatry (Review). 70 (2): 402–405. doi:10.1177/00207640231208374. PMC 10913303. PMID 38146090.
  22. ^ “Mystery of sonic weapon attacks at US embassy in Cuba deepens”. The Guardian. September 14, 2017. Archived from the original on November 26, 2018. Retrieved October 19, 2017.
  23. ^ a b Neuman, Scott (August 9, 2017). “Cuban Diplomats Expelled After US Embassy Staff ‘Incidents’ In Havana”. NPR. Archived from the original on October 4, 2017. Retrieved October 1, 2017.
  24. ^ Connor, Tracy; Murray, Mary; Williams, Abigail (September 17, 2017). “Victim of Cuba embassy ‘attacks’ frustrated by response”. NBC News. Archived from the original on September 28, 2017. Retrieved October 1, 2017.
  25. ^ “U.S. says another American suffers illness at its Cuba embassy”. Reuters. June 28, 2018. Archived from the original on July 3, 2018. Retrieved July 3, 2018.
  26. ^ Hurley, Dan (March 22, 2018). “The Mystery Behind Neurological Symptoms Among US Diplomats in Cuba: Lots of Questions, Few Answers”. Neurology Today. 18 (6): 1, 24–26. doi:10.1097/01.NT.0000532085.86007.9b. S2CID 80371791.
  27. ^ Zachary Cohen. “New audio adds to mystery of Cuba attacks”. CNN. Archived from the original on October 14, 2017. Retrieved October 14, 2017.
  28. ^ a b Doubek, James (August 25, 2017). “At Least 16 U.S. Embassy Staff In Cuba Treated After ‘Health Attacks’. NPR. Archived from the original on December 21, 2018. Retrieved April 5, 2018.
  29. ^ U.S. does not believe Cuba is behind sonic attacks on American diplomats Archived October 18, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. McClatchy News Service, September 26, 2017.
  30. ^ Chavez, Nicole (August 10, 2017). “Using sound to attack: The diverse world of acoustic devices”. CNN. Archived from the original on September 26, 2018. Retrieved October 14, 2017.
  31. ^ Catherine McIntyre (August 24, 2017). “How Canadian diplomats in Cuba are being acoustically attacked”. Maclean’s. Archived from the original on August 12, 2020. Retrieved June 8, 2020.
  32. ^ Rich Edson (September 29, 2017). “US stops issuing visas in Cuba, cuts embassy staff, urges no travel to island”. Fox News. Archived from the original on September 29, 2017. Retrieved October 1, 2017.
  33. ^ Zachary Cohen (October 16, 2017). “Trump blames Cuba for mysterious attacks on US diplomats”. CNN. Archived from the original on November 26, 2017. Retrieved December 7, 2017.
  34. ^ “Trump says Cuba ‘responsible’ for alleged sonic attacks, but offers no evidence”. The Guardian. October 16, 2017. Archived from the original on October 16, 2017. Retrieved December 7, 2017.
  35. ^ Koran, Laura; Oppmann, Patrick (March 2, 2018). “US Embassy in Cuba to reduce staff indefinitely after ‘health attacks’. CNN. Archived from the original on April 22, 2018. Retrieved April 22, 2018.
  36. ^ “Blood and bureaucracy: Inside Canada’s panicked response to ‘Havana syndrome’. Archived from the original on February 7, 2019. Retrieved February 7, 2019.
  37. ^ “‘Havana Syndrome’ forces Canada to halve its diplomatic presence in Cuba” Archived January 31, 2019, at the Wayback Machine. Radio Canada International, January 30, 2019.
  38. ^ Campion-Smith, Bruce (February 7, 2019). “Ailing Canadian diplomats who served in Cuba have ‘visible and real’ health impacts, Trudeau”. The Star. Archived from the original on February 8, 2019. Retrieved February 7, 2019.
  39. ^ Dan Bilefsky, Canadian Diplomats Sue Their Government Over Mysterious Cuban Disease Archived August 19, 2019, at the Wayback Machine, New York Times (February 7, 2019).
  40. ^ a b Brian Platt, In court filing, Canadian government argues diplomats exaggerated ‘Havana Syndrome’ claims behind $28M lawsuit, National Post (November 26, 2019).
  41. ^ “Cuba official accuses US of lying about sonic attacks”. Associated Press News. November 3, 2017. Archived from the original on December 3, 2017. Retrieved December 7, 2017.
  42. ^ Gaouette, Nicole (November 2, 2017). “Cuban Minister rejects US sonic attack claims”. CNN. Archived from the original on January 8, 2018. Retrieved January 7, 2018.
  43. ^ “Statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba”. Minrex.gob.cu. Minrex. August 9, 2017. Archived from the original on April 7, 2018. Retrieved April 7, 2018.
  44. ^ Mitchell, Andrea; Murray, Mary (October 24, 2017). “Cubans Forcefully Reject Blame for U.S. Diplomats’ Mystery Ailments”. NBC News. Archived from the original on December 25, 2017. Retrieved December 26, 2017.
  45. ^ a b “Cuban scientists reject ‘Havana Syndrome’ claims”. Yahoo! News. September 13, 2021. Archived from the original on September 13, 2021. Retrieved November 5, 2021.
  46. ^ a b Sherwood, Dave (March 3, 2023). “Cuba blasts U.S. for years of disregarding evidence on ‘Havana Syndrome’. Reuters.com. Reuters. Archived from the original on March 3, 2023. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
  47. ^ a b Ioffe, Julia (October 19, 2020). “The Mystery of the Immaculate Concussion”. GQ. Archived from the original on May 29, 2021. Retrieved May 30, 2021.
  48. ^ a b Entous, Adam; Anderson, Jon Lee (November 19, 2018). “The Mystery of the Havana Syndrome: Unexplained brain injuries afflicted dozens of American diplomats and spies. What happened?”. The New Yorker. Archived from the original on November 27, 2018. Retrieved December 3, 2018.
  49. ^ Payne, Elizabeth (November 30, 2018). “Ottawa doctor treating Canadian diplomats with mysterious ‘Havana syndrome’. Ottawa Citizen. Archived from the original on December 4, 2018. Retrieved December 3, 2018. It is being called Havana syndrome and officials in Canada and the United States, where more than 20 diplomats have been affected, are trying to identify the cause of the injuries.
  50. ^ Entous, Adam. (July 16, 2021). Vienna Is the New Havana Syndrome Hot Spot. Archived August 1, 2021, at the Wayback Machine The New Yorker. Retrieved July 31, 2021.
  51. ^ Hruby, Denise and Hansler, Jennifer. (July 19, 2021). Austria probes reports of Havana Syndrome among US diplomats in Vienna. Archived July 31, 2021, at the Wayback Machine CNN. Retrieved July 31, 2021.
  52. ^ a b Atwood, Kylie (September 20, 2021). “Member of CIA chief’s team reported Havana syndrome symptoms on recent trip to India”. CNN. Archived from the original on September 20, 2021. Retrieved September 21, 2021.
  53. ^ a b c Corera, Gordon (September 9, 2021). ‘Havana syndrome’ and the mystery of the microwaves”. BBC News. Archived from the original on September 28, 2022. Retrieved September 28, 2022.
  54. ^ “China Pledges to Investigate Fears of Sonic Attacks on U.S. Diplomats”. The New York Times. June 7, 2018. Archived from the original on June 12, 2018. Retrieved June 7, 2018.
  55. ^ a b Myers, Steven Lee; Perlez, Jane (June 6, 2018). “U.S. Diplomats Evacuated in China as Medical Mystery Grows”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on November 18, 2018. Retrieved June 7, 2018.
  56. ^ “US diplomats evacuated from China amid ‘sonic attack’ concerns”. CNET. June 6, 2018. Archived from the original on June 12, 2018. Retrieved June 7, 2018.
  57. ^ Dorsey, Steve (November 28, 2017). “Uzbekistan incident raises suspicions of Russian involvement in Cuba attacks”. CBS News. Archived from the original on June 12, 2018. Retrieved June 8, 2018.
  58. ^ Harris, Gardiner (May 23, 2018). “Pompeo Says Mysterious Sickness Among Diplomats in Cuba Has Spread to China”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 6, 2020.
  59. ^ Jiang, Steven; Westcott, Ben; Vazquez, Maegan (March 23, 2018). “Pompeo says China incident ‘entirely consistent’ with Cuba ‘sonic attacks’. CNN. Archived from the original on January 6, 2019. Retrieved June 8, 2018.
  60. ^ Kuo, Lily (June 7, 2018). ‘Sonic attack’ fears as more US diplomats fall ill in China”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on September 12, 2018. Retrieved June 8, 2018.
  61. ^ “U.S. expands China health alert amid illness reports”. Reuters. June 7, 2018. Archived from the original on June 8, 2018. Retrieved June 8, 2018.
  62. ^ Achenbach, Joel (June 8, 2018). “Controversy surrounds research on State Department employees sickened in ‘attacks’. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on June 10, 2018. Retrieved June 10, 2018.
  63. ^ “Two U.S. diplomats to be evacuated from Vietnam after “Havana Syndrome” incidents”. NBC News. August 2021. Archived from the original on August 24, 2021. Retrieved August 24, 2021.
  64. ^ Wright, Jasmine; Liptak, Kevin; Diamond, Jeremy; Sullivan, Kate (August 24, 2021). “Possible Havana syndrome incident delayed Harris flight to Vietnam”. CNN. Archived from the original on August 24, 2021. Retrieved August 24, 2021.
  65. ^ KAYALI, Laura (April 1, 2024). “Havana Syndrome linked to Russian military agency GRU, investigation indicates”. Politico.
  66. ^ Beitsch, Rebecca (April 29, 2021). “US investigating possible ‘Havana syndrome’ attack near White House: CNN”. The Hill. Archived from the original on April 29, 2021. Retrieved April 29, 2021.
  67. ^ Entous, Adam (July 16, 2021). “Vienna Is the New Havana Syndrome Hot Spot”. The New Yorker. Archived from the original on September 2, 2021. Retrieved September 2, 2021.
  68. ^ ‘Havana syndrome’-like mystery illness affects Vienna US diplomats”. BBC News. July 17, 2021. Archived from the original on July 17, 2021. Retrieved July 17, 2021.
  69. ^ Bojan Pancevski, U.S. Officials in Germany Hit by Havana Syndrome Archived August 18, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, Wall Street Journal (August 18, 2021).
  70. ^ “Havana syndrome: Berlin police probe cases at US embassy”. BBC News. October 9, 2021. Archived from the original on October 11, 2021. Retrieved October 13, 2021.
  71. ^ Bucci, Nino (October 28, 2020). “Russia issues extraordinary statement over reports CIA agents were attacked in Australia”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on June 2, 2021. Retrieved May 30, 2021.
  72. ^ “Havana syndrome reported at US embassy in Colombia”. BBC News. October 13, 2021. Archived from the original on October 13, 2021. Retrieved October 13, 2021.
  73. ^ “The world this week, Oct 16th 2021 edition – Politics”. The Economist. Archived from the original on August 18, 2022. Retrieved October 15, 2021.
  74. ^ “Tillerson to order new probe of Havana embassy health ‘attacks’. Reuters. January 9, 2018. Archived from the original on April 7, 2018. Retrieved April 7, 2018.
  75. ^ a b “Retired ambassador to Libya to lead Cuba attacks review”. CNN. January 10, 2018. Archived from the original on January 10, 2018. Retrieved January 10, 2018.
  76. ^ Lederman, Josh; Lee, Matthew (January 8, 2018). “Tillerson tells AP Cuba still risky; FBI doubts sonic attack”. Associated Press. Archived from the original on July 23, 2019.
  77. ^ On Cuba, Diplomats, Ultrasound, and Intermodulation Distortion (PDF) (Technical report). University of Michigan. March 1, 2018. Tech Report CSE-TR-001-18. Archived (PDF) from the original on May 31, 2019. Retrieved July 24, 2019.
  78. ^ Torres, Nora Gámez (March 2, 2018). “Computer scientists may have solved the mystery behind the ‘sonic attacks’ in Cuba”. Miami Herald. Archived from the original on April 22, 2018. Retrieved April 22, 2018.
  79. ^ McKay, Tom (March 3, 2018). “Study: Malfunctioning Surveillance Gear, Not Sonic Weapons, Could Explain Cuba Embassy ‘Attack’. Gizmodo.com. Gizmodo. Archived from the original on April 22, 2018. Retrieved April 22, 2018.
  80. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Ana Swanson (October 19, 2020). “U.S. Diplomats and Spies Battle Trump Administration Over Suspected Attacks”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 19, 2020. Retrieved October 20, 2020.
  81. ^ a b Sample, Ian (February 24, 2018). “Fresh row over mysterious sickness affecting US diplomats in Cuba”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on April 6, 2018. Retrieved April 6, 2018.
  82. ^ a b Swanson II, Randel L.; Hampton, Stephen; Green-McKenzie, Judith; et al. (2018). “Neurological Manifestations Among US Government Personnel Reporting Directional Audible and Sensory Phenomena in Havana, Cuba”. Journal of the American Medical Association. 319 (11): 1125–1133. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.1742. PMC 5885885. PMID 29450484.
  83. ^ a b Broad, William J. (September 1, 2018). “Microwave Weapons Are Prime Suspect in Ills of U.S. Embassy Workers”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 13, 2020. Retrieved September 2, 2018.
  84. ^ a b Nelson R (December 2021). “Havana syndrome might be the result of energy pulses”. Lancet. 396 (10267): 1954. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32711-2. PMID 33341130. S2CID 229306878.
  85. ^ Golomb, Beatrice Alexandra (November 2018). “Diplomats’ Mystery Illness and Pulsed Radiofrequency/Microwave Radiation”. Neural Computation. 30 (11): 2882–2985. doi:10.1162/neco_a_01133. ISSN 0899-7667. PMID 30183509. S2CID 52162053.
  86. ^ a b c “Long before Havana Syndrome, the U.S. reported microwaves beamed at an embassy”. NPR. Archived from the original on November 26, 2021. Retrieved October 27, 2021.
  87. ^ Muth, Christopher C.; Lewis, Steven L. (March 20, 2018). “Editorial: Neurological Symptoms Among US Diplomats in Cuba”. Vol. 319, no. 11. pp. 1098–1100. Archived from the original on October 16, 2021. Retrieved November 3, 2021.
  88. ^ Cortex Editorial Board (November 2018). “Responsibility of neuropsychologists: The case of the ‘sonic attack’“. Cortex. 108: A1–A2. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2018.10.001. PMID 30340749. S2CID 195663840.
  89. ^ Kaplan, Sarah; Achenbach, Joel (September 6, 2018). “Scientists and doctors zap theory that microwave weapon injured Cuba diplomats”. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 16, 2018. Retrieved January 5, 2019.
  90. ^ Bokat-Lindell, Spencer (October 26, 2021). “Is ‘Havana Syndrome’ an ‘Act of War’ or ‘Mass Hysteria’?”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 26, 2021. Retrieved October 26, 2021.
  91. ^ a b c d e f Vergano, Dan (September 30, 2021). “A Declassified State Department Report Says Microwaves Didn’t Cause ‘Havana Syndrome’. BuzzFeed News. Archived from the original on September 30, 2021. Retrieved September 30, 2021.
  92. ^ Levinson, Charles (July 30, 2019). “Special Report: Inside a Trump-era purge of military scientists at a legendary think tank”. Reuters. Archived from the original on July 30, 2019. Retrieved July 30, 2019.
  93. ^ Lederman, Josh; Weissenstein, Michael (October 12, 2017). “Dangerous sound? What Americans heard in Cuba attacks”. Associated Press News. Archived from the original on November 5, 2021. Retrieved November 4, 2021.
  94. ^ a b Zimmer, Carl (January 4, 2019). “The Sounds That Haunted U.S. Diplomats in Cuba? Lovelorn Crickets, Scientists Say”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 5, 2019. Retrieved January 5, 2019.
  95. ^ a b Stubbs, Alexander L.; Montealegre-Z, Fernando (2019). “Recording of ‘sonic attacks’ on U.S. diplomats in Cuba spectrally matches the echoing call of a Caribbean cricket”. bioRxiv 10.1101/510834.
  96. ^ Stone, Richard (February 15, 2018). “U.S. diplomats in Cuba have unusual brain syndrome, but there’s no proof they were attacked, study says”. Science. doi:10.1126/science.aat3410.
  97. ^ Stone, Richard (December 8, 2017). “Cuban panel claims stress caused mystery illnesses”. Science. 358 (6368): 1236–1237. Bibcode:2017Sci…358.1236S. doi:10.1126/science.358.6368.1236. PMID 29217550.
  98. ^ Stone, Richard (June 20, 2018). “Sonic attack or mass paranoia? New evidence stokes debate over diplomats’ mysterious illness”. Science. doi:10.1126/science.aau5386 (inactive January 31, 2024). Archived from the original on June 22, 2018. Retrieved July 24, 2019.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of January 2024 (link)
  99. ^ a b c d Vergano, Dan (January 15, 2021). “Medical Records Can’t Explain “Havana Syndrome,” A Buried CDC Report Says”. BuzzFeed News. Archived from the original on May 10, 2021. Retrieved May 11, 2021.
  100. ^ a b c d e f *CUBA Unexplained Events Investigation – Final Report (PDF). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. December 3, 2019. Archived (PDF) from the original on April 22, 2021. Retrieved May 10, 2021.

  101. ^ a b c d Kornbluh, Peter, ed. (February 2, 2021). Briefing Book #739: CDC Report on the ‘Havana Syndrome’. National Security Archive, George Washington University. Archived from the original on May 10, 2021. Retrieved May 10, 2021.
  102. ^ a b Bartholomew, Robert E; Baloh, Robert W (January 1, 2020). “Challenging the diagnosis of ‘Havana Syndrome’ as a novel clinical entity”. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 113 (1): 7–11. doi:10.1177/0141076819877553. ISSN 0141-0768. PMC 6961165. PMID 31672089.
  103. ^ Gaffney, Adam (November 8, 2021). “The Big Misunderstanding About Havana Syndrome”. New York. Archived from the original on November 8, 2021. Retrieved November 8, 2021.
  104. ^ a b c d e f g h i Atwood, Kylie (February 24, 2021). “CIA launches task force to probe invisible attacks on US diplomats and spies as one victim finds some relief”. CNN. Archived from the original on February 25, 2021. Retrieved February 25, 2021.
  105. ^ a b Borger, Julian (June 2, 2021). “Microwave weapons that could cause Havana Syndrome exist, experts say”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on November 27, 2021.
  106. ^ Baloh, Robert W.; Bartholomew, Robert E. (2020). Havana Syndrome: Mass Psychogenic Illness and the Real Story Behind the Embassy Mystery and Hysteria. Springer International. ISBN 9783030407469. Archived from the original on March 3, 2023. Retrieved October 21, 2021.
  107. ^ Relman, David A.; Pavlin, Julie A., eds. (December 5, 2020). An Assessment of Illness in U.S. Government Employees and Their Families at Overseas Embassies. National Academies of Sciences. doi:10.17226/25889. ISBN 978-0-309-68137-7. PMID 33411434. S2CID 230639099. Archived from the original on March 3, 2023. Retrieved March 3, 2023.
  108. ^ Breslauer, Brenda; Dilanian, Ken; Lederman, Josh (December 5, 2020). ‘Havana Syndrome’ likely caused by pulsed microwave energy, government study finds”. NBC News. Archived from the original on March 3, 2021. Retrieved February 27, 2021.
  109. ^ ‘Havana syndrome’ likely caused by directed microwaves – US report”. BBC News. December 6, 2020. Archived from the original on September 28, 2022. Retrieved September 28, 2022.
  110. ^ a b c d e f g h i

  111. ^ Vergano, Dan (December 7, 2020). “Scientists Are Slamming A Report Saying Microwave Attacks Could Have Caused ‘Havana Syndrome’ In US Diplomats”. BuzzFeed News. Archived from the original on April 12, 2021. Retrieved April 12, 2021.
  112. ^ a b c d McCammon, Sarah (October 15, 2021). “New cases of ‘Havana Syndrome’ grow as cause remains a mystery”. NPR. Event occurs at 5:59. Archived from the original on November 10, 2021. Retrieved November 11, 2021.
  113. ^ Crawford, Jamie (December 5, 2020). ‘Sonic attacks’ suffered by US diplomats likely caused by microwave energy, government study says”. CNN. Archived from the original on December 6, 2020.
  114. ^ Swanson, Ana; Wong, Edward (December 5, 2020). “Report Points to Microwave ‘Attack’ as Likely Source of Mystery Illnesses That Hit Diplomats and Spies”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 5, 2020.
  115. ^ Hansler, Jennifer (March 12, 2021). “State Department names senior official to lead response to mysterious ‘Havana syndrome’ attacks”. CNN. Archived from the original on October 28, 2021. Retrieved October 14, 2021.
  116. ^ Lederman, Josh; Breslauer, Brenda (September 22, 2021). “Diplomat overseeing ‘Havana Syndrome’ response is out after 6 months”. NBC News. Archived from the original on October 14, 2021. Retrieved October 14, 2021.
  117. ^ Barnes, Julian E. (July 8, 2021). “Spy Agencies Turn to Scientists as They Wrestle With Mysteries”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 8, 2021. Retrieved July 8, 2021.
  118. ^ Rofer, Cheryl (May 10, 2021). “Claims of Microwave Attacks Are Scientifically Implausible”. Foreign Policy. Archived from the original on October 26, 2021. Retrieved October 26, 2021.
  119. ^ “State Department website, July 12, 2021”. Archived from the original on July 13, 2022. Retrieved July 13, 2022.
  120. ^ Gazis, Olivia (November 5, 2021). “Secretary of State Blinken appoints two diplomats to lead ‘Havana Syndrome’ response”. CBS News. Archived from the original on November 5, 2021.
  121. ^ Ryan, Missy (November 5, 2021). “State Dept. names new team to oversee ‘Havana Syndrome’ response”. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on November 5, 2021.
  122. ^ Birenbaum, Gabby (May 1, 2021). “Reports of possible ‘Havana syndrome’ attacks are now documented in the US”. Vox. Archived from the original on May 22, 2021.
  123. ^ a b c “Are U.S. Officials Under Silent Attack?”. The New Yorker. May 21, 2021. Archived from the original on October 27, 2021. Retrieved October 26, 2021.
  124. ^ Seo, Hannah (January 20, 2022). “What causes Havana Syndrome? Not foreign attackers, CIA says”. Popular Science. Archived from the original on April 21, 2022. Retrieved April 15, 2022.
  125. ^ “Havana Syndrome could be caused by pulsed energy devices – US expert report”. The Guardian. February 2, 2022. Archived from the original on February 3, 2022. Retrieved February 3, 2022.
  126. ^ “TBICoE: Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) Acute Assessment Training 2022–2023”. DHA J-7 CEPO Continuing Education Management System.
  127. ^ a b c *Office of the Director of National Intelligence. “Updated Assessment of Anomalous Health Incidents” (PDF). Director of National Intelligence. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 2, 2023. Retrieved March 3, 2023.

  128. ^ Atwood, Kylie; Hansler, Jennifer (March 2, 2023). “US intelligence community cannot link ‘Havana Syndrome’ cases to a foreign adversary”. CNN. Archived from the original on March 4, 2023. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
  129. ^ Seligman, Lara; Banco, Erin (March 1, 2023). “Intel community bats down main theory behind ‘Havana Syndrome’ incidents”. Politico. Archived from the original on March 4, 2023. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
  130. ^ Pengelly, Martin (March 13, 2023). “John Bolton chose not to brief Trump on Russia Havana syndrome suspicion”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on March 13, 2023. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
  131. ^ Bolton, Alexander (March 4, 2023). “Rubio rejects intelligence finding that ‘Havana syndrome’ not linked to foreign adversary”. The Hill. Archived from the original on March 4, 2023. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
  132. ^ Karem, Brian (March 29, 2023). “Exclusive: Declassified report suggests ‘Havana syndrome’ could result from energy weapon”. Salon. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
  133. ^ Barnes, Julian E.; Entous, Adam (March 1, 2023). “Foreign Adversaries ‘Very Unlikely’ to Blame for Havana Syndrome, Intelligence Review Finds”. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved June 5, 2024.
  134. ^ Harris, Shane; Hudson, John (March 2, 2023). ‘Havana syndrome’ not caused by energy weapon or foreign adversary, intelligence review finds”. Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved June 5, 2024.
  135. ^ a b Faulconbridge, Guy (April 1, 2024). “Kremlin dismisses report Russia behind ‘Havana Syndrome’. Reuters. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
  136. ^ a b “Havana syndrome: Report links mystery illness to Russian intelligence unit”. www.bbc.com. Retrieved April 2, 2024.
  137. ^ Luscombe, Richard (April 1, 2024). ‘Havana syndrome’ linked to Russian unit, media investigation suggests”. The Guardian. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
  138. ^ Dobrokhotov, Roman; Grozev, Christo; Weiss, Michael (March 31, 2024). “Unraveling Havana Syndrome: New evidence links the GRU’s assassination Unit 29155 to mysterious attacks on U.S. officials and their families”. The Insider. Retrieved April 1, 2024.
  139. ^ Pelley, Scott (March 31, 2024). “Havana Syndrome mystery continues as a lead military investigator says bar for proof was set impossibly high – CBS News”. CBS News. Retrieved April 1, 2024.
  140. ^ Dieckmann, Cornelius; Dobrokhotov, Roman; Grozev, Christo; Lüdke, Steffen; Schadwinkel, Alina; Schmid, Fidelius (March 31, 2024). “Did Russian agents use microwave weapons against US diplomats”. Der Spiegel (in German). Retrieved April 1, 2024.
  141. ^ Flaherty, Anne (April 1, 2024). “Senior DOD official experienced ‘Havana syndrome’ symptoms at NATO summit in July, Pentagon says”. ABC News. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
  142. ^ Chasan, Aliza (April 17, 2024). “Senators call for renewed Havana Syndrome assessment after 60 Minutes report – CBS News”. CBS News. Retrieved April 24, 2024.
  143. ^ Luscombe, Richard (May 8, 2024). “Congress hears testimony on Russia’s sonic attacks on US officials in Havana”. The Guardian. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
  144. ^ “Silent Weapons: Examining Foreign Anomalous Health Incidents Targeting Americans In The Homeland”. United States House Committee on Homeland Security. May 8, 2024.
  145. ^ “Congress Passes National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022”. FYI Bulletin. No. 109. American Institute of Physics. December 15, 2021. Archived from the original on December 21, 2021.
  146. ^ “S.1828 – HAVANA Act of 2021”. United States Congress. May 25, 2021. Archived from the original on June 25, 2021. Retrieved June 25, 2021.
  147. ^ Martinez, Didi; Breslauer, Brenda; Lederman, Josh (December 8, 2020). “10 senators propose new bill to help victims of ‘Havana Syndrome’. NBC News. Archived from the original on June 25, 2021. Retrieved June 25, 2021.
  148. ^ Barnes, Julian E.; Sanger, David E.; Rogers, Katie (October 8, 2021). “Biden Signs Legislation to Compensate Victims of Mysterious ‘Havana Syndrome’. The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 18, 2021.
  149. ^ Barnes, Julian E. (August 24, 2022). “C.I.A. Begins Compensating Victims of Havana Syndrome”. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved June 5, 2024.
  150. ^ Strobel, Warren P. “Some Havana Syndrome Victims to Draw Six-Figure U.S. Payments”. WSJ. Retrieved June 5, 2024.
  151. ^ “HAVANA Act – Authorized Payment Frequently Asked Questions”. U.S. Department of Commerce. Retrieved June 5, 2024.
  152. ^ a b c Seligman, Lara (March 9, 2023). “The Pentagon is funding experiments on animals to recreate ‘Havana Syndrome’. Politico. Archived from the original on March 18, 2023. Retrieved March 18, 2023.
  153. ^ Best, Paul (March 13, 2023). “PETA asks Pentagon to cease animal testing related to ‘Havana syndrome’. Fox News. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
  154. ^ Wiśniewska, Maggie (March 13, 2023). “Letter from PETA to the Honorable Christine Wormuth” (PDF). PETA. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 13, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Havana syndrome.

Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

The Insider, 60 minutes и Spiegel рассказали, что агенты ГРУ России приезжали туда, где у дипломатов США нашли “гаванский синдром”


7BC933C4-70E6-455D-BDB9-A5EB443DECE2_cx0

Сотрудники ГРУ могли вызывать “гаванский синдром” у американских и канадских дипломатов и работников спецслужб, считают авторы совместного расследования The Insider, передачи 60 Minutes американского канала CBS News и немецкого издания Der Spiegel.

“Гаванский синдром” – неофициальная болезнь, для которой характерны головокружение, тошнота, головные боли и проблемы со слухом и координацией. С 2014 года подобные симптомы наблюдаются у сотрудников посольств США и Канады в разных странах.

Расследовали выяснили, что симптомы “гаванского синдрома” наблюдались у зарубежных дипломатов в те же периоды и в тех же местах, куда приезжали сотрудники воинской части 29155 ГРУ. Именно это подразделение связывают с с отравлениями “Новичком” Сергея и Юлии Скрипалей в Великобритании, а также бизнесмена Емельяна Гебрева в Болгарии.

Об этой связи говорят данные перелетов сотрудников ГРУ, которые с 2014 года оказываются в тех же местах, где фиксируют случаи “гаванского синдрома”. По данным расследователей, в ноябре 2014 года жертвой “гаванского синдрома” стал сотрудник американского консульства во Франкфурте, который узнал в одном из вероятных нападавших предполагаемого сотрудника ГРУ Егора Гордиенко.

Еще один инцидент произошел в 2017 году в Китае – у одного из сотрудников американского консульства, ответственного за хранение секретной информации, врачи зафиксировали “неизвестное воздействие окружающей среды, вызвавшее черепно-мозговую травму”. Расследовали отмечают, что информация о китайских инцидентах у них неполная.

Подобный случай произошел с женой американского дипломата в 2021 году в Тбилиси. Незадолго до приступа женщина заметила из окна своего дома мужчину, в котором узнала Альберта Аверьянова, сына командира части Андрея Аверьянова. Также расследователи рассказывают о вероятных инцидентах в 2021 году в Белграде и Ханое.

Журналисты отмечают, что пережившие атаки не получили должной помощи − их жалобы списали на психическое расстройство.

Помимо описанных случаев, расследователи сообщили, что замкомандира части 29155 ГРУ Иван Терентьев получил госзаказ на изучение “потенциальных возможностей нелетального акустического оружия при военных (боевых) действиях в городе”.

Авторы расследования отмечают, что прямых улик в пользу причастности ГРУ к использованию “акустического оружия” нет, однако теперь “американские власти могут переосмыслить свое отношение к “гаванскому синдрому”.

В эфире Настоящего Времени один из участников журналистского расследования, главред The Insider Роман Доброхотов рассказал, что они три года хотели заняться темой “гаванского синдрома”, но не сразу нашли к ней подход.


– Мы года три присматривались к этой теме. И у нас были разные представления о том, кто может стоять за этими атаками, хотя сам факт, что это не просто какие-то странные инциденты со здоровьем, а атаки российских спецслужб, подозрения были довольно давно. Не бывает таких совпадений: редкие симптомы и именно американские дипломаты, часто так или иначе работающие по России.

Год назад мы стали работать с американской программой “60 минут”. Появилась уникальная возможность связаться с жертвами “гаванского синдрома”. Мы изучили несколько десятков эпизодов и смогли, очертив круг подозреваемых, показать их фотографии жертвам. Пострадавшие опознали сотрудников войсковой части 29155: Егора Гордиенко, это франкфуртская атака 2014 года, и сына Аверьянова, Альберта Аверьянова, который тоже сотрудник, несмотря на свою молодость, ему был всего 21 год во время атаки в Тбилиси. По словам жертвы, он находился просто на малолюдной улице напротив здания в момент, когда атака происходила.

У нас есть показания свидетелей, сопоставление поездок сотрудников в/ч 29155 с инцидентами, документы, которые подтверждают, что ровно те сотрудники получали государственный заказ на исследование так называемого акустического оружия. У нас также есть данные о работе ученых, связанных с Военно-медицинской академией имени Кирова. И это публичная информация. Именно эта военно-медицинская академия по странному совпадению изучала то, что называется “синдром Минора”. Это тот диагноз, который ставят многим жертвам “гаванского синдрома”. Очень редкое заболевание, которое в обычных условиях почти не встречается.

Если говорить о симптомах, то это потеря равновесия на ровном месте, когда человек не может даже нормально встать с кровати. У него настолько плохо работает вестибулярный аппарат. Человек может упасть на улице. Это ощущение сильного давления в ушах, иногда очень сильной боли в ушах, причем это приходит одномоментно. Человек вдруг себя очень плохо чувствует, испытывает давление в голове и в ушах, часто слышит очень громкий шум, похожий на ультразвук или стрекотание кузнечика. И после этого шокового состояния начинаются уже хронические эффекты: потеря равновесия, затуманенное сознание, слабость, плохой сон, невозможность концентрироваться и регулярные мигрени. При синдроме Минора происходит разрушение определенной костной трубочки, через которую проводится звук. Так что это не психосоматическое, это не психологическое состояние, а это физическое нарушение.

– Но при этом цель – не убить?

– Мы не знаем ни одного летального случая. Если американские ученые правы, то речь идет о микроволновом импульсном излучении: это такая модулированная волна, которая на самом деле не микроволновая, но поскольку идет импульсами, частота этих импульсов совпадает с частотой звуковой волны, поэтому ухо воспринимает это как звуковую волну. И это такой эффект, когда нервный аппарат человека сильно перезагружается и возможны и механические, и физические нарушения, возникающие вследствие этого. Цель была навредить, запугать человека, да еще и сделать так, чтобы он не мог нормально к врачу пойти. Если ты идешь к врачу и говоришь, что тебя, кажется, облучают, рекомендуют обратиться к психиатру. И такое постоянно случалось. То есть это именно так и работало.

– Как это физически выглядит? Какой-то аппарат должен стоять возле американской дипмиссии?

– Мы слышали разные мнения. Одни специалисты говорят, что это нечто достаточно громоздкое, размером с телескоп. Другие считают, что устройство может быть относительно портативным и помещаться в чемоданчик. Судя по всему это что-то транспортабельное. Если это что-то размером с рояль, то, наверное, было бы очень заметно.


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

New Probe Claims Russia May Be Linked To Mysterious ‘Havana Syndrome’


Rescuers release an injured man from a destroyed car at the site of an apartment building hit by a Russian missile strike in Dnipro on June 28.

Rescuers release an injured man from a destroyed car at the site of an apartment building hit by a Russian missile strike in Dnipro on June 28.

As Ukrainians marked Constitution Day on June 28, Moscow unleashed a fresh wave of drone and artillery strikes on southern and eastern regions for the second day in a row, killing at least four people in a village in the Donetsk region, one person in Dnipropetrovsk, and injuring others in Kharkiv, Ukrainian officials in the regions said.

At attack by Russian troops on Toretsk in the Donetsk region hit an apartment building, destroying the entrance of the five-story building, the regional prosecutor’s office said. Four civilians, ages 43 to 76, died. Among the injured are a 39-year-old woman and her 8-year-old daughter, who was in serious condition.

The attack in the Dnipropetrovsk region hit a nine-story apartment building in the city of Dnipro, killing one person and injuring six others, including a 7-month-old baby, said Dnipropetrovsk regional Governor Serhiy Lysak. Several floors were destroyed, the governor said.

The attack in Kharkiv occurred in the village of Tsyrkuny, Governor Oleh Synyehubov said. Russian troops fired at least three anti-aircraft missiles at the settlement, Synyehubov said on Telegram.

“At this moment, there are eight victims,” he said.

He added that two houses and smaller buildings caught fire. Another 10 houses were damaged.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said the attacks were another reminder that Ukraine needs better air defense.

“‘That’s why we keep reminding all our partners: Only sufficient quantity and quality of air defense systems, only sufficient determination of the world, can stop Russian terror,” he said on Telegram. “We need these solutions. We need a reliable air shield for Ukraine.”

In a video message posted earlier on Telegram, Zelenskiy congratulated his compatriots on Constitution Day, which is marked on June 28, and highlighted the importance of national solidarity in times of war.


RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

“The 17th article of the constitution: The protection of Ukraine is the most important function of the state and the cause of the entire Ukrainian people. Millions of Ukrainians prove their devotion to this every day. Heroes on the front lines and those who work hard to strengthen the state. Ukrainians who changed their lives, changed their profession, but did not change their choice in favor of freedom, Ukraine, Europe,” Zelenskiy said.

Zelenskiy’s message came as Russia targeted Nikopol, a city that lies on the right bank of Dnieper River, for a second day on June 28.

“From very early in the morning, the Russian military struck the city of Nikopol again, targeting the district center with kamikaze drones,” Dnipropetrovsk regional Governor Serhiy Lysak said on Telegram, without specifying the number of drones. “There are no dead or wounded,” Lysak said, adding that several houses and industrial facilities in the city had been damaged in the attack. On June 27, Russia launched a massive artillery attack on Nikopol, causing extensive damage to several schools. Another southern Ukrainian region, Kherson, was also targeted by a fresh round of Russian strikes, regional Governor Oleksandr Prokudin reported on June 28.

Prokudin said in a message on Telegram that 28 settlements across Kherson were targeted in the attack that wounded a total of six people and damaged a critical infrastructure facility. He did not elaborate.

Meanwhile, a suspected Ukrainian drone attack set an oil depot on fire in Michurinsk, in Russia’s Tambov region, some 400 kilometers southeast of Moscow, regional Governor Maksim Egorov reported on June 28.

Egorov said the fire was small and it was under control.


Aleksandr Bogomaz, the governor of Russia’s Bryansk region, reported that five drones had been shot down over his region on June 28.

The governor of Smolensk region, Vasily Anokhin, said nine drones had been downed over a military facility in the Pochinovsk district.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said a total of 25 drones had been downed over five regions. The claim could not be independently confirmed.

Ukraine, whose energy infrastructure has been devastated by constant Russian attacks, has over the past several months increasingly targeted fuel-production sites inside Russia, mainly oil-refining facilities that work for the Russian military.


Categories
Michael Novakhov's favorite articles

‘Havana syndrome’ linked to Russian unit, media investigation suggests


4000.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=8

A Russian intelligence unit is probably the origin of mysterious so-called Havana syndrome symptoms – including brain injuries and hearing loss – experienced by US diplomats in recent years, according to a joint media investigation released on Sunday.

The findings directly contradict the conclusion of US officials a year ago that “anomalous health incidents” (AHIs) among embassy staff in Cuba, China and various locations in Europe were not caused by an energy weapon or foreign adversary.

In a related development on Monday, the US defense department said a senior official who attended a summit on international military alliance Nato at Vilnius, Lithuania, last year experienced similar symptoms.

New evidence uncovered in the joint report by the Insider, Der Spiegel and CBS’s 60 Minutes – after a year-long investigation – suggests that sonic weaponry created and employed by Unit 29155 of the Russian GRU was probably the cause of Havana syndrome.

The notorious unit is responsible for Russia’s military intelligence operations overseas and has been blamed for several international incidents, including the attempted poisoning of the defector Sergei Skripal in the UK in 2018.

Havana syndrome was first reported in 2016 when diplomats in Cuba’s capital reported hearing piercing sounds at night, followed by staff in other locations globally, and in Washington DC. Their symptoms included bloody noses, headaches, vision problems and other strange auditory sensations.

“Members of the Kremlin’s infamous military intelligence sabotage squad have been placed at the scene of suspected attacks on overseas US government personnel and their family members, leading victims to question what Washington knows,” the report states.

“Havana syndrome shows all the markings of a Russian hybrid warfare operation. If it is established that the Kremlin really is behind the attacks … such a sustained, decade-long campaign would easily count as one of Vladimir Putin’s greatest strategic victories against the US.”

The Insider said senior members of the unit received awards and political promotions for work related to the development of “non-lethal acoustic weapons” that include both sound and radio frequency-based directed energy devices.

The report also documents numerous incidents in which senior US staff were harmed and “neutralized”, some suffering life-changing injuries that led to their premature retirements or return to the US. The American Foreign Service Association acknowledged in 2022 that Havana syndrome had “dramatically hurt” morale among US diplomats and had affected recruitment.

A follow-up report on Monday from the Insider, 60 Minutes and Der Spiegel recounted how a Russian spy who worked as an executive chef at Russia-themed restaurants in New York City and Washington DC was arrested in 2020 and then interrogated by an FBI agent who later came down with Havana syndrome. The outlets that produced the report again posited that the agent’s symptoms may have been caused by a directed energy weapon wielded by the GRU.

In March last year, however, the joint conclusion of seven US intelligence agencies – in a redacted report following their own multi-year investigation into AHIs – was that “available intelligence consistently points against the involvement of US adversaries in causing the reported incidents”.

Five of the agencies said foreign involvement was “very unlikely”, one found it “unlikely”, and the seventh declined to offer an opinion. But most noted their assessments were moderate to low confidence given the available evidence.

On Monday, Russia dismissed as “baseless” the new report linking attacks to its military intelligence operations.

“This is not a new topic. For many years so-called Havana syndrome has been exaggerated in the press, and from the very beginning it was linked to accusations against the Russian side,” the Kremlin press official Dmitry Peskov told reporters.

“But no one has ever published or expressed any convincing evidence of these unfounded accusations anywhere. Therefore, all this is nothing more than baseless, unfounded accusations by the media.”

Also on Monday, a Pentagon spokesperson, Sabrina Singh, told reporters that an unnamed senior defense department official experienced Havana syndrome symptoms during a 2023 Nato summit in Vilnius. Citing medical privacy laws, she did not say if the official required treatment, or had to cease performing their duties.

The US closed its Havana immigration office in 2018 under an American policy shift toward Cuba and also in response to fears at the time that the Havana syndrome was a result of a microwave or other electronic attack. It reopened in August 2023, almost half a year after the US report found no credible evidence that Russia, or anybody else, was behind the attacks.

The new Insider report suggests the first cases may have occurred in Germany two years earlier than those in Havana in 2016 that gave the syndrome its name.

“There were likely attacks two years earlier in Frankfurt, Germany, when a US government employee stationed at the consulate there was knocked unconscious by something akin to a strong energy beam,” the report said.

The New Yorker reported in July 2021 that about two dozen US intelligence officers, diplomats and other government officials in Austria had reported problems similar to Havana syndrome since Joe Biden became president the same year.

The US deployed medical and scientific experts to study the alleged attacks and those affected have been extensively examined to try to understand their afflictions.

In 2021, Congress passed the Havana Act, authorizing the state department, CIA and other government agencies to provide payments to staff and their families who were affected during assignments.

“We are working overtime across the entire government to get to the bottom of what happened, who’s responsible. And in the meantime to make sure that we’re caring for anyone who’s been affected and to protect all of our people to the best of our ability,” the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said in 2022 after further cases were reported in Paris and Geneva.

CBS said in a tweet that the office of the director of national intelligence referred inquiries by 60 Minutes journalists to the intelligence community’s annual threat assessment commentary on AHIs.

The network obtained statements from the White House and FBI promising to continue to investigate the causes and consequences of AHIs.

Agence France-Presse and Reuters contributed to this report