David L. Norquist was born November 24, 1966, in Concord, Massachusetts. He is a 1989 graduate of the University of Michigan, where he received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and a Master’s Degree in Public Policy. He also holds a Master’s Degree in National Security Studies from Georgetown University and is a Certified Government Financial Manager (CGFM).
When the Senate confirmed David Norquist by voice vote, it not only demonstrated his overwhelming popularity on Capitol Hill but also, at long last, emplaced the top level of the Pentagon’s leadership after a half-year hiatus. Norquist, previously confirmed as Pentagon comptroller and chief financial officer, had been acting as deputy secretary ever since James Mattis resigned as secretary and, as a result, former deputy secretary Patrick Shanahan acted in his former boss’s place. In fact, Norquist was not even formally the acting deputy; he was “performing the duties of deputy secretary,” a weird formulation intended to comply with the terms of the 1998 Federal Vacancies Reform Act.
Washington’s newest thinktank is fomenting a revolution in US foreign affairs – and a retreat from interventionism
America’s newest foreign policy thinktank threatens to radically realign the politics of US national security. At a conference on Capitol Hill in late February, the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft showcased what it calls its “transpartisan” left-right alliance of “realists”. Their goal is to drop democracy promotion, humanitarian intervention and stop the US from fighting “endless wars”.
The Commission’s latest budget non-paper threatens to hamper flagship defence initiatives more than previous proposals. It was put forward on Friday (20 February) in an attempt to bridge the growing differences among EU leaders over the bloc’s next seven-year budget.
Earlier this year, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin proposed a range of sweeping constitutional changes to ensure a favourable power transition scenario for the country’s leadership. The reform would also allow Kremlin-linked historians and policy advisers to introduce an alternative, politically advantageous narrative of the Second World War, as the past takes on increased significance in legitimising the regime.