|
Quotes of the Day:
“Strategy is not about what we intend to do. It is about what we must be prepared to do.”
– Bernard Brodie
“The price of greatness is responsibility.”
– Winston Churchill
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”
– Ronald Reagan
1. China Signals It Won’t Give an Inch to the U.S. in Latin America
2. Taiwan stays on high alert as Chinese ships pull back after massive drills
3. Damn the Deep State’s Torpedoes: Full Speed Ahead for America’s ‘Golden Fleet’
4. The Right Diagnosis, the Wrong Prescription: Why a “Golden Fleet” Misses the Mark
5. Iran Says Regime Loyalist Killed as Protests Turn Violent
6. Opinion | In Ukraine, Give War a Chance
7. Opinion | Maybe Arms Control Does Have a Future
8. Is China’s truck-mounted catapult system enabling merchant aircraft carriers?
9. Beijing slams Taiwanese leader Lai’s New Year’s speech as ‘lies’ and ‘malice’
10. China’s Wang Yi takes aim at Japan in call with South Korean foreign minister
11. A Booze Ban Since the ’50s Is Being Quietly Lifted in Saudi Arabia
12. How Meta’s Reels Became a $50 Billion Business
13. China warns satellites from Elon Musk’s Starlink are ‘safety and security’ risk
14. Is Trump channeling JFK?
15. Secretive Taiwanese Land Attack Cruise Missile Seen On The Move
16. The incredible firepower of the US Army’s Night Stalkers Airpower, Special Operations
17. Underground betting scandal sweeps the Pentagon
1. China Signals It Won’t Give an Inch to the U.S. in Latin America
Summary:
China’s new Latin America and Caribbean policy paper signals Beijing will contest U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere and will not yield to POTUS’s push to “deny non-Hemispheric competitors.” China frames a global power shift away from U.S. primacy, expands Belt and Road ties across the region, and deepens leverage through infrastructure finance, trade, critical minerals, and energy links. It is defending partners like Venezuela largely with rhetoric, while signaling wider military ambition through talk of “strategic support points” and provocative simulations. A core objective is isolating Taiwan by flipping remaining regional diplomatic ties, with Panama as a key battleground.
Comment: Will we see a test of the Monroe Doctrine/Trump Corollary in 2026? Is the gauntlet being thrown down?
Does the PRC have the same power project challenges in the Western Hemisphere as we have in the Asia-indo-Pacific?
We have bases and a silk web of friends, partners, and allies. Who should have the advantage in strategic competition and conflict?
This is quite a way to welcome in the New Year.
China Signals It Won’t Give an Inch to the U.S. in Latin America
WSJ
Beijing doubles down on its ambitions for the region just as Trump tries to assert dominance over the Western Hemisphere
By James T. Areddy
Follow
Dec. 31, 2025 11:00 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/china-signals-it-wont-give-an-inch-to-the-u-s-in-latin-america-ba03bd24
Beijing has expressed anger at the destruction of a Chinese-built friendship park overlooking the Panama Canal. Enea Lebrun/Reuters
- China’s new policy paper on Latin America signals increased competition with the U.S. for regional influence.
- Beijing has expanded its Belt and Road Initiative to 24 signatories in the region and displaced the U.S. as a top trading partner.
- The U.S. is concerned about China’s efforts to develop a global network of “strategic support points” for its military.
An artificial-intelligence tool created this summary, which was based on the text of the article and checked by an editor. Read more about how we use artificial intelligence in our journalism.
- China’s new policy paper on Latin America signals increased competition with the U.S. for regional influence.
China intends to keep playing in the U.S. backyard, Latin America.
The Trump administration took veiled swipes at China in its national-security strategy with the vow to “restore American pre-eminence in the Western Hemisphere” and “deny non-Hemispheric competitors.”
Less than a week after the release of the U.S. strategy in December, Beijing issued a little-noticed policy paper on Latin America and the Caribbean that geopolitical analysts say foreshadows more U.S.-China jostling for regional influence.
“China has always stood in solidarity through thick and thin with the Global South, including Latin America and the Caribbean,” said the 6,700-word policy paper, China’s first on the region in almost a decade. The paper cites how a “significant shift is taking place in the international balance of power,” terminology Chinese leader Xi Jinping uses to allege that the era of U.S. global supremacy is ending.
China shadows each major challenge President Trump has taken on in Latin America, from degrading the Venezuelan regime to reasserting American dominance at the Panama Canal. It is a counterpoint—albeit a moderate one—to what Beijing considers encirclement of its territory by the U.S. system of military alliances throughout Asia.
“Great power competition in the region has only just begun,” according to an analysis of China’s Latin American stance by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
The Washington-based think tank said Beijing’s policy plan demonstrated its intention to expand diplomatic and economic ties in Latin America, and position itself as an alternative to the U.S. China is gaining political leverage in the region by spending money on infrastructure projects and extracting critical minerals, energy and other natural resources. This is done while its diplomats engage local political power brokers via its embassies.
Beijing now claims 24 signatories in the region to its Belt and Road Initiative, compared with none before 2017. It has also displaced the U.S. as the biggest trading partner with many Latin American countries. “China’s strategy is basically not giving an inch,” said Ryan Berg, a co-author of the CSIS analysis.
China is Venezuela’s largest creditor and biggest oil customer, and state-owned Petróleos de Venezuela appeared at a Beijing business expo in July. wu hao/epa/shutterstock
Trump’s muscle-flexing at the Venezuelan regime of Nicolás Maduro is providing an early test of China’s priorities and its claim that it has an “all-weather strategic partnership” with the country. Beijing has denounced as illegal hegemony and “unilateral bullying” the U.S. military buildup around Venezuela, including the interception of oil tankers that are allegedly part of a sanctions-busting ghost fleet that also transports oil to China.
China’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, Sun Lei, thundered against the U.S. in Venezuela’s defense at a Security Council meeting on Dec. 23. “We stand against any move that violates the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter and infringes upon other countries’ sovereignty and security,” he said.
Most of Beijing’s support for the Maduro regime and other governments that fall into Trump’s crosshairs is likely to remain rhetorical. No one expects China to back up its tough talk with any action that could risk a direct military confrontation with the U.S.
Still, Beijing recently sent a provocative message when state media showed a wargame simulation in the Western Hemisphere. Government broadcaster China Central Television said the computer-based wargames were meant to demonstrate human-machine collaboration strategies, but they also showed Chinese “red” forces facing off against “blue” ships and aircraft around Cuba and Mexico.
China's military engaged planes near Cuba and Mexico during a wargame simulation shown on China Central Television.
Even if Chinese military action in the region is unlikely in the near term, such signals are a reminder that Beijing’s ambitions are no longer purely economic, said Leland Lazarus, a Miami-based risk consultant.
The former U.S. diplomat, who has advised the Defense Department on Latin America and China, said Washington is concerned about Chinese efforts to develop a global network of “strategic support points” that would turn ports into logistics hubs for its military, including a node in Cuba.
In an unclassified annual report to Congress from December, the Defense Department cited Cuba as the only nation in the Americas where China may have considered putting a military base. The report said China had made inroads through soft power and by helping countries launch satellites.
The Trump administration’s China policy has featured efforts to sustain trade in agriculture and rare-earth minerals, while limiting American technology exports that might strengthen its military. In response to questions about China’s Latin America stance, White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said the administration has moved “with historic speed to restore American strength at home and abroad and bring peace to the world.”
China hasn’t said why it has published the Latin American strategy paper now. It significantly expands on the previous official policy unveiled in 2016 to include security and governance initiatives since then.
Panama illustrates the U.S.-China tussle. It was central to an early Trump assertion of regional power when he vowed to retake control of the Panama Canal.
Since taking office in January, Trump has argued that Beijing has too much influence in Panama. Soon afterward, the Central American nation—which is so close to the U.S. it uses dollars as its official currency—said it would withdraw from the Belt and Road Initiative. The country’s president skipped Xi’s summit with Latin American leaders in May.
U.S.-China tension in Latin America are on display in Panama. martin bernetti/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
Trump welcomed a deal announced in March that appeared designed to appease him. A BlackRock-backed group would buy control of container handling ports at either end of the canal from the Hong Kong company that has managed them since 1996 and which marked the strongest evidence of Chinese influence there. Beijing has since put pressure on the tycoons and firms behind the deal to restructure terms so control shifts to Cosco, a shipping group owned by China, The Wall Street Journal has reported.
In a much lower-stakes action last weekend, the mayor of a city abutting the waterway ordered the demolition of a Chinese-built friendship park, angering Beijing’s embassy in nearby Panama City.
The strategy paper makes clear that Beijing’s top policy priority for Latin America and the Caribbean is severing the region’s remaining links to Taiwan.
The region includes seven of the 12 governments worldwide that maintain diplomatic relations with the democratically run island, including Guatemala, Paraguay and Haiti. China has pledged unspecified benefits to nations that alter their foreign policies and accept Beijing’s “One China” policy. Several have done so in recent years, including Panama.
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
How should U.S. officials address China’s growing influence in Latin America? Join the conversation below.
Yet on this point, Honduras recently elected Nasry Asfura as president. The Trump-backed candidate campaigned against his nation’s 2023 decision to establish diplomatic relations with Beijing and said he would consider restoring ties with Taiwan.
The Trump administration doesn’t explicitly mention China in its national-security strategy’s outline of a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine—the 19th-century warning to European colonial powers that the U.S. is pre-eminent in the Western Hemisphere.
But China is the obvious challenger when it references the “hidden costs” of foreign assistance that appear in the form of “espionage, cybersecurity, debt-traps.”
America wants to “make ourselves the partner of first choice” in the region, according to Trump’s strategy.
China in turn is “trying to draw a stark contrast with the Trump administration’s revival of the Monroe Doctrine,” said Lazarus, who called the neocolonial language a “narrative gift” to Beijing.
Write to James T. Areddy at James.Areddy@wsj.com
Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
WSJ
2. Taiwan stays on high alert as Chinese ships pull back after massive drills
Summary:
Taiwan kept forces on high alert after China ended “Justice Mission 2025,” while Taipei continued tracking a residual Chinese air and maritime presence. The drills featured large-scale rocket launches and major deployments of PLA warships, coast guard vessels, and aircraft operating around Taiwan, including flights crossing the median line. Taiwan condemned the exercise as a militarized provocation that threatens regional stability, but reported the maritime picture was calming as Chinese ships pulled back. Beijing framed the operation as a “stern warning” against Taiwan independence and external interference, following a new U.S. arms package. Quad ambassadors met in Beijing as the drills unfolded.
Comment: What did we learn from this? Is the PRC telegraphing a possible move? Is it a warning and coercion? Political and unrestricted warfare? Who is the target audience for messaging? Taiwan, the US, US allies or all of the above? Or is it deception? Did we gather any significant intelligence? What are we not seeing/what have we missed?
Welcome to 2026.
Taiwan stays on high alert as Chinese ships pull back after massive drills
Reuters · Yimou Lee
By Yimou Lee and Liz Lee
December 31, 202510:15 AM ESTUpdated 23 hours ago
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/taiwan-stays-high-alert-chinese-ships-pull-back-after-massive-drills-2025-12-31/
- Summary
- China's drills involved rockets, warships, and aircraft near Taiwan
- Taiwan condemned drills as threat to regional security
- China's exercises follow announcement of US arms package for Taiwan
- Ambassadors from Quad nations met in Beijing on Tuesday
TAIPEI/BEIJING, Dec 31 (Reuters) - Taiwan remained on high alert on Wednesday after China staged massive military drills around the island the previous day, keeping its emergency maritime response centre running as it monitored Chinese naval manoeuvres, the coast guard said.
The exercises named "Justice Mission 2025" saw China fire dozens of rockets towards Taiwan and deploy a large number of warships and aircraft near the island, in a show of force that drew concern from allies in the region and the west.
The Reuters Tariff Watch newsletter is your daily guide to the latest global trade and tariff news. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Beijing announced late on Wednesday the completion of the drills, saying its military would remain on high alert and continue to strengthen their combat-readiness.
In reply, Taiwan's defence ministry said that as there were still a significant number of Chinese planes and vessels in its response area, its armed forces would maintain an "appropriate contingency mechanism". It did not elaborate.
"The Chinese Communist Party's aggressive and militaristic provocations endanger regional security and stability, and have been condemned by democratic allies in the international community," it said in a statement.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
China's President Xi Jinping struck a familiar tone on Taiwan in his New Year address shortly after Beijing's announcement, repeating last year's warning to what it regards as forces seeking Taiwan's independence.
"Compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are bound by blood ties thicker than water, and the historical trend toward national reunification is unstoppable," he said in a speech televised by state broadcaster CCTV.
China claims democratically governed Taiwan as its own territory, and it has not ruled out using force to take it under Chinese control. Taiwan, which rejects China's claims, condemned the latest drills as a threat to regional security and a blatant provocation.
Chinese ships were moving away from Taiwan by Tuesday night, according to Kuan Bi-ling, head of Taiwan's Ocean Affairs Council.
"The maritime situation has calmed down, with ships and vessels gradually departing," she said in a post on Facebook late on Tuesday.
A Taiwan coast guard official told Reuters that all 11 Chinese coast guard ships had left waters near Taiwan and were continuing to move away. A Taiwan security official said emergency response centres for the military and coast guard remained active.
There were more than 90 Chinese naval and coast guard vessels in the region, with many of them deployed in the South China Sea, near Taiwan and the East China Sea, two security officials in the region told Reuters earlier.
The officials, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter, said the size of China's maritime deployment had steadily increased since early this week.
Item 1 of 6 Explosive barrels placed by Taiwan military at the Tamsui river, as part of a series of emergency combat readiness drills, in response to China conducting "Justice Mission 2025" military drills around Taiwan, in Taipei, Taiwan, December 31, 2025. REUTERS/Ann Wang
[1/6]Explosive barrels placed by Taiwan military at the Tamsui river, as part of a series of emergency combat readiness drills, in response to China conducting "Justice Mission 2025" military drills around Taiwan, in Taipei, Taiwan, December 31, 2025. REUTERS/Ann Wang Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab
China is in the middle of what has become a busy season for military exercises.
Taiwan's defence ministry on Wednesday said 77 Chinese military aircraft and 25 navy and coast guard vessels had been operating around the island in the past 24 hours.
Among them, 35 military planes had crossed the Taiwan Strait median line that separates the two sides, it added.
Map showing multiple zones around Taiwan marked by China for December 30 military drills, and past drill areas.
'STERN WARNING'
As the war games unfolded, the ambassadors to China from countries in the Quad grouping, formed to conduct security dialogue, met in Beijing on Tuesday.
United States Ambassador David Perdue posted on X a photo of himself with the Australian, Japanese and Indian ambassadors at the U.S. embassy. He called the Quad a "force for good" working to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific but gave no details about the meeting. The U.S. embassy did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the meeting.
The drills, China's most extensive war games by coverage area to date, forced Taiwan to cancel dozens of domestic flights and dispatch jets and warships for monitoring. Soldiers ran rapid-response drills including putting up barricades at various locations.
China regards the exercises as a "necessary and just measure" to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity, its Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Zhang Han told reporters on Wednesday at a weekly briefing. They were "a stern warning against Taiwan independence separatist forces and external interference", she added.
China's state news agency Xinhua published an article summarising "three key takeaways" from the drills, which began 11 days after the United States announced a record $11.1 billion arms package for Taiwan.
The simulated "encirclement" demonstrated the People's Liberation Army's ability to "press and contain separatist forces while denying access to external interference – an approach summarised as 'sealing internally and blocking externally'," the article said, citing Zhang Chi, a professor at the PLA National Defence University.
Despite the growing intensity of China's war games, Beijing is unlikely to start a war at the cost of its reputation, said Lyle Goldstein, the Asia programme head of U.S. think tank Defense Priorities.
"They threaten and bluster a lot, but ultimately (a war) would be very costly for China no matter what," Goldstein said.
Reporting by Yimou Lee in Taipei and Liz Lee in Beijing; Editing by Stephen Coates and Michael Perry
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
Purchase Licensing Rights
Yimou Lee
Thomson Reuters
Yimou Lee is a Senior Correspondent for Reuters covering everything from Taiwan, including sensitive Taiwan-China relations, China's military aggression and Taiwan's key role as a global semiconductor powerhouse. A three-time SOPA award winner, his reporting from Hong Kong, China, Myanmar and Taiwan over the past decade includes Myanmar's crackdown on Rohingya Muslims, Hong Kong protests and Taiwan's battle against China's multifront campaigns to absorb the island.
Reuters · Yimou Lee
3. Damn the Deep State’s Torpedoes: Full Speed Ahead for America’s ‘Golden Fleet’
Summary:
James Fanell argues POTUS’s “Golden Fleet” plan would reverse decades of U.S. naval decline and blunt China’s maritime rise. He claims POTUS announced “Trump-class” battleships, starting with USS Defiant, plus carrier upgrades, a new frigate tied to the Coast Guard cutter design, and a new medium amphibious ship, all meant to revive shipbuilding and jobs. Critics, including CSIS and retired flag officers, warn of high cost, long design timelines, budget strain, and mismatch with Navy concepts. Fanell says the real fight is will and money, driven by Pentagon budget shares, command-plan reforms, and shipbuilding process change, not feasibility.
Comment: Let's get those ships built. Do we have the will and money?
Damn the Deep State’s Torpedoes: Full Speed Ahead for America’s ‘Golden Fleet’ › American Greatness
amgreatness.com · James E. Fanell
Trump’s Golden Fleet fight isn’t really about battleships—it’s about whether Washington has the will to rebuild American naval power or let bureaucracy and budgets sink it.
By James E. Fanell
December 30, 2025
https://amgreatness.com/2025/12/30/damn-the-deep-states-torpedoes-full-speed-ahead-for-americas-golden-fleet/
This past week, in what could be described as a “Christmas present” press conference from Mar-a-Lago, President Donald J. Trump announced the building of a new class of “battleships”—the Trump-class. Flanked by the secretaries of war, state, and the navy, President Trump declared that the first ship of this class will be appropriately named the United States Ship (USS) Defiant. Initially, two Trump-class battleships are scheduled to be in the water within two and a half years—a very aggressive schedule—to be followed up quickly by eight more, with plans for an eventual total of up to 25 ships.
As the president noted, these new 30,000-to-40,000-ton-plus combatants, armed with nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missiles (SLCM-N), hypersonic missiles, lasers, and rail gun weapons, will be the flagships of the American Naval Fleet and will “inspire fear in America’s enemies all over the world.” Just as importantly, their construction will help “revive the American shipbuilding industry” and create thousands upon thousands of jobs for Americans.
These new battleships are just one of many key components of the president’s “Golden Fleet”—his strategic plan to rebuild the maritime power of the United States of America. Other elements of the Golden Fleet referenced at the Christmas-week press conference included upgrading the Ford-class aircraft carrier, a new frigate class based on the U.S. Coast Guard’s proven National Security Cutter, and a new type of medium-sized amphibious assault ship. Undergirding all these surface ship enhancements is the U.S. Navy’s continued commitment to maintaining America’s lead in the undersea domain with a submarine force that is second to none.
All in all, the press conference was a “Christmas present” for those of us who have been arguing for two decades that America’s maritime and naval power had been decimated to the point of putting America’s national security and safety at an existential risk. For instance, since 1986, when Ronald Reagan’s 600-ship navy dominated the seven seas, the U.S. Navy has atrophied to just over 290 warships and submarines today. During this 40-year decline of U.S. naval power, Communist China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy went from being a “brown-water” coastal defense force to the largest navy on the planet, currently estimated to be 395 warships by the end of 2025. Thus, President Trump’s Christmas week announcement was seen by navalists as a long overdue return to a rational military force structure—one that returns the U.S. Navy’s dominance.
However, by the week’s end, the relentlessly hostile, toxically negative cynics of America’s Deep State began their Grinch-like campaign of stealing Christmas from the Navy and the Nation. While major national security initiatives such as the Golden Fleet rate close review and criticism when warranted, this onslaught on the Golden Fleet has the feel of an orchestrated attack simply because the name Trump is associated with it.
For instance, in an article that the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) rushed into print less than 24 hours after the president’s press conference entitled “The Golden Fleet’s Battleship Will Never Sail,” a retired Marine Corps Infantry veteran argued that the cost of the ships is too high (as high as $9 billion per ship), they “will take years to design,” and the ships do not fit into the “operational concept” of the U.S. Navy. Others, like retired U.S. Navy RADM Mark Montgomery, asserted the new battleship program would be “a massive life cycle maintenance challenge” because maintaining supply chains, support systems, and training for a large number of such ships would place significant pressure on the Navy’s operational budget.
Other naysayers willfully mischaracterized the new Trump-class battleship as being nothing more than WWI/II-era dreadnoughts, which they assert were made extinct by airpower and doomed by the PLA’s arsenal of supersonic and hypersonic anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles. In their obligatory rush to condemn Trump’s vision, the naysayers dismissed the Department of War (DoW) plans for fielding space-age lasers and rail guns for the fleet’s missile defense: oblivious to the cynical contradiction of their arguments, they assert that the new systems are not ready and even if they were, at 30 knots the new battleships would still be “sitting ducks.” Others complained that fielding just two of these new battleships before 2030 is not enough to change the naval balance of power in the Western Pacific, let alone to deter or defeat the PLA Navy—complaints that childishly ignore the cumulative impact of these additional ships with broader national security initiatives in the Indo-Pacific Region.
Still more concerning is a report from The War Zone, entitled “The War Zone Trump Class Battleship Construction Won’t Begin Until 2030s,” written by Joseph Trevithick and Howard Altman, rushed out the day after the president’s press conference. The authors claim the “U.S. Navy has confirmed” that the construction of the new Trump-class battleships won’t begin until the 2030s, in contradiction of what the Commander-in-Chief stated in his press conference. Such reporting further demonstrates the “can’t do” mentality that dominates at least part of the Pentagon—amazingly, even from within the Navy Department.
These hurried condemnations of Trump’s Golden Fleet vision, obligatory as they may be to Deep Staters and the generally antagonistic think tank and news media cliques, overlook the central issue: does the U.S. have the willpower and the money to make it happen?
As it relates to willpower, President Trump has done his part to articulate the need for a maritime resurgence, unlike any of his predecessors since Ronald Reagan and the 600-ship Navy and Maritime Strategy. First, in March 2025, President Trump announced the creation of the Office of Shipbuilding. Further, in July of 2025, the office was moved under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), where the real changes to the U.S. government spending are being implemented. Second, in October, the president announced the initiation of the Golden Fleet during the celebrations of the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Navy. Third was his Christmas week press conference unveiling the new Trump-class battleship and more details on the key elements of the Golden Fleet. On this most critical issue, Trump has led from the front, using the bully pulpit of the presidency to demonstrate that America has the will to achieve a maritime resurgence that has not been seen in nearly half a century of American politics.
The money is there as well; the real issue is that it is fueling the Deep State’s pushback on the president’s Golden Fleet. With nearly four decades of wars in the Middle East, the Pentagon’s top priority was the U.S. Army (and Marine Corps) land-centric programs and force posture requirements. Thus, the U.S. Army’s programmatic approach dominated the spending priorities for the Pentagon. Consequently, the president’s announcement is seen as a real threat to the Army’s continued budget dominance.
The real issue is what changes will be made to the Total Obligation Authority (TOA), the top-line spending amount, for each of the services as the president’s vision of the Golden Fleet is implemented. If the entrenched interests of most of the past 40 years are allowed to win, then there will be no substantive change to each service. TOA and the Navy will be forced to build the Golden Fleet “out of hide.” If that were to happen, then yes, the president’s Golden Fleet will sink inside the Pentagon before ever becoming a reality.
Even the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board argues that “a flat budget” cannot build the ships of the president’s Golden Fleet. What the WSJ editorial board fails to mention is that the “flat budget” does not necessarily mean that the Trump administration will continue to give each of the services their same existing slice of the overall Pentagon budget pie.
In their haste to attack Trump’s naval buildup, the WSJ editorial board and other naysayers refuse to discuss the 800-pound gorilla in the room. That gorilla is the forthcoming sweeping changes to the Unified Command Plan (UCP), which sets the overall foundation for the funding requirements for the Pentagon.
Just two weeks ago, the Washington Post reported that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth will significantly alter the UCP by consolidating existing land-centric Combatant Commands (CoComs), reducing them from 11 to eight, along with downgrading the size of headquarters staffs of several major commands.
The changes are coming. As Trump’s recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) states, the “days of the United States propping up the entire world order like Atlas are over.” As these changes take place, standing Operational Plans (OPLANS) and existing Contingency Plans (CONPLANS) will be rewritten. Revised plans will directly impact force structure requirements and thus will undeniably impact each of the Services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps) TOA—how much money each service gets.
As stated, America’s national security benefits from legitimate criticism, and the U.S. Navy rates its fair share of criticism in the lead-up to the drastic steps the Trump Administration is now taking. For most of the past 40 years of Army domination of our nation’s military spending priorities, the Navy leadership—political (think “Green Hornet” Ray Mabus), uniformed (think politicized Admirals) and civilian (think Senior Executive Service)—repeatedly failed our nation and our Navy with disastrous programs like the Littoral Combat Ship, the Zumwalt-class destroyer, the Constellation-class guided missile frigate, and the decade-long delays with the Ford-class aircraft carrier. The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) was responsible for most of these debacles, as well as senior Navy leadership.
No one who served at NAVSEA or in senior echelons of the U.S. Navy over the past 40 years can hold their heads high for these colossal failures, and the Trump administration needs to make major changes to NAVSEA and the Navy as an organization. Most importantly, the U.S. must change how we go about the business of building new warships for the Fleet in a timely and lethal manner.
One recommended change comes from WWII, during which we enabled more rapid shipbuilding through the sharing of common designs among multiple shipbuilders. Another is to incentivize private shipyards, which made shipbuilding turnaround times much faster. Also, the approach to financing shipyard construction (annual appropriations) isn’t working. Private capital has to be infused into the shipbuilding industry. For instance, the work currently going on to expand the shipyard in Mobile, Alabama, to support submarine maintenance is financed through the private capital markets—a unique U.S. advantage, as private capital markets are some four times the U.S. GDP. As such, NAVSEA should focus on outcomes rather than processes.
So, we can expect the services will argue that there is no fat in their top lines and that taking any cuts would result in serious degradations to our national security. And yes, any war in the Pacific will demand fully capable joint capabilities drawn from all services, including persistent effects (anti-missile defense, long-range fires, electronic warfare, counter space, theater logistics, and assured communications, etc.), but that does not mean American ground forces are needed for a land war on the Asia landmass. As such, the total number of soldiers in uniform for the U.S. Army can be reduced, and programs specifically focused on operations in the CENTCOM AOR can be reduced, eliminated, or repositioned to better support a war in the Pacific.
Rather than buying the rhetoric from all the naysayers who predict the Golden Fleet cannot be financed, Americans would be better served to focus on affecting the changes that are coming to the UCP, OPLANS, and CONPLANs, and how that will ultimately impact the allocation of resources across the various service TOAs. That’s where the real debate—a knife fight, based on past such infighting—is going to happen. This inevitable vicious infighting is why the placing of the Office of Shipbuilding under OMB Director Russ Vought is a leading indicator of where change is coming within that so-called “flat budget”—one that is $1 trillion, the largest by any nation in history. If these changes in service TOAs are enacted, then America can rebuild its Navy. If not, the Deep State will have won, and America’s Navy will be, in both figurative and literal terms, very likely sunk.
***
James E. Fanell served as a career naval intelligence officer whose positions included senior intelligence officer for China at the Office of Naval Intelligence and chief of intelligence for CTF-70, Seventh Fleet, and the U.S. Pacific Fleet. He is the co-author of the book Embracing Communist China: America’s Greatest Strategic Failure.
amgreatness.com · James E. Fanell
4. The Right Diagnosis, the Wrong Prescription: Why a “Golden Fleet” Misses the Mark
Summary:
John Ferrari argues the “Golden Fleet” gets the diagnosis right but prescribes the wrong cure. He agrees the Navy is too small, readiness is brittle, maintenance backlogs are rising, sailors are overworked, and the shipbuilding industrial base cannot surge. But he says reviving battleships confuses spectacle with strategy. In a precision-strike, submarine, cyber, and space-targeting environment, large capital ships concentrate risk, demand heavy crews and logistics, and lose the cost-exchange with missiles. Ferrari argues the real problem is incentives and execution in acquisition and sustainment. He urges simpler ships, faster builds, more distributed and unmanned systems, stronger accountability, and frank tradeoffs.
Comment: I do not think POTUS means battleships like the Arizona, Missouri, and Iowa. I think "battleships" is simply a tagline or attention getter. And it has gotten our attention.
The Right Diagnosis, the Wrong Prescription: Why a “Golden Fleet” Misses the Mark
AEI · John G. Ferrari
December 29, 2025
https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-defense-policy/the-right-diagnosis-the-wrong-prescription-why-a-golden-fleet-misses-the-mark/
John G. Ferrari
The Trump administration’s announcement touting a return to new battleships and the “Golden Fleet” deserves a fair hearing because it starts from a place too few defense reform efforts do: It correctly identifies the problem. The United States Navy is underpowered for the missions it is asked to perform. Fleet size is insufficient, readiness is fragile, and the industrial base has atrophied after decades of feast-or-famine procurement. On those points, the administration is right.
Where it goes wrong is the solution.
We do not have a naval problem because we lack nostalgia. We have a naval problem because we have mismatched strategy, incentives, and execution. Rebranding maritime power with gold-plated symbolism and reviving capital ships designed for a different era risks confusing seriousness with spectacle and spending political capital on platforms that won’t survive the fight we’re actually preparing for.
Let’s start with the part worth praising. The administration is acknowledging what uniformed leaders have been whispering for years: The Navy is too small for a world of persistent competition with China, renewed Russian activity, and unrelenting demand from combatant commanders. Ship availability is stretched thin. Maintenance backlogs are growing. Sailors are exhausted. And the defense industrial base, especially shipyards and skilled labor, cannot surge on demand.
That recognition matters. In Washington, naming the problem is often the hardest step. Too many defense initiatives start with a solution in search of a justification. This one at least begins with the reality that American sea power is eroding, and that erosion has consequences for deterrence, alliance confidence, and crisis stability.
But identifying the problem does not excuse choosing the wrong fix.
Battleships, no matter how modernized, are the wrong answer to today’s maritime challenge. They are manpower-intensive, logistics-heavy, and operationally vulnerable in a world saturated with precision missiles, submarines, cyber warfare, and space-based targeting. The modern battlefield does not reward concentration of force in large, slow, exquisite platforms. It punishes it.
Advocates of new battleships often argue that advances in armor, electronic warfare, and point defenses can restore survivability. That argument ignores the economics of offense versus defense. It is far cheaper for an adversary to add another missile than for us to harden another hull. History is unkind to platforms that depend on being hit last.
The “Golden Fleet” concept compounds this mistake by leaning into symbolism over strategy. Gold suggests prestige, permanence, and dominance. But deterrence is not about how impressive our ships look at a commissioning ceremony; it’s about whether an adversary believes we can deny objectives at acceptable cost. That requires distribution, resilience, and adaptability, not a return to capital ships that concentrate risk.
There is also a deeper institutional problem here, one I’ve written about repeatedly: We keep trying to solve organizational and incentive failures with hardware. The Navy’s challenges are not primarily about steel in the water. They are about how they buy ships, how they maintain them, and how they hold leaders accountable for outcomes rather than promises.
They design ships that take too long to build, cost too much to modify, and are too complex to maintain. They stretch service lives beyond reason because replacing platforms is politically harder than fixing the acquisition system. They protect programs instead of performance, and they confuse industrial base stability with vendor entrenchment.
A new class of battleships would likely make all of this worse. It would be a bespoke program, justified as unique, shielded from competition, and vulnerable to cost growth. It would siphon resources from the kinds of capabilities actually needed: smaller combatants, unmanned systems, munitions stockpiles, logistics vessels, and the digital backbone that ties them together.
If the administration truly wants to rebuild American sea power, there is a better path.
First, prioritize numbers and availability over exquisite capability. A fleet that can show up matters more than a fleet that looks impressive on paper. That means simpler designs, faster build times, and realistic sustainment plans.
Second, invest in unmanned systems. Unmanned surface and undersea vessels, combined with smaller crewed ships, complicate adversary targeting and reduce the consequences of loss. This is not about replacing sailors; it’s about putting humans where judgment matters most.
Third, fix the incentives. Tie program survival to delivery and performance, not political support. Reward shipyards for speed and quality, not just capacity. Hold leaders accountable when schedules slip and costs explode.
Finally, be honest about tradeoffs. Every dollar spent on exquisite platforms is a dollar not spent on readiness, munitions, or sailors.
The administration deserves credit for saying out loud that the Navy is in trouble. Candor is refreshing, but leadership is not just about diagnosing decline, it’s about choosing reforms that reverse it.
We don’t need a return to the past. We need the discipline to build a future fleet that matches the fight ahead.
AEI · John G. Ferrari
5. Iran Says Regime Loyalist Killed as Protests Turn Violent
Summary:
Iran says a 21-year-old Basij regime loyalist was killed after confronting demonstrators in Kuhdasht, as protests over economic hardship entered a more violent phase. Officials reported injuries among security forces and arrests tied to attempted attacks on government facilities. Leaders pledged to address livelihoods, including appointing a new central bank governor, while hard-liners warned of a firm response if unrest shifts from economic grievance to instability. Analysts warned the regime’s default tool is repression. Inflation and currency collapse are the drivers: food inflation reached 64.2 percent in October, and the rial has lost about 60 percent since the June war with Israel.
Comment: Did the "regime loyalist" martyr himself to create the justification for a brutal crackdown?
Iran Says Regime Loyalist Killed as Protests Turn Violent
WSJ
Hard-liners have promised a harsher crackdown if protests spiral out of control.
By Benoit Faucon
Follow
Updated Dec. 31, 2025 6:36 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-vows-to-address-economic-problems-as-protests-enter-fourth-day-98f949c6
Demonstrators on Monday in Tehran. Zuma Press
A regime loyalist in Iran died Wednesday after he confronted demonstrators as unrest over economic problems took a violent turn, state media said.
The 21-year-old member of the Basij—a volunteer force tasked with protecting the Islamic Republic—was killed after demonstrators threw stones in Kuhdasht, in western Iran’s Lorestan province, the state broadcaster IRIB reported. About a dozen members of law enforcement and the Basij were injured, the local deputy governor, Saeed Pour Ali, said.
Earlier, demonstrators tried to break into the governor’s office in Fasa, in southern Iran, with one of the ringleaders arrested, the state news agency IRNA said.
Iranian officials have said they will address the economic problems that brought demonstrators to the streets for a fourth straight day, but some conservative leaders have been warning of a harsh response if matters escalate.
The Lorestan deputy governor said “rioting and destruction of public property have nothing to do with civil protests.… Enemies will exploit” the situation.
Following the death, Saeid Golkar, an associate professor at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga who follows Iran, warned of “a mass crackdown as soon as possible…. The only strategy the regime knows is repression.”
Mustapha Pakzad, a geopolitical analyst focused on Iran, said repression could rapidly harden if the demonstrations turn overwhelmingly against the Islamic Republic. “The regime is saying it wants to listen to protesters’ harsh language, but we are past talk therapy, and many people want a fresh beginning, a new system,” he said.
Mohammad Movahedi-Azad, Iran’s prosecutor-general, warned this week that any attempt to turn economic protests into a tool of “insecurity” or “destruction of public property would face a legal, proportionate and firm response,” according to the judiciary-news agency Mizan.
Government officials had so far been taking a relatively conciliatory tone compared with mass demonstrations that were more sharply aimed at the Islamic Republic’s rule. While some arrests have been made, there hasn’t yet been evidence of the kind of police violence that resulted in hundreds of deaths in 2022 demonstrations over the country’s strict religious codes.
Part of the reason, according to analysts, is that the demonstrations are focused on economic concerns and not on toppling the government. Iran cracks down harshly on political dissidents and executed more people in 2025 than in any year in the past four decades.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said this week that the government was aware of the pressure on people’s livelihoods and urged the Interior Ministry to hear their demands.
Iran appointed a new central bank governor this week, Abdolnaser Hemmati, who promised to get a grip on inflation. His predecessor resigned Monday after protests by merchants broke out over the precipitous drop in the value of the rial, the country’s currency. “We must stabilize the country’s economic conditions so that people can find peace,” said Hemmati.
Iranian Chief Justice Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, who has played an important role in political repression, has called for “the swift punishment of those responsible for currency fluctuations.”
Iran’s food inflation reached 64.2% in October, according to the World Bank, the second- highest level in the world after South Sudan. The rial has lost 60% of its value since the June war with Israel that damaged much of Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure. The rial’s weakness also stems from international sanctions after Iran failed to clinch a deal with the U.S. over its atomic program earlier this year.
Food-price inflation in Iran has provoked discontent. Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA/Shutterstock
Even some of the country’s leading conservatives have vowed to hear out the demonstrators. The parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, a former commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, told lawmakers Tuesday that “protests must be treated with generosity, responsibility and full accountability.”
Authorities on Wednesday released six students detained during protests at Tehran University, the university’s student council said. Five workers at a sugar factory in western Iran who had been striking for better pay were released Tuesday, according to the Free Workers’ Union of Iran, the country’s main federation of independent trade unions.
More than 1,870 people have been executed in Iran so far this year, around twice as many as last year, according to data collected by the Washington-based Abdorrahman Boroumand Center, an advocacy group that documents human-rights violations in Iran. More than 490 people have been executed since Nov. 1, surpassing the total for all of 2021.
Write to Benoit Faucon at benoit.faucon@wsj.com
Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
WSJ
6. Opinion | In Ukraine, Give War a Chance
Summary:
Barton Swaim argues that while POTUS rightly detests war, he is wrong to treat peace as inherently preferable regardless of terms. Zelensky’s point is that Ukrainians want a just peace, not a pause that rewards aggression. Swaim says POTUS’s year of shuttle diplomacy misreads Putin’s aims and may prolong the conflict by seeking a deal that Moscow does not respect. Drawing on Edward Luttwak, he argues wars often end through exhaustion, yielding at least a “peace of separation.” The U.S. should keep arming Ukraine and let the combatants decide when they cannot continue.
Comment: The problem with peace at any cost, is that it costs a lot. Too much. Especially if you are Ukrainian.
Opinion | In Ukraine, Give War a Chance
WSJ · In Ukraine, Give War a Chance
Trump’s diplomacy may pause the fight. Only its participants can say when it ends.
By Barton Swaim
Follow
Dec. 31, 2025 7:31 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/in-ukraine-give-war-a-chance-3508a1c8
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky after talks with President Donald Trump in Palm Beach, Fla., Dec. 29. PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE/Zuma Press
“People want peace,” Volodymyr Zelensky said of Ukrainians in an interview with Bret Baier on Monday. He exhaled as he said it, his face pained with the burden of explaining, for the thousandth time, the same agonizing reality: that war is painful and odious but that peace for its own sake is amoral and anathema to any self-respecting people.
“Everybody wants peace,” he added, then said slowly, as if hoping Americans would understand: “But a just peace.”
President Trump would have no trouble understanding that simple proposition if one of the sides were the U.S.—which is the point Mr. Zelensky was trying to make in that Oval Office meeting last February when Vice President JD Vance chose to interpret his words as a provocation. In Mr. Trump’s defense, he makes a common assumption about other countries that wage war on each other, namely that they do so for stupid reasons.
Which is why he speaks only of ending the war in Ukraine, only of its “bloodshed” and “killing” and senselessness, not of its meaning or morality, or even of America’s interest in a victory for one side or the other. He speaks of having “ended” eight wars. Others may argue about what the true number is; what’s notable is that the president places value on their cessation rather than their outcome.
Mr. Trump is right to detest war. He is wrong to think peace is always better when it comes sooner. That outlook has led him to spend the past year sending emissaries to and from Moscow and Kyiv in an attempt to force a peace deal, even as Vladimir Putin daily advertises his scorn for Ukraine’s sovereignty and thus for any “deal” with it. The effect, barring some history-altering exogenous circumstance, has almost certainly been to push the war’s conclusion further into the future.
Mr. Trump begins to resemble President Clinton at the end of his second term, trying to force a peace deal between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Any fool could see that Yasser Arafat had no interest in an agreement with an entity whose legitimacy he rejected. In the end the effort failed spectacularly. Mr. Clinton blamed Arafat, but no one forced him to trust an obvious liar.
Every time I hear Mr. Trump speak of the war in Ukraine as some vast destructive mistake, solvable by the right allocation of takings and hand-overs, I think of an essay by the military scholar Edward Luttwak published in the Times Literary Supplement in December 2000. Mr. Clinton’s peace process had collapsed that summer. The Palestinians had launched the so-called Second Intifada in the fall.
Mr. Luttwak’s essay, which chronicled Arafat’s brilliance as a politician and failure as a leader, concluded with reflections on the nature of war.
“If peace cannot be achieved by diplomacy,” Mr. Luttwak wrote, “it may yet be achieved by war—that being admittedly only a lesser peace of separation, rather than a full peace of reconciliation. War destroys itself by consuming the resources, willpower and hopes needed to keep fighting. Unless one side annihilates the other—a very rare event in history—leaders and nations eventually accept the compromises necessary for peace. War can therefore bring about peace, by a process of exhaustion—with or without negotiations, agreements, or treaties to formalize the outcome.”
War, in all its savagery, its tens of thousands killed and cities ruined, is what ultimately brought peace to the Balkans in the 1990s. Diplomacy and peace plans played a role only after years of violence left participants no choice. “With all passions spent,” Mr. Luttwak went on, “Croats, Serbs and Muslims now coexist without killing each other, even if they cannot yet co-operate. . . . War can be its own remedy, if fought in earnest.”
The moral and psychological premises of war existed between the Palestinians and Israel in the 1990s, but conflict was assiduously discouraged by the U.S., Europe and the United Nations. The effect, however unintended, was to prolong the bloodshed—a foreshadowing of Mr. Trump’s feverish pursuit of peace in Ukraine.
The great paradox is that he achieved a measure of peace in the Middle East by exactly the opposite means—by allowing the conflict to happen without intervening. In Israel and Gaza, Mr. Trump ignored the counsel of liberal internationalists and let the belligerents knock the hell out of each other, as he would put it. The outcome is imperfect: a peace of separation rather than of reconciliation, in Mr. Luttwak’s terms. But Israel has its hostages back, Hamas is bereft of leverage, the carnage has stopped, and international media are uncomfortably positing the possibility of a redeveloped Gaza Strip.
A corresponding policy in Ukraine would continue arming one side of the conflict—the side that isn’t America’s avowed enemy—and let the two countries do what, in the fullness of time, they will do anyway: decide for themselves when they can’t go on fighting. Mr. Trump’s shuttle diplomacy may pause the conflict for a time, but pauses mean only delay. He can’t end this war because he can’t alter Mr. Putin’s worldview or soften his implacability. Only exhaustion can do that.
Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky meet to work out an agreement to end the Ukraine war, but what security guarantees is Zelensky looking for? Plus, Benjamin Netanyahu comes to Mar-a-Lago to discuss the next phase of the Gaza cease-fire plan.
Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
WSJ · In Ukraine, Give War a Chance
7. Opinion | Maybe Arms Control Does Have a Future
Summary:
Thomas Grant and Henry Sokolski argue arms control may still be possible by using the April 2026 NPT Review Conference to pressure China and Russia. With New START expiring in February and Beijing and Moscow expanding or brandishing nuclear forces, they propose leveraging allied demand for stronger U.S. extended deterrence. Their approach is to keep upgrading nuclear storage sites, expand joint nuclear exercises, and create an “escrow” of refurbished warheads on U.S. soil that could be deployed if allies request it. They would then invite China and Russia to negotiate limits in exchange for no foreign redeployments, while clarifying NPT “control” and “nuclear sharing” rules.
Comment: Perhaps. Just not in north Korea.
Opinion | Maybe Arms Control Does Have a Future
WSJ · Maybe Arms Control Does Have a Future
A chance for the U.S. to nudge China and Russia toward a deal on nuclear weapons.
By
Thomas Grant
and
Henry Sokolski
Dec. 29, 2025 5:06 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/maybe-arms-control-does-have-a-future-f34a40e6?mod=hp_opin_pos_4
Soldiers stand next to a Russian RS-24 Yars ballistic missile in a Victory Day parade rehearsal in Moscow, May 2, 2024. Alexander Zemlianichenko/Associated Press
As China makes a global spectacle of its nuclear buildup and Russia threatens to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, President Trump says he will resume testing nuclear weapons. No wonder everyone thinks arms control is dead. The U.S. withdrew from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019 and since then has dropped two other arms-control agreements, the Open Skies Agreement and the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. Meanwhile New Start, which caps Russian and U.S. weapons deployments, expires in February.
One possible bright spot ahead is the April Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference at the United Nations in New York. The U.S. can take advantage in those talks of its right to deploy nuclear weapons to get China and Russia to pull back on their nuclear-weapons misbehavior.
Free Expression Newsletter Sign-up
Daily perspectives on culture and politics from voices that matter.
Subscribe
China, Russia, and the U.S. disagree about Articles I and II of the NPT, which prohibit letting nonweapons states gain “control” of nuclear weapons. Russia insists its recent redeployment of nuclear weapons to Belarus doesn’t violate the NPT, but that America’s efforts to upgrade its forward nuclear-weapons deployments in Europe do. China argues both Russian and U.S. stationing of nuclear weapons on foreign soil are illegal under the NPT. The U.S. believes its own and Russia’s forward deployments are legal.
Washington could cut this knot in three steps. First, continue to upgrade nuclear weapons storage sites in Britain, Europe, South Korea and Japan. Second, increase its joint nuclear exercises with all interested allies. Third, invite Germany, Poland, Balkan allies, Finland, Sweden, Turkey, South Korea, Japan and Australia to implement a RAND proposal to fund the refurbishment of at least 100 nuclear warheads the Pentagon is planning to dismantle. The U.S. would keep the weapons in an escrow account on U.S. soil to deploy in a crisis if asked.
These steps—especially the last—would prompt immediate Russian and Chinese protests. Washington could then invite Chinese and Russian diplomats to field their concerns at arms-control negotiations. It’s easy to anticipate what each would say. China would insist that Washington do nothing to redeploy nuclear weapons to South Korea or Japan. Russia would be no less adamant that the U.S. forgo nuclear weapons redeployments to any member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
U.S. negotiators could then ask: What are China and Russia willing to offer in exchange?
Russian nuclear provocations and Chinese nuclear buildup have rattled U.S. allies. That’s why they have requested that the U.S. back its security guarantees with a threat to use nuclear weapons if necessary. It’s also why some allied officials have suggested deploying nuclear weapons on their soil. The U.S. would prefer not to, but it will be difficult to say no unless China and Russia reduce the nuclear activities that are giving rise to these demands.
Might Russia consider withdrawing its in-theater nuclear weapons to the east of the Urals in exchange for a U.S. withdrawal of its approximately 100 weapons from NATO countries? Would China freeze production of separated plutonium by shutting down its spent-fuel recycling plants? Would China and Russia finally allow three-way nuclear arms reduction talks (something China has rejected repeatedly)?
The Pentagon and State Department should find out at the NPT Review Conference. Beforehand, the U.S. should call for a clarification of the meaning of “control” and “nuclear sharing” under Articles I and II of the NPT. This would prompt China and Russia to repeat their arguments, which are at odds with each other and with the U.S. position. Then American diplomats could clarify what the NPT means by “control” in a way beneficial to all three parties. This would lead to a discussion of nuclear limitations on each party in exchange for pledging no redeployments on foreign soil.
Many observers think the NPT Review Conference is a ceremonial event. Neither the White House nor the State Department has said what the U.S. position will be at the conference—an omission worth correcting.
The first Trump administration argued correctly that China should live up to its Article VI obligation to negotiate nuclear arms control in good faith. It should stick to its guns in the coming conference and add the concerns about nuclear sharing and control.
Mr. Grant, a senior fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at Cambridge, was senior adviser for strategic planning in the State Department’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation (2019–21) and is author of “Nuclear Arms Control in Peril.” Mr. Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, served as the Pentagon’s deputy for nonproliferation policy (1989-93) and is author of “China, Russia and the Coming Cool War.”
Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky meet to work out an agreement to end the Ukraine war, but what security guarantees is Zelensky looking for? Plus, Benjamin Netanyahu comes to Mar-a-Lago to discuss the next phase of the Gaza cease-fire plan.
Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the December 30, 2025, print edition as 'Maybe Arms Control Does Have a Future'.
WSJ · Maybe Arms Control Does Have a Future
8. Is China’s truck-mounted catapult system enabling merchant aircraft carriers?
Summary:
Photos circulating in China appear to show a truck-mounted electromagnetic catapult system for launching large fixed-wing drones, with three linked low-loader trucks forming a rail track. New images suggest the segments were loaded onto the deck of the cargo ship Zhong Da 79, a vessel previously seen carrying containerized missile launchers, sensors, and self-defense systems. Observers speculate China is testing modular “weapon modules” that could convert flat-decked merchant ships into auxiliary drone carriers, enabling runway-independent UAV launches from civilian platforms. The concept also fits land-based use, improving dispersal, survivability, and flexibility, though recovery methods and mission profiles remain unclear.
Comment: Creating dilemmas for China's enemies. If we had any merchant ships in the US, perhaps we could compete.
ChinaMilitary
Is China’s truck-mounted catapult system enabling merchant aircraft carriers?
Scalable truck-based launch track pictured on modified cargo ship raises questions about drone war potential
Published: 12:00pm, 1 Jan 2026
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3338331/chinas-truck-mounted-catapult-system-enabling-merchant-aircraft-carriers?module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article
Pictures have emerged in China that appear to show a truck-mounted electromagnetic catapult system for large drones on a cargo ship apparently converted for military use, triggering speculation on social media platforms.
Some images circulating online since the weekend show three linked eight-wheeled low-loader trucks in a line with a large combat drone mounted on a shuttle-like fixture at the rear.
The configuration appears to form a ground-based launch track with visible details suggesting an electromagnetic propulsion system that could provide a runway-independent launching capability for fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
The cargo ship Zhong Da 79, with the three linked eight-wheeled low loaders and large drones visible on the dock. Photo: Handout
Latest photos emerging on Wednesday showed the trucks, in separate segments, had been loaded onto the deck of the cargo ship Zhong Da 79. The same vessel attracted attention earlier in December when it was spotted carrying containerised vertical missile launchers, radar sensors and self-defence systems.
The trucks were positioned for loading at the Hudong-Zhonghua shipyard in Shanghai near China’s first Type 076 amphibious assault ship, the Sichuan, which has been berthed after initial sea trials. The Sichuan features an integrated electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) on its flight deck, potentially making it a “drone carrier”.
On Wednesday, most of the weapon containers on the Zhong Da 79 had been removed, clearing space on the deck. The trucks were photographed in front of some remaining containers, and their dimensions appeared to be compatible with those container sizes.
Close-up images showed the inscription “containerised weapon module development suite” visible on the containers aboard the ship.
The merchant vessel’s modifications to support military payloads seem to indicate that China is testing modular defence capabilities that could be rapidly deployed on civilian platforms.
The ship-based weapon module suite itself, as well as the truck-mounted catapult system’s role in it, have attracted speculation on social media.
If the modular, mobile catapult is indeed part of a broader containerised weapon module initiative, it would suggest that the Chinese military is testing the conversion of flat-decked merchant ships into auxiliary aircraft carriers, according to some observers.
If the pictured trucks were loaded and interlocked on the deck of a ship like the Zhong Da 79, high-performance fixed-wing combat drones could theoretically be launched from any of the thousands of container ships in China’s commercial fleets.
While the implications for naval warfare are compelling, an earlier concept of this system was proposed for land-based applications by Chinese company Tiantao Technology, according to information circulating on social media.
A highly mobile system that could launch large combat drones without the need for a traditional runway would boost tactical flexibility, especially in environments like China’s high-altitude western border with India or the island chains of the Pacific Ocean.
It would enable the deployment of drones closer to the front lines, effectively reducing transit time and increasing loiter endurance or the capacity to carry heavier combat payloads.
And unlike vulnerable static runways, the trucks could be deployed separately to avoid detection and attack. A convoy would be capable of rapidly disassembling after a launch to immediately disperse, improving survivability.
What did China’s military parade tell us about its capabilities and global standing?
Tiantao Technology, a privately owned company, has previously displayed models and renderings of a similar system capable of launching drones weighing up to two tonnes, with configurations of 10-wheeled trucks linked together to form electromagnetic catapults ranging from 20 to 60 metres (65 to 197 feet) in length.
In the latest photos, complex electrical wiring and cylindrical drums can be seen through the eight-wheeled truck’s open sides, indicating either a suspension system or energy storage for electromagnetic propulsion components.
As no landing mechanism is currently visible on site, it remains unclear whether the catapult pairs with a separate arresting system or if it is designed for launching one-way suicide missions.
Besides the drone mounted on the rail, satellite images showed at least five more drones nearby. All were covered and it is unknown whether they were genuine or mock-up models.
In shape, they resembled one of the “loyal wingmen” drones that made their debut in September as part of China’s military parade to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Victory Day.
Liu Zhen
Liu Zhen joined the Post in 2015 as a reporter on the China desk. She previously worked with Reuters in Beijing.
9. Beijing slams Taiwanese leader Lai’s New Year’s speech as ‘lies’ and ‘malice’
Summary:
Beijing sharply condemned Taiwan leader William Lai’s New Year’s speech, calling it “lies” marked by hostility and an attempt to mislead both Taiwanese and international audiences. China’s Taiwan Affairs Office said Lai was promoting “Taiwan independence,” fueling cross-strait confrontation, and replaying a “democracy versus authoritarianism” narrative. The rebuttal followed Lai’s pledge to strengthen deterrence after the PLA’s “Justice Mission 2025” live-fire drills around the island. Lai argued the drills proved Taiwan must expand defense procurement, tighten security laws, counter infiltration, and bolster its defense industry. He urged legislators to back a proposed US$40 billion defense spending increase
Excerpts:
Chen said the speech once again exposed Lai’s “unwavering” pro-independence stance and “stubborn confrontational mindset”.
“[This] fully confirms him as an out-and-out ‘peace destroyer’, ‘crisis creator’ and ‘war instigator’,” Chen said, according to state news agency Xinhua.
Comment: Unrestricted warfare and three warfares. But does China not see that its hypocrisy is glaringly evident? How could Chen make these comments after the PLA/PLAN conducts such exercises? (and with a straight face?) What do you think President Lai is supposed to say after the PRC conducts blatant acts of aggression?
From a cognitive warfare perspective I suppose the PRC comments are meant to influence those politicians who naturally blame Taiwan for provoking China's actions with the intention this would contribute to internal political friction in Taiwan (and perhaps the US) when factions will try to disrupt national security decision making by opposing necessary self defense measures.
Beijing slams Taiwanese leader Lai’s New Year’s speech as ‘lies’ and ‘malice’
William Lai vows to boost Taiwan’s defences in televised address days after PLA holds live-fire military drills around the island
Published: 4:25pm, 1 Jan 2026Updated: 5:06pm, 1 Jan 2026
Beijing has condemned Taiwanese leader William Lai Ching-te’s New Year’s Day speech – including his vow to boost the island’s defences – as full of “lies, falsehoods, hostility and malice” and an attempt to “mislead the Taiwanese people and international public opinion”.
Chen Binhua, spokesman for Beijing’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO), said on Thursday that Lai’s speech “once again peddled the fallacy of ‘Taiwan independence’, incited cross-strait confrontation and reiterated the old tune of ‘democracy versus authoritarianism’”.
Beijing’s response came shortly after Lai said in the speech broadcast live from his office in Taipei on Thursday that Taiwan was determined to boost its defences. The address came just two days after the People’s Liberation Army finished a major military drill around the island.
Chen said the speech once again exposed Lai’s “unwavering” pro-independence stance and “stubborn confrontational mindset”.
“[This] fully confirms him as an out-and-out ‘peace destroyer’, ‘crisis creator’ and ‘war instigator’,” Chen said, according to state news agency Xinhua.
Chen accused Lai of “constantly fabricating separatist fallacies, deliberately escalating cross-strait confrontation, and exacerbating tensions in the Taiwan Strait” since taking office.
“The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation is unstoppable, and the complete reunification of the motherland will surely be achieved,” he said, adding that Beijing hoped compatriots in Taiwan would “firmly stand on the right side of history” and resolutely oppose separatism and external interference.
In New Year’s speech, Xi urges growth and vows ‘unstoppable’ Taiwan reunification
In his New Year’s Eve address on Wednesday, Chinese President Xi Jinping echoed his message from last year that reunification with Taiwan could not be stopped.
On Tuesday, the PLA’s Eastern Theatre Command wrapped up a two-day live-fire exercise called Justice Mission 2025. The PLA stated that the drills were aimed at both “independent forces” in Taiwan and external intervention.
The exercise came less than a fortnight after the United States announced a US$11.1 billion weapons package for Taiwan – the largest in the island’s history.
Responding to the PLA drill, Lai said the international community was watching to see whether the Taiwanese people had the resolve to defend themselves.
“My stance has always been clear: to resolutely defend national sovereignty, strengthen national defence and the resilience of society as a whole, and comprehensively build an effective deterrent force,” he said on Thursday.
He vowed to implement security strategies to counter Beijing’s infiltration, accelerate the revision of Taiwan’s security laws, improve combat abilities, strengthen the defence industry, and reinforce security and social stability this year.
Lai said the increased PLA pressure “demonstrated the need for increasing defence procurement”. He urged opposition parties to support his plan to boost Taiwan’s defence spending by US$40 billion, a proposal stalled in the opposition-controlled legislature.
Beijing views Taiwan as part of China to be reunited by force if necessary. Most countries, including the US – the island’s biggest international partner – do not recognise Taiwan as an independent state. But Washington is opposed to any attempt to take the island by force and is legally bound to supply it with weapons to defend itself.
William Zheng
William Zheng is a veteran journalist who has served and led major Hong Kong and Singaporean media organisations in his 20-year career, covering greater China. He is now a senior correspondent on the China desk at the Post.
10. China’s Wang Yi takes aim at Japan in call with South Korean foreign minister
Summary:
China’s top diplomat Wang Yi used a call with South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun to press Beijing’s Taiwan line and criticize Japan ahead of South Korean President Lee Jae-myung’s upcoming summit visit to China. Wang invoked Japan’s colonial history and warned of “political forces” in Tokyo he said were whitewashing past aggression, urging Seoul to uphold “international justice” by adhering to the one-China principle. China said Cho reaffirmed South Korea’s unchanged one-China position, while Seoul has publicly emphasized maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. The ministers agreed to prepare concrete outcomes for Lee’s visit and also discussed the Korean peninsula and Northeast Asia.
Comment: Interesting reporting by Orange Wang. Again, I think we can see China's cognitive warfare emanating from its unrestricted warfare and three warfares. Clearly China is trying to ensure that the political factions within South Korea will pressure the Lee administration to stay out of Taiwan affairs and not support US or Japan efforts in the region toward China and Taiwan.
China’s Wang Yi takes aim at Japan in call with South Korean foreign minister
In countdown to summit, Wang and Cho Hyun talk Taiwan, Tokyo and the Korean peninsula
Orange Wang
Published: 5:06pm, 1 Jan 2026
With less than a week to go until a presidential summit, China’s top diplomat has used talks with his South Korean counterpart to reassert Beijing’s stand on Taiwan and take aim at Tokyo.
In a phone call with South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun on Wednesday, China’s Wang Yi raised the spectre of Japan’s colonial past to get support for his country’s position on Taiwan.
Wang accused “certain political forces in Japan” of trying to “reverse the course of history and whitewash [the country’s] crimes of aggression and colonialism”, according to the Chinese foreign ministry.
“It is believed that the South Korean side will uphold a responsible attitude towards history and people, adopt the correct stance and safeguard international justice, including adhering to the one-China principle on Taiwan,” Wang told Cho.
A day earlier, Wang warned that “Japan’s current leader publicly challenged China’s sovereignty” and the world “must stay highly vigilant to the resurgence of militarism in Japan”.
People’s Liberation Army holds second day of live-fire exercises around Taiwan
Tokyo has been critical of drills by the People’s Liberation Army around Taiwan this week, adding to the tensions that followed Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s suggestion last month that an attack on Taiwan by the PLA could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan, justifying military intervention from Tokyo.
Beijing sees Taiwan as part of China to be reunited by force if necessary. Most countries, including the United States, South Korea and Japan, do not recognise Taiwan as an independent state, but Washington is opposed to any attempt to take the self-governed island by force and is committed to arm Taiwan.
Noting the talks were at Cho’s request, the Chinese foreign ministry said the South Korean foreign minister assured Wang that his country’s commitment to the one-China principle remained unchanged.
The phone conversation on Wednesday took place just four days before South Korean President Lee Jae-myung will make a state visit to China next week, with Beijing looking to Seoul for more backing on Taiwan and Tokyo.
Lee has been trying to balance Seoul’s relations with Beijing and its ties with Washington and Tokyo, shifting to a more pragmatic foreign policy approach from his predecessor Yoon Suk-yeol’s tilt towards the United States and Japan.
Lee is expected to visit Japan in mid-January for talks with Takaichi after his trip to Beijing.
Wang said that Beijing expected the South Korean leader’s visit to the Chinese capital to “promote new progress” in bilateral relations.
“China-South Korea relations have emerged from a low point and returned to the right track, showing a steady and positive development trend,” Wang was quoted as telling Cho.
In New Year’s speech, Xi urges growth and vows ‘unstoppable’ Taiwan reunification
Meanwhile, in his annual televised New Year’s speech, Chinese President Xi Jinping described the island’s reunification with the mainland as “a trend of the times” that would be “unstoppable”.
Wang also raised the issue during a speech at an event organised by the China Institute of International Studies think tank on Tuesday.
“We are seeing more and more countries stand with China,” Wang said.
“They not only reaffirm their commitment to the one-China principle and recognise Taiwan as China’s territory, but also unequivocally oppose all separatist activities for ‘Taiwan independence’ and support China’s reunification cause.”
The comments showed that Beijing had moved beyond reinforcing its previous position on Taiwan to working to “forge a new consensus” on the issue, according to an article posted on Wednesday on Yuyuan Tantian, a social media account controlled by state broadcaster CCTV.
Still, the South Korean government has called for “continued peace and stability” in the Taiwan Strait.
Asked about this week’s PLA drills around Taiwan, South Korean foreign ministry spokesman Park Il said on Tuesday that Seoul hoped for “cross-strait relations to develop peacefully through dialogue and cooperation”.
He added that South Korea’s fundamental position on Taiwan remained unchanged.
In its statement on Wednesday’s talks, the South Korean foreign ministry said Cho and Wang agreed to “ensure the success of [Lee’s] state visit”, an event that will be the first high-level diplomatic engagement of the year for both countries.
“They agreed to … meticulously prepare concrete and practical outcomes that citizens of both countries can directly experience,” the South Korean foreign ministry said, without mentioning Taiwan or Japan.
The two ministers also exchanged views on the situation on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia, it added.
Orange Wang
Based in Beijing, Orange covers a range of topics including China's economy and diplomacy. He previously worked in Hong Kong and had a stint in Washington. Before joining the Post, Orange worked as a Shanghai Correspondent for ET Net, a Hong Kong financial news agency.
11. A Booze Ban Since the ’50s Is Being Quietly Lifted in Saudi Arabia
Summary:
Saudi Arabia is quietly loosening a decades-old alcohol taboo, allowing some non-Muslim premium-residency holders to buy beer, wine, and spirits at an unmarked shop in Riyadh’s Diplomatic Quarter. The step fits Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s modernization drive to attract skilled expatriates, tourists, and investment as the kingdom diversifies beyond oil and markets itself for global events. Analysts expect limited expansion to high-end hotels and Red Sea resorts, mirroring the UAE model, while keeping bans in religiously sensitive areas like Mecca and Medina. The shift is incremental and low-profile given conservative public opinion, even as broader governance and human-rights restrictions remain tight.
Comment: The influence of "western" soft power? Simply a recognition of the reality of the ubiquitousness of alcohol around the world? Or support for the Prince's vision as notes.
New Year's Eve in Riyadh must have been a good time last night.
A Booze Ban Since the ’50s Is Being Quietly Lifted in Saudi Arabia
WSJ
The Islamic kingdom is loosening its laws against alcohol as part of a modernization push
By Omar Abdel-Baqui
Follow
Dec. 31, 2025 11:00 pm ET
https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-alcohol-ban-laws-d6f961de
In Riyadh, some non-Muslims have recently been able to buy booze. Hamad I Mohammed/Reuters
Saudi Arabia is quietly permitting some residents to buy alcohol, breaking a longstanding taboo as the Islamic kingdom looks to expand its tourism sector, attract high-earning expatriates and modernize its conservative image.
Without making an announcement, the government in recent weeks has begun allowing non-Muslims with the premium residency status given to skilled or wealthy expatriates to buy beer, wine and spirits at a store in the country’s capital, Riyadh, according to people familiar with the matter.
The kingdom is expected to follow that first step by allowing alcohol at exclusive hotels and resorts along the Red Sea coast, which it has built up as a destination over the past few years, according to analysts and people familiar with Saudi rulers’ thinking. The introduction of alcohol sales has been in the works for years.
“We always knew it was coming, that Saudi was preparing for something,” said Michael Ratney, who served as U.S. ambassador to the kingdom under the Biden administration. “One thing was just the physical signals—you would go into new restaurants, and they all had bars. The bars didn’t have alcohol, but the infrastructure was starting to pop up.”
The liberalization around alcohol follows other modernizing steps over the past decade under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, including lifting the ban on women driving, allowing cinema and music festivals, and reining in the country’s morality police, as he looks to position the country as a modern destination for investment and diversify its economy.
Saudi Arabia is selling itself on the global stage as a center for major sporting events. It has attracted soccer stars like Cristiano Ronaldo to play in its national league, and is slated to host the World Cup in 2034. The kingdom also began hosting the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix Formula One race in the coastal city of Jeddah in 2021. In other countries, such sporting events are usually accompanied by boozing—and often a lot of it.
Crowds during the Sound Storm music festival in Riyadh in December. Amr Nabil/Associated Press
Alcohol was banned in the kingdom in the 1950s after a drunk young Saudi royal shot dead a British diplomat. Islam, the official state religion of Saudi Arabia, the self-styled guardian of Islam’s holiest sites, also prohibits alcohol consumption.
A longtime expat in Saudi Arabia who recently bought alcohol from the only known liquor store in Riyadh said everything he learned about the booze-buying process in the capital has been through word-of-mouth.
Upon arrival at the unmarked liquor store in the Diplomatic Quarter, staff checked his residency card to confirm he wasn’t Muslim and that he qualified to buy alcohol through his residency status. They then made him put his cellphone in a sealed bag so he couldn’t take photos before allowing him to browse the store.
Newsletter Sign-up
He said it had a decent selection, with household brands priced higher than in the West but lower than on the Saudi black market. Wine connoisseurs would have had trouble finding niche favorites, he added.
The change was exciting, he said, adding that drinkers are relieved to not have to resort to the black market, where dangerous homemade liquor and overpriced smuggled booze circulate.
With a tepid energy market and Saudi Arabia facing a budget crunch, the kingdom is looking for an influx of funds from foreign visitors and expats to help reduce its fiscal deficit. It has also scaled back ambitious infrastructure projects such as the planned multitrillion-dollar metropolis Neom.
Saudi Arabia is focused on “bringing in and retaining elites in the country and persuading tourists to come,” said Neil Quilliam, associate fellow at international affairs think tank Chatham House. “The economy is in a downturn. It will hit a few bumps in the road over the next year or so. The government is trying to prepare itself for that.”
The Saudi Foreign Ministry and government media office didn’t respond to requests for comment.
The crown prince has pushed rapid social change since being given the title in 2017. But lifting the countrywide ban on alcohol won’t happen all at once like some other modernizations. It remains a sensitive issue within Saudi Arabia’s large, conservative society and is likely to happen incrementally and with little fanfare.
“MBS is not insensitive to public opinion,” said Ratney, the former U.S. ambassador, using the acronym by which the crown prince is often known.
“And although I don’t think he wants the principal international identity of Saudi Arabia to be religious, as it has been known historically, he is very conscious of the fact that they own that,” Ratney said. “Still, he sees tourism, but also normalness, as his target.”
While Saudi Arabia’s government has liberalized in many ways, it still lags behind much of the world when it comes to human rights, in particular those of women and workers. The kingdom now allows gender mixing in restaurants and cafes, and has eased restrictions on women traveling and living independently.
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
Would expanded access to alcohol make you more likely to visit Saudi Arabia? Join the conversation below.
But the Saudi state continues to carry out frequent executions, including for drug-related offenses, according to rights groups. It bans cohabitation for unmarried couples, harshly cracks down on dissent and considers homosexuality a crime.
Saudi Arabia likely will emulate the introduction of alcohol in the neighboring United Arab Emirates, according to analysts and people familiar with Saudi leaders’ thinking. While alcohol is limited in parts of the kingdom’s conservative Gulf neighbor and banned in the emirate of Sharjah, it flows freely in Dubai, which has attracted hordes of wealthy international tourists and a white-collar expatriate class in part by loosening moral restrictions.
Saudi Arabia is likely to follow that pattern, allowing alcohol in parts of the country while prohibiting it in religiously sensitive areas such as the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.
The kingdom and the U.A.E. have been feuding over their opposing positions in regional conflicts. Still, in economic and social matters, “Dubai is their benchmark,” Quilliam, the Chatham House fellow, said of Saudi Arabia. “They have to look at Dubai for everything.”
It’s unclear to what extent foreign investors will be able to get in on the act.
Alistair Paine, chief executive of Peninsula, a company that helps international businesses establish themselves in Saudi Arabia, said he has received an uptick of inquiries from clients trying to enter the kingdom’s liquor market.
“Everyone is really trying to unpiece the jigsaw and get some clarity as to what level of participation they’ll be able to have in it,” Paine said.
Write to Omar Abdel-Baqui at omar.abdel-baqui@wsj.com
Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
WSJ
12. How Meta’s Reels Became a $50 Billion Business
Summary:
Meta’s Reels has evolved from a TikTok copycat into a major revenue engine, surpassing a $50 billion annual run rate driven by improved AI recommendations and a sharp rise in time spent watching video. After early struggles, Instagram rebuilt discovery beyond the “following graph,” incentivized original creator content, and refined ranking based on user behavior. Average Instagram users now spend about 27 minutes a day on Reels, outpacing YouTube Shorts though still behind TikTok’s core feed. Meta’s next move is to push Reels onto bigger screens in 2026, beginning with a U.S. test on Amazon Fire TV, alongside features that make viewing more social and more controllable.
Comment: I did not expect to see this. But they still have a ways to go to catch up to TikTok. Interesting: "Viewing more social and controllable." Is that what viewers and advertisers want?
How Meta’s Reels Became a $50 Billion Business
WSJ
Once a TikTok wannabe, Instagram’s video feature is now a hit with users and advertisers. Can it make the leap to television?
By Meghan Bobrowsky
Follow
Jan. 1, 2026 5:30 am ET
https://www.wsj.com/tech/meta-reels-revenue-ade4179e
Instagram’s average user is now spending 27 minutes a day watching Reels, according to a market intelligence firm. Facebook
Five years ago, Meta’s META -0.88%decrease; red down pointing triangle Reels was a TikTok copycat with no revenue. Now, it is set to bring in as much as Coca-Cola and Nike—and the company plans to expand to more screens in 2026.
Meta Platforms Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg announced on an October earnings call that Instagram and Facebook Reels had surpassed a $50 billion annual run rate, which means that the company is on track to make that amount of revenue in the next 12 months. By comparison, analysts expect YouTube to bring in $46 billion in advertising revenue this year, and the research firm eMarketer estimates TikTok will bring in $17 billion.
Zuckerberg credited the company’s AI recommendation systems which, he said, have been delivering higher quality and more relevant content on its platforms.
“Video is a particular bright spot,” he said, noting that people were spending 30% more time watching videos on Instagram than they did the previous year.
It is a far cry from just a few years ago, when internal Meta research showed that Instagram was stumbling in its attempt to mimic TikTok. Caught flat-footed by the success of that video app, then owned by ByteDance, Instagram launched Reels in August 2020.
Meta’s Reels has become a $50 billion business. Above is the launch video for the product from 2020. META
By 2022, Instagram users were spending one-tenth the time watching Reels as they did on TikTok, The Wall Street Journal reported at the time. One document said Reels engagement had been falling over the previous four weeks and that “most Reels users have no engagement whatsoever.”
Tessa Lyons, Instagram’s vice president of product, said the first challenge was figuring out how to introduce short-form video into an app that had primarily been known as a place for people to post photos and connect with their friends and the creators they follow.
Then they had to help people find Reels from accounts they don’t even follow. “That’s an entirely different ranking challenge from the way that we originally had to think about ranking content,” she said in an interview.
Instagram’s algorithm previously had been built on a following graph, meaning it primarily showed users posts from people they followed—either friends, celebrities or creators. TikTok upended the idea of the following graph, instead showing users videos from accounts they didn’t follow and figuring out what they liked based on how long they lingered on each video.
Tessa Lyons says that Reels will become a more social viewing experience. Slaven Vlasic/Getty Images for CARE
Instagram had to figure out how to do that much harder task, too.
It focused on promoting original content and paying creators to post on the platform. As people spent more time scrolling Reels, the algorithm got better at predicting what users wanted to see.
Five years on, something has started to click.
The average Instagram user is now spending 27 minutes a day watching Reels, versus YouTube Shorts users’ watching for 21 minutes on that platform, according to estimates from market intelligence firm Sensor Tower. (TikTok is still king with the average user spending 44 minutes a day scrolling its main feed.)
Mark Zuckerberg has cited AI recommendation systems as a reason for the success of Reels. Alex Kent/Getty Images
Brock Johnson, a 28-year-old content creator in Park City, Utah, has posted regularly on Instagram since 2017. He said he has noticed a change on the platform recently.
“A lot of my friends are now sending me Reels every day and we’re talking about things that we saw on Reels, whereas even just like two years ago, that wasn’t really the case,” he said.
The company says it has “turned a corner” and now plans to build on that momentum by launching Instagram for TV. A few weeks ago, Meta announced the first step toward that goal, rolling it out on Amazon Fire TV devices in the U.S. as a test.
Lyons said Instagram knew from research that a lot of people already were watching Reels with their friends by mirroring their devices on a TV.
YouTube has seen success in the TV market, and last year, it became the most-watched video provider on TVs in the U.S. People also now watch more YouTube on TV sets than on phones or any other devices.
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
What features would make you more likely to watch social media content on a TV screen? Join the conversation below.
Instagram wants a slice of that pie.
In April, it launched a feature called Blend that lets people create custom feeds of videos based on the algorithms of a user and his or her friends. Lyons said it makes for a more social viewing experience.
Last month, Instagram launched another new feature that lets users more directly control the videos their algorithm shows them by telling it what they do and don’t want to see. (More puppies, fewer gender reveal parties gone wrong.)
Lyons thinks that will help with the push into TV. “When you’re on TV, you want to be able to just tap in to the right type of content, whoever you’re sitting with,” she said.
Write to Meghan Bobrowsky at meghan.bobrowsky@wsj.com
Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
WSJ
13. China warns satellites from Elon Musk’s Starlink are ‘safety and security’ risk
Summary:
China told a UN Security Council meeting that the rapid growth of large commercial satellite constellations such as SpaceX’s Starlink creates “pronounced safety and security challenges,” citing near-miss incidents with China’s space station in 2021 and a Starlink satellite breakup in December that produced debris. Beijing argued that unchecked proliferation crowds orbital and frequency resources, raising collision risks, especially for states with limited tracking and maneuver capability. China also warned that commercial satellite services are increasingly used for military reconnaissance and battlefield communications, blurring civilian and military lines, and said such networks can enable cross-border interference and be exploited by terrorists, separatists, and fraud networks.
Comment: I do not think it is surprising that China would challenge Starlink in this way since they must deem it a threat that would allow the people in China possibly unfettered access to information.
China warns satellites from Elon Musk’s Starlink are ‘safety and security’ risk
Beijing tells UN meeting of near misses involving SpaceX satellites and warns they are being used by criminals and terrorists
Victoria Bela
Published: 6:00pm, 1 Jan 2026Updated: 6:14pm, 1 Jan 2026
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3338409/china-warns-satellites-elon-musks-starlink-are-safety-and-security-risk
China has warned that the rapid expansion of internet satellite constellations such as SpaceX’s Starlink presented “pronounced safety and security challenges”.
Addressing an informal United Nations Security Council event initiated by Russia on Monday, Beijing’s representative cited several incidents, including near collisions between Starlink satellites and the Chinese space station in 2021, and a satellite that disintegrated in December.
The representative also pointed to the disregard of countries’ airspace and laws by “certain low Earth orbit constellations”, including their use for military reconnaissance and by terrorist and separatist groups.
The comments were made shortly after a senior Starlink executive said there had been a near miss between one of the firm’s satellites and a newly launched Chinese satellite, accusing the Chinese side of not coordinating with other satellites.
“In recent years, humanity has made new progress in the exploration and use of outer space,” the representative said, according to a statement by Beijing’s UN mission that did not name the diplomat involved.
“At the same time, it must also be noted that, with the rapid expansion of commercial space activities, the unchecked proliferation of commercial satellite constellations by a certain country, in the absence of effective regulation, has given rise to pronounced safety and security challenges.”
The representative pointed to Starlink – which now has around 10,000 internet satellites in orbit – saying “such constellations crowd frequency-orbit resources [which are shared by all satellites in orbit for communication and operation] and significantly increase the risk of collisions”.
Elon Musk’s Starlink appears to be fuelling Myanmar scam hub
The Starlink internet satellite network, built by Elon Musk’s company SpaceX, aims to have more than 42,000 satellites in orbit when complete, with each satellite designed for a five-year lifespan before it is deliberately burned up in the Earth’s atmosphere.
China is building its own internet satellite megaconstellations, including the Shanghai-government-backed Qianfan broadband network, which aims to deploy more than 15,000 satellites by 2030, and the Guowang network, which aims to launch around 13,000 satellites.
The Chinese representative also pointed to two separate incidents in 2021, when Starlink satellites “conducted dangerous close approaches to China’s space station … posing grave threats to the safety of Chinese astronauts” and forcing them to take evasive action.
“Recently, [December 17] one Starlink satellite disintegrated in orbit, generating more than one hundred debris fragments,” the diplomat added.
“For spacecraft operated by developing countries that lack orbit-control capability, space situational awareness, or sufficient reaction time, this undoubtedly constitutes a major risk.”
The Chinese representative also warned that the expanding military use of commercial satellites in areas such as reconnaissance and battlefield communications “aggravated the risk of an arms race in outer space”.
“This has blurred the boundary between military and civilian activities in outer space, created accountability dilemmas, and posed challenges to the Outer Space Treaty and the law of state responsibility,” they said.
The Outer Space Treaty, which entered into force in 1967, provides the basic framework of international space law and says states are responsible for their national space activities and are liable for damage caused by outer space objects.
SpaceX Starship explodes during routine pre-launch ground test
“This means that, where commercial space activities impede the peaceful use of outer space by other states or fuel an arms race in outer space, the country concerned bears jurisdictional responsibility,” the representative said.
The representative also told the meeting that satellites had been used to provide signal services over foreign borders without authorisation, becoming a tool for interfering in countries’ internal affairs.
In certain regions, such as South Asia, Southeast Asia and the Sahel in Africa, Starlink had also been used by terrorists, separatist forces and telecommunications fraud networks, they said.
Musk has previously denied that insurgents in India had been using Starlink services, saying its “satellite beams are turned off over India”, while the company said in October it had “proactively identified and disabled” more than 2,500 Starlink kits in suspected scam centres in Myanmar.
SpaceX has been asked for comment.
In a veiled reference to the United States, the Chinese diplomat said: “If a country fails to exercise effective regulation and supervision over its commercial space enterprises, or even directs and manipulates them to use satellite internet services to intervene in armed conflicts or interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, that country must – and should – bear responsibility.
“China calls on the country concerned to earnestly fulfil its obligations under the Outer Space Treaty, strengthen regulation and oversight of its commercial space activities, and respond to the concerns of the international community.”
The diplomat added that China supported the UN in taking the lead on discussions about clarifying existing legal provisions and developing norms of conduct to address “abuses”.
The comments came after Michael Nicolls, Starlink’s vice-president of engineering, said in a social media post on December 13 that there had been a near miss between one of the company’s satellites and a newly launched Chinese one, adding “as far as we know, no coordination or deconfliction with existing satellites operating in space was performed”.
CAS Space, the Chinese commercial space launch provider that developed the Kinetica-1 rocket used for the launch, said that, if confirmed, this incident occurred 48 hours after payload separation, by which time the launch mission had concluded.
“This calls for re-establishing collaborations between the two new space ecosystems,” CAS Space added in a social media response.
Victoria Bela
Prior to joining SCMP in 2023, Victoria received her Bachelor’s degrees in Environmental Health and Environmental Studies from the University of Rochester, where she also worked in a Biochemistry lab. She holds a Master's in Public Policy from Peking University.
14. Is Trump channeling JFK?
Summary:
Harlan Ullman argues POTUS appears to be “channeling” John F. Kennedy in style and symbolism, citing the renaming of the Kennedy Center venue and efforts to make the White House a hub of cultural display. Ullman’s core claim is that the more consequential parallel is policy: POTUS is using force abroad in ways that echo 1960s escalation logic, but without clear justification or congressional authorization. He compares recent U.S. actions against Venezuela to Vietnam-era dynamics, warns the War Powers framework is being sidelined, and links strikes in Nigeria and Somalia to a widening pattern of discretionary military action. Ullman cautions this risks strategic drift and dangerous farce.
Comment: Quite a critique to start the New Year. Many of us (me included) invoke JFK's memory for lessons though not interpreted in the way Dr. Ullman has.
Voices Dec. 31, 2025 / 11:13 AM
Is Trump channeling JFK?
By Harlan Ullman
https://www.upi.com/Voices/2025/12/31/trump-JFK-image/4921767195516/
The "REACH" at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, which was recently renamed the "Trump Kennedy Center," is seen in Washington on Tuesday. President Donald Trump's name being added on December 19, a day after his hand-picked board members voted to rename the venue. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
Dec. 31 (UPI) -- Of all the extraordinary events of 2025, one of the most amazing and inexplicable is why Donald J. Trump seems to be channeling John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Despite the exceptional display of bad taste and vulgarity by inserting his name above that of Kennedy's in renaming the Center for the Performing Arts, that was no accident. For reasons known only to himself, is Trump attempting to remake himself in Kennedy's image?
Consider the evidence: While the Kennedys made the White House the center of culture with invitations to the most creative members of society in the arts, science and other fields, Trump is doing the same with the new East Wing ballroom. He is trying to bring the cultural splendor of the Kennedys with a Mar-a-Lago twist to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
But, more importantly, while Trump is crafting his actions in line with Making America Great Again and America First, is he stating in a profoundly different, yet eerily similar way, JFK's promise "to pay any price and bear any burden ... to assure the survival of liberty"?
Related
Consider Trump's most recent use of force in that context with the Kennedy promise.
In Venezuela, as in Vietnam, Trump is trying to protect Americans from the scourge of drugs just as Kennedy intended to stop the equally dangerous spread of communism at the Mekong and not the Mississippi.
While Lyndon Johnson inherited the mantle of assuring liberty, he ordered the retaliatory bombing of North Vietnam in August 1964 to punish Hanoi for a PT boat attack it did not make against two U.S. destroyers. Aside from the United States sinking hapless speedboats, the CIA just attacked an east coast Venezuelan port with drones.
But Venezuela -- just as North Vietnam did not launch an attack against U.S. warships -- is not sending drugs to America. So why the escalation? And if the Vietnam analogy continues, do we expect to see U.S. special or clandestine forces on the ground in Venezuela much like we conducted a not-so-secret war in Southeast Asia?
There is one huge difference.
President Lyndon Johnson operated under the Tonkin Gulf Resolution that authorized force. Trump does not believe he needs one as commander-in-chief. And Republicans in Congress do not seem inclined to carry out their responsibilities or to enforce the War Powers Act that requires congressional approval for the continued use of military force beyond 60y days. And Trump is not limiting his Kennedy channeling.
Over last weekend, Trump approved cruise missile strikes against Nigeria's Boko Haram terrorist organization, retaliating for its killing of Christians. Why Trump did that either reflects JFK to defend the liberty of Christians or the need to placate his born-again Christian supporters.
In Venezuela and now Nigeria, it would seem that physical military attacks against those bases were some form of a declaration of war. Trump also authorized cruise missile attacks against ISIS targets in Somalia.
While this churn was occurring, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian declared that his country is engaged in a "full-fledged war with America, Israel, and Europe."
In a sense, this is becoming a tragicomedy and farce and a throwback to the 1960s. Recall the Kingston Trio's Merry Little Minuet, with the final verse that went: "They're rioting in Africa; There's strife in Iran; What nature doesn't do us; Will be done by our fellow man."
An even better parallel is the 1959 film that made Peter Sellers famous, The Mouse that Roared.
The imaginary kingdom of the Duchy of Fenwick had only one product: wine. A California winery made a knockoff product that captured the market. A desperate Fenwick decided that the only solution was to declare war on the United State and then be saved by losing.
Instead, the hapless Fenwickians, en route to Washington via New York to surrender, stumbled on the infamous U.S. Q-bomb -- the deadliest weapon in the world -- and became the most powerful state on Earth. But it was only a movie!
Perhaps Trump is not really channeling JFK. But what Trump has been doing so far might better be explained by verse and movie. Yet, this is deadly serious. The United States cannot continue to bomb or attack any and all places of its choosing without justification or purpose. This then becomes farce. And farce is no way to run a country, especially when lives are at stake.
Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist, senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with Field Marshal The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out next year, is Who Thinks Best Wins: Preventing Strategic Catastrophe. The writer can be reached on X @harlankullman.
15. Secretive Taiwanese Land Attack Cruise Missile Seen On The Move
Summary:
The War Zone reports Taiwan moved a rare transporter-erector-launcher linked to the secretive Hsiung Feng IIE (HF-2E) land-attack cruise missile, likely prompted by China’s “Justice Mission 2025” drills. Video shows the launcher reportedly relocating south along Taiwan’s east coast, consistent with wartime dispersal tactics to complicate targeting and preserve strike options. The HF-2E, in development since the early 2000s and reportedly in service for years, is described as a Tomahawk-like, ground-launched cruise missile using booster launch and a jet-powered cruise phase. Reported variants include extended range and multiple warhead and guidance options.
Comment: Photos and graphics at the link.
Secretive Taiwanese Land Attack Cruise Missile Seen On The Move
twz.com · Thomas Newdick
The cruise missile system, able to strike deep into China, appeared on the road during high-profile PLA live-fire drills surrounding the island.
Thomas Newdick
Published Dec 31, 2025 11:02 AM EST
126
https://www.twz.com/news-features/secretive-taiwanese-land-attack-cruise-missile-seen-on-the-move?utm
The TWZ Newsletter
Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.
China’s latest live-fire drills around Taiwan appear to have prompted the movement of the island’s secretive Hsiung Feng IIE (HF-2E) land-attack cruise missile. While the development of this important weapon is understood to date back at least to the early 2000s, it has only very rarely been seen since then, which makes its public appearance now all the more interesting.
A transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) vehicle associated with the HF-2E was noted recently on the move, reportedly heading south from Hualien to Taitung, further down the southeast coast of Taiwan.
The related video is posted below, but if it does not appear for you, here is the link to the Facebook reel.
Initial reports identified the TEL as part of the Haifeng Brigade, an anti-ship missile unit. However, as Roy Choo, a defense journalist and TWZ contributor, noted, the container-launcher and the flatbed trailer match what we have previously seen of the HF-2E.
Taiwan's secretive HF-2E LACM launcher veh spotted on the road reportedly en route to Taitung from Huatung. While captions incorrectly label it as belonging to the ROCN's Haifeng AShM brigade, the design of container launcher & trailer bed matches those seen in previous photos. pic.twitter.com/J1iBwKWlUm
— Roy Choo (@RXRoy) December 31, 2025
As we reported at the time, it was only in the summer of 2023 that a Taiwanese newspaper published pictures and video clips providing us with a first look of the HF-2E. At this point, the missile was understood to have already been in Taiwanese military service for more than a decade, with full-rate production reportedly beginning in 2011.
Oh my God, we've got the first ever image of the HF-2E land attack cruise missile, taken during a secret firing last night.
The missile was briefly illuminated by the still burning solid booster, which was being discarded. pic.twitter.com/LZVMpEUHxU
— Taepodong (@stoa1984) August 16, 2023
Despite its name, the HF-2E is not understood to have any relationship to the Hsiung Feng II (HF-2) anti-ship cruise missile.
A Taiwanese Coast Guard Anping class catamaran patrol ship fires an HF-2 anti-ship cruise missile, which is unrelated to the HF-2E land-attack cruise missile. Taiwan Military
The HF-2E is part of a number of secretive counter-strike capabilities that Taiwan’s armed forces are understood to possess to try to help deter or respond to a Chinese military intervention by holding targets on the mainland at risk. The redeployment of the system at this stage would make sense considering the large-scale live-fire drills being held around the island by the People’s Liberation Army. After all, ahead of any kind of potential contingency, Taiwan would move to redeploy and then keep on the move its critical mobile weapons systems, complicating China’s targeting and providing for less predictable strike vectors.
The little that is known about the HF-2E suggests that it is broadly analogous to the U.S. Tomahawk in function, being a ground-launched land-attack cruise missile. The limited available imagery points to a long cylindrical missile with what looks to be a relatively blunt nose, and fins at the tail end. It is initially launched using a booster rocket, before a small jet engine kicks in for the cruise phase, for which pop-out wings deploy toward the rear of its body.
Past pics of the HF-2E launcher vehicle. I'll have a story on Taiwan's LACMs and more generally its "source-strike" capabilities in the near future. pic.twitter.com/vTC2KmBoDV
— Roy Choo (@RXRoy) December 31, 2025
There are meanwhile thought to be at least two different HF-2E variants, with the baseline version complemented by an extended-range variant, also known as the Hsiung Sheng. There are no official figures available on maximum ranges for these weapons, with the baseline design able to reach targets anywhere from 300 to 600 kilometers (186 to 372 miles) away, depending on the source in question, while the extended-range version can reportedly hit targets at distances between 1,000 and 1,500 kilometers (621 to 932 miles).
A table from an unclassified 2017 U.S. Air Force report on foreign missile capabilities. HF-2E’s range here is listed as 300 kilometers (186 miles). It also says it is “undetermined” when it entered service. U.S. Air Force
There are also reports of different warhead options. These warheads reportedly include 1,000 and 440-pound class unitary high-explosive types, as well as a bunker-buster type, and a cluster munitions warhead may also have been developed.
In terms of guidance, the HF-2E reportedly uses a GPS-assisted inertial navigation system with an additional terrain contour matching (TERCOM) capability. TERCOM is a feature of various other land-attack cruise missiles, including Tomahawks, and provides for more precision navigation and the ability to fly lower, making it more survivable against enemy air defenses. Some accounts suggest that an imaging infrared seeker is also fitted, which would further improve accuracy in the run-in to the target.
A very general visual representation, using the U.S. Tomahawk as an example, of how TERCOM and digital scene-matching area correlation (DSMAC) systems scan the terrain below to help determine a missile’s position and make sure it is on course. via the Federation of American Scientists
With concerns growing about the potential for Chinese military intervention across the Taiwan Strait sometime in the next few years, Taiwan has been focused on building up its long-range land-attack strike capabilities, of which the HF-2E is an important part. Other weapons that are intended to deter China from launching such an operation include the Yun Feng, a supersonic land-attack cruise missile that is thought to be able to reach Beijing.
Air-launched standoff weapons include the Wan Chien land-attack cruise missile, although this likely has a shorter maximum range than either the HF-2E or the Yun Feng.
During a visit to the Republic of China Air Force’s Makung Air Force Base on the Penghu archipelago, on September 22, 2020, Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen was shown a display of Wan Chien conventionally-armed air-launched land-attack cruise missiles. Taiwan TV News screencap
The deterrence value of these weapons lies in their ability to strike critical targets that would disrupt Beijing’s ability to conduct complex military operations. Such high-profile strategic-level targets would include seats of government, possibly even in the capital, Beijing, as well as critical infrastructure. The HF-2E, however, is not thought to have the range to reach the Chinese capital.
Nevertheless, as Choo told TWZ, “The ability to hit targets deep into the mainland not only serves to provide deterrence against China from acting against Taiwan but also helps offset its arsenal of ballistic and cruise missiles and long-range rocket artillery, which the island’s air and missile defenses may not fully intercept. Achieving this would require a robust kill chain, which would be questionable in a high-intensity conflict.”
Earlier this month, Taiwan reportedly test-fired the Yun Feng, a long-range cruise missile similar to the U.S. Tomahawk. Learn more on Taiwan's secretive missile programs here: https://t.co/51bQwASgYk @CSIS pic.twitter.com/KcLMtCTNCB
— CSIS Missile Defense (@Missile_Defense) April 28, 2020
On the other hand, while the total number of these various Taiwanese land-attack cruise missiles remains unknown, the stockpile is far smaller than that of its adversary. China has an enormous and growing arsenal of air, sea, and ground-launched land-attack cruise missiles, as well as conventionally-armed ballistic and now hypersonic missiles. Any of these could be brought to bear in a future major conflict across the Taiwan Strait.
The latest live-fire drills once again demonstrate the capability and capacity of the Chinese military to encircle the island with air and naval forces, allowing them to readily strike from multiple vectors at once, as well.
Against this, Taiwan’s relatively tiny arsenal of counterstrike weapons like the HF-2E would be hoped to provide only a small degree of deterrence, since they would impose costs on the Chinese mainland in response to any intervention.
“Taiwan has been investing in its offensive capabilities, aiming to expand both capability and capacity,” Choo continues. “It reportedly fields the Ching Tien cruise missile, adapted from the Hsiung Feng III supersonic anti-ship missile, and was approved to acquire AGM-84H SLAM-ER missiles for its F-16s in 2020, though no deliveries have been confirmed. To manage costs, Taiwan is also pursuing a hi-low mix and is studying lower-cost options such as the Anduril Barracuda and the Chien Feng IV, derived from Kratos’ MQM-178 Firejet target drone.” You can read more about the last of these programs here.
An MQM-178 Firejet target drone is seen being launched via catapult. Kratos
It should also be remembered that, as well as its land-attack cruise missiles, Taiwan has a long history of developing other kinds of advanced capabilities to help deter any kind of Chinese move against it. In recent years, these have included new submarines and other naval vessels, drones, loitering munitions, counter-drone and other air and missile defense systems, among others. There is also a notable track record of U.S. defense contractors assisting with Taiwanese military efforts, including in the classified realm.
Exactly why Taiwan has decided to bring the HF-2E — or, at least, the TEL associated with it — further out of the shadows at this point is unclear. However, the response may well have been measured against the ongoing Chinese maneuvers around the island, Justice Mission 2025.
Taiwanese officials have been highly critical of the Chinese exercise, but so far the response from the United States has been more circumspect.
Speaking yesterday, U.S. President Donald Trump said he was not worried by the live-fire military drills surrounding Taiwan and that he has a great relationship with the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, who “hasn’t told me anything about it.”
China is conducting military exercises very near to Taiwan, but Donald Trump says he is 'not worried' about any further escalation.
Sky's @ShingiMararike explains what we know about the drills.
More here: https://t.co/WulrLCKwwd pic.twitter.com/KmWS7PJxAL
— Sky News (@SkyNews) December 30, 2025
This week’s drills are the sixth and largest to target Taiwan since 2022, when major exercises surrounded the island in retaliation for a visit by the then speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi.
As long as these maneuvers continue, we may see more of Taiwan’s deterrence capabilities, secretive or otherwise, as the island puts its own military capabilities through their paces in response.
Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com
Staff Writer
Thomas is a defense writer and editor with over 20 years of experience covering military aerospace topics and conflicts. He’s written a number of books, edited many more, and has contributed to many of the world’s leading aviation publications. Before joining The War Zone in 2020, he was the editor of AirForces Monthly.
twz.com · Thomas Newdick
16. The incredible firepower of the US Army’s Night Stalkers Airpower, Special Operations
Comment: Video at the link. Although we have these reports before the 160th is a truly great organization.
The incredible firepower of the US Army’s Night Stalkers Airpower, Special Operations
By Stavros Atlamazoglou
December 26, 2025
sandboxx.us · December 26, 2025
https://www.sandboxx.us/news/the-incredible-firepower-of-the-us-armys-night-stalkers/?ue-mini-cart-product-added
The 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment is the U.S. military’s premier rotary-wing special operations unit. Created in the 1980s after the failed attempt to rescue the American hostages from Iran, the “Night Stalkers,” as the unit is nicknamed, has seen action in every major and minor conflict ever since.
These are the pilots who flew the stealth helicopters that carried SEAL Team 6 in the Osama bin Laden raid and the pilots who put the Delta Force operators on the ground during the raid that killed Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State. Simply put, there are no better helicopter pilots in the world.
With a battle-proven motto “Night Stalkers Don’t Quit,” the 160th SOAR brings impressive precision strike capabilities to the U.S. special operations arsenal. A rare video from Iraq showcases their deadly precision, but before we delve into that, let’s go over the Night Stalker arsenal.
The 160th SOAR is comprised of four battalions that fly three main platforms: the AH-6 (attack) and MH-6 (assault/transport) Little Bird; the MH-60 (assault/transport) and MH-60 DAP (attack) Black Hawk; and the MH-47 Chinook (assault/transport).
AH-6 (attack) and MH-6 (assault/transport) Little Bird
An AH-6 during training at Range 14. Notice the piles of ammunition necessary to feed the chopper. (Courtesy picture)
The Little Bird is a light helicopter that can carry either only weapons, in the case of the AH-6, or operators, in the case of the MH-6.
The AH-6 specializes in armed reconnaissance, direct action, and close air support. In order to meet the requirements of those mission sets, the Little Bird has a sizeable arsenal available to it, including the GAU-19 .50 caliber Gatling gun, M134 Minigun, Hydra 70 rockets, Hellfire anti-tank, and Stinger anti-air missiles.
The MH-6, the unarmed version, can surgically and quickly insert special operators on targets. It can carry four operators, two on each pod, or other vehicles, like motorcycles (and even the occasional kayak).
Both Little Bird variants are mostly used for their speed, agility, and precision. Little Birds can land almost anywhere, including on top of hijacked airplanes, moving trains, and rooftops.
“The MD-530 series helicopter (AH/MH) is very easily maintained and a combat worthy helo. Developed in the late 1950’s by Mr. Hughes to be a simple machine as helicopters go and very crash worthy,” Retired Chief Warrant Officer 4 Greg Coker, a former Little Bird pilot,” told Sandboxx News.
“There are no hydraulics in the aircraft which provides easy maintenance. The Little Bird pilots are all capable of conducting maintenance on the aircraft if needed,” Coker explained.
An MH-6 Little Bird placing two special missions unit operators on a small rooftop in Iraq. (Screenshot from YouTube)
“However, the crew chief cringes when they see a pilot working on THEIR helo. The AH uses metal blades which provides longer use and will take bullet hits and not come apart like a composite blade used on many helos. It is a War Horse.”
A legendary Night Stalker and AH-6 Little Bird pilot with 11 combat deployments under his belt and 30 years of service, Coker has seen it all. In 2004, his AH-6 Little Bird was shot down by Iraqi insurgents carrying a Man-Portable Air-Defense System (MANPAD). Not only did Coker and his co-pilot manage to crash safely, but they also joined the Delta Force assault team that came to their rescue and immediately went after the very same insurgents who shot them down.
Coker has written about this experience and plenty of others in his superb book Death Waits in the Dark: Six Guns Don’t Miss.
MH-60 Black Hawk
The MH-60 DAP packs an impressive arsenal that can take out anything from enemy convoys to fortified bunkers to even hostile aircraft. (Department of Defense)
The Black Hawk is the medium-lift helicopter of choice for the U.S. Army. The Night Stalkers use the “M” special operations version of the aircraft. The MH-60 is used to carry squad-size elements of special operators. This is one of the most widely used 160th SOAR helicopters and it gained fame (or infamy) during the “Black Hawk Down” incident in Somalia in 1993. During the incident, Somali insurgents shot down two MH-60s, spurring a fierce battle that lasted for almost two days and became the basis for a hit movie.
In addition to the standard assault/transport version of the helicopter, there is the Direct Assault Penetration (DAP), a heavily armed version of the MH-60 that is designed to provide close air support to commandos or take out heavily fortified targets.
The DAP version has two small wings, or Light Armament Support Structures (LASS), attached to the sides that can carry an impressive arsenal, including M134 miniguns, M230 30mm chain guns, GAU 19 .50 caliber machine gun, rocket pods, Hellfire missiles, and Stinger missiles.
MH-47 Chinook
A MH-47 Chinook. (U.S. Army)
The venerable Chinook is the heavy-lift workhorse of the Night Stalkers. With its ability to carry close to 40 fully armed commandos, the MH-47 is primarily used for long-range special operations insertions.
When Delta Force went after Mullah Omar, the leader of the Taliban, deep inside Afghanistan on the days after 9/11, it was four MH-47 Chinooks that carried the assault force. Operation Gecko included the longest air assault in history and perfectly showed the capabilities of the Chinook. Despite its size and weight, the Chinook can be surprisingly agile and nimble when piloted by the right hands.
Besides these three rotary-wing platforms, the 160th SOAR also flies the MQ-1C Gray Eagle remotely piloted aircraft. Although there is only a limited number of drones within the Night Stalker ranks, they are devastatingly effective. Over an 11-month period in 2015, Night Stalker MQ-1Cs killed more than 300 Taliban and Islamic State fighters.
Death waits in the dark
In the following leaked video, we can see the impressive precision strike capabilities of the Night Stalkers. Taken in Iraq in the mid-2000s, the video shows U.S. special operations forces on the ground calling in close air support on an insurgent position. The commandos use infrared lasers, which are only visible through night vision goggles, to “paint” the target and guide the Night Stalkers. Then, MH-60 DAPs and AH-6 Little Birds take turns on the target with impressive results. The night literally turns into day.
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in December 2021. It has been edited for republication.
Feature Image: A Little Bird helicopter during Close Air Support training. (Courtesy picture)
Read more Sandboxx News
sandboxx.us · December 26, 2025
17. Underground betting scandal sweeps the Pentagon
Comment: What a clickbait headline.
This is New Year's Day, not April First. I find this more than a little far-fetched, even for the Daily Mail.
I hesitated sending this. I have not heard anything like this from friends at the Pentagon. (though I am out of the loop on so many things).
However, I decided to send this only for the possible relevance to cognitive warfare.
If I were a hostile actor (which I suppose I am toward certain of our enemies) this might be the type of cognitive warfare I would conduct to cause a major civil-military rift between the uniformed and civilian professional military and the Trump administration which would undermine trust and damage the national security decision making process in keeping with the description of cognitive warfare:
Cognitive Warfare is a contest for “cognitive superiority” in which adversaries use synchronized military and non-military activities to influence how people perceive, make sense of events, and decide and act, at individual, group, and societal levels. It stresses that modern technologies expand reach and effectiveness, since the openness and connectedness of democracies can be exploited via propaganda, disinformation, deepfakes, and other information threats that degrade trust and polarize societies. (From the NATO Chief Scientist's report on Cognitive Warfare).
Underground betting scandal sweeps the Pentagon
Underground betting scandal sweeps the Pentagon: Insiders expose all the scheming... a Game of Thrones power struggle... and Pete Hegseth's fight for survival
By ELINA SHIRAZI, US SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER
Published: 08:03 EST, 1 January 2026 | Updated: 08:03 EST, 1 January 2026
Daily Mail · ELINA SHIRAZI, US SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER · January 1, 2026
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15367711/pete-hegseth-pentagon-bets-fired-game-thrones.html
Pete Hegseth has weathered a string of scandals in his first year, including a controversial air strike in the Caribbean and the Signal-gate national security leak.
But high-ranking Pentagon staff are betting the Secretary of War won't last much longer, running clandestine 'betting pools' on the date of his removal as they describe the atmosphere under his command as a precarious game of survival.
Money is changing hands between officers, with varying odds offered on whether Hegseth hits the one-year and 18-month mark, three Army staff told the Daily Mail.
That would place his departure - or ouster - around July 2026.
The sweepstakes are ongoing in various offices, described as fantasy football-style games that act as a 'coping mechanism' for personnel who say Hegseth runs the Pentagon like the unruly Army captain he once was rather than a distinguished Cabinet secretary.
'There are a lot of people in each group - maybe 20 or 30. They are all mostly done on text or Signal because nobody wants to get caught doing that on an official platform,' the source explained.
Insiders say Hegseth's downfall could come as a result of misplaced priorities, like an obsessive focus on uniforms and facial hair over a pressing national security threat or military mishap, according to one army source.
This internal friction is reflected in the current betting markets, where Hegseth's job security is increasingly viewed as volatile.
Jennifer Rauchet and U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth attend the 48th Kennedy Center Honors at The Kennedy Center on December 7
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth walks by the Brigade of Midshipman before the start of the game between the Navy Midshipmen and the Air Force Falcons at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium on October 4
An exclusive look inside senior offices of the Department of War reveals a catastrophic breakdown in trust and confidence. Insiders accuse Hegseth of having the wrong priorities, while expressing deep alarm over his handling of the recent controversial Caribbean boat strikes
The revelations come as the Secretary of War faces intense scrutiny over the lethal airstrikes on a drug boat in the Caribbean, where his own support in Congress appears to be wavering
According to Kalshi, Hegseth remains among the top contenders in the 'Next Cabinet Member Out,' his odds having spiked following the controversy surrounding the video of a double strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean.
Hegseth has eroded some trust inside the Pentagon with sudden firings of top commanders sparking paranoia among colleagues, according to insiders. The atmosphere was likened to 'Game of Thrones' by one senior staffer whose boss works closely with the Secretary of War.
That same staffer describes conversations taking place between colleagues where they compare Hegseth to Saddam Hussein and the 'purge' in Iraq in which he publicly accused members of his own party of treason.
The controversial boat strikes on drug smugglers in the Caribbean, as well as his fiery rhetoric and memes posted on social media have further fueled concern.
'Nobody knows who's going to be removed. Something could happen at any moment,' the source said, adding some leaders have been 'retired very, very quickly' or found new jobs under Hegseth's rule.
Another staffer said Hegseth appeared to be safe for now, but it was only a matter of time before another scandal would force President Trump to act.
'How has he not been fired yet?' he asked. 'The president hasn't reached his tipping point we are hearing … but there will be a straw that breaks the camels back.'
However, Trump has praised Hegseth and defended him consistently.
During the final Cabinet meeting of the year, the President offered a full-throated defense of his administration, singling out the Secretary of War for special praise to dispel rumors of a rift. 'Pete Hegseth has been phenomenal... I read a story that I was unhappy with Pete... I would say very much the opposite.'
A Capitol Hill insider tells Daily Mail it's well known in the halls of Congress that Trump is making Hegseth the scapegoat in case things go sideways
Following a tense, closed-door briefing with senators on Capitol Hill earlier this Hegseth argued last week that he wouldn't release the full video of the double strike on survivors to the public, and that it would jeopardize their operations.
However, this appeal to 'national security' is being increasingly framed by critics as a shield to hide potential violations of international law.
While most Republican lawmakers have rallied behind the Secretary, the defense is not entirely uniform. High-ranking Republicans like Senator Roger Wicker, chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, initially called for 'vigorous oversight' into the reports.
Democrats have been demanding the administration release full footage from the strikes.
However, despite the politics, internal dissent within the ranks remains high.
The Army source added that given the boat was headed toward Europe and not the US, it didn't even 'pose a threat to us specifically' — making the action even harder to justify.
The multiple 'betting pools' or 'sweepstakes' are reportedly running in various Pentagon offices, which are described as a 'fantasy football thing' and a 'coping mechanism' for Army personnel
This growing disillusionment with Hegseth is compounded by what insiders perceive as an unhealthy obsession with narrative control, as evidenced by their replacement of the press corp and ushering in of the 'new media.'
Many high-level Pentagon personnel tell Daily Mail they are 'mad' at the ban on speaking with 'credentialed, reputable press.'
'Sometimes we go on media blackouts where they tell us we can't post anything or speak to anyone in media. And it comes in waves without an explanation,' two sources explain.
But another source familiar with the Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill says Hegseth has lasted so long because he is 'a lot more capable' than public impression suggests, and is not 'an idiot' or 'inexperienced.'
'Listen, the more he gets attacked directly, the more I think President Trump will defend him. That is what we have seen so far,' the committee source said.
As for what the future has in store for the Secretary of War, Army staffers sigh heavily.
'Everyone is just waiting for the one-year mark to pass,' two sources said.
Daily Mail · ELINA SHIRAZI, US SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER · January 1, 2026
De Oppresso Liber,
David Maxwell
Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy
Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation
Editor, Small Wars Journal
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
Phone: 202-573-8647
email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com
| 
