Quotes of the Day:

"The high destiny of the individual is to serve rather than to rule." 

– Albert Einstein

““That is a great mystery,” said Doctor Winter. “That is a mystery that has disturbed rulers all over the world—how the people know. It disturbs the invaders now, I am told, how news runs through censorships, how the truth of things fights free of control. It is a great mystery.””

– The Moon Is Down (Twentieth-century Classics) by John Steinbeck

“If you were to look up the word rhetoric in the dictionary, it would tell you more or less the following: Rhetoric is the art of using language to persuade or influence others. It would tell you, too, that the etymology of the word started in Greek and traveled through Latin to get to us. If you were to look up the word polemic, you would find, perhaps to your surprise, that its root is from the Greek word for war. A polemic, originally a theological term, is defined as language used to create controversy in contesting a thesis or point of view. Polemics is making war, or rather pursuing conflict, with words instead of literal, physical weapons. So rhetoric and polemic are closely related concepts, but they are not exactly the same.”

– Political Writing: A Guide to the Essentials by Adam Garfinkle

1. Russia projects confidence as it pursues alliances to undermine West

2. Three US troops are killed and 25 injured in drone strike by Iran-backed militia in Jordan, US says

3. Cheap but lethally accurate: how drones froze Ukraine’s frontlines

4. Roger Donlon, first Medal of Honor recipient from Vietnam War, dies at 89

5. 50 years of ‘Robin Sage’: Warfare test for U.S. Special Forces continues this week across NC — mountains to coast

6. Where Is Hamas Getting Its Weapons? Increasingly, From Israel.

7. Statement From Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on an Attack Against U.S. and Coalition Forces in Northeastern Jordan Near the Syria Border

8. China Would Need 1.2 Million Troops to Invade Taiwan (It Could Be a Disaster)

9. Poland and Korea Offer Lessons for Ending the Russia-Ukraine War

10. The ICJ Ruling’s Hidden Diplomacy

11. Report: 80 percent of Gaza Strip's tunnel network still intact

12. Navy lowers bar to enlist again amid continued recruiting woes

13. Hungary Far-Right Would Lay Claim to Neighbouring Region, if Ukraine Loses War

14. Record winter warmth smashes highs in D.C., Southeast

1. Russia projects confidence as it pursues alliances to undermine West

In case anyone still had questions about Russia's intent.

Excerpts:

“One of the most important tasks is to create a new world order,” one of the documents dated April 3, 2023, states. “Western countries led by the United States have tried to impose their own structure, based on their dominance.”

Another document, written by a close ally of Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev and circulated in the Kremlin this summer, advocated greater cooperation between China and Russia on artificial intelligence, cyber systems and the “internet of things.” As part of that, the document envisioned Beijing and Moscow creating a new financial system and a Eurasian digital currency based on alternative payment systems, such as blockchain, to bypass the Western dominance of global financial transactions.

Russia projects confidence as it pursues alliances to undermine West

By Catherine Belton

January 27, 2024 at 2:00 a.m. EST

The Washington Post · by Catherine Belton · January 27, 2024

Russia is increasingly confident that deepening economic and diplomatic ties with China and the Global South will allow it to challenge the international financial system dominated by the United States and undermine the West, according to Kremlin documents and interviews with Russian officials and business executives.

Russia has been buoyed by its success in holding off a Western-backed Ukrainian counteroffensive followed by political stalemates in Washington and Brussels over continued funding for Kyiv. In Moscow’s view, the U.S. backing of Israel’s invasion of Gaza has damaged Washington’s standing in many parts of the world. The confluence of events has led to a surge of optimism about Russia’s global position.

Officials in Moscow point to growing trade with China, military cooperation with Iran, diplomatic outreach in the Arab world and the expansion of the BRICS grouping of major emerging economies — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — to include Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Ethiopia.

The BRICS expansion demonstrated the group’s “growing authority and role in world affairs,” and its work will focus on “sovereign equality,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a Jan. 1 statement as Russia assumed the chairmanship of the group. The Kremlin has begun to refer to itself as part of the “Global Majority.”

Internal Russian Security Council documents obtained by a European intelligence service and reviewed by The Washington Post, show that the Kremlin convened meetings in 2022 and 2023 on ways to undermine the dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency. The ultimate goal, one of the documents stated, was to dismantle the post-World War II global financial system and the power it gives Washington.

“One of the most important tasks is to create a new world order,” one of the documents dated April 3, 2023, states. “Western countries led by the United States have tried to impose their own structure, based on their dominance.”

Another document, written by a close ally of Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev and circulated in the Kremlin this summer, advocated greater cooperation between China and Russia on artificial intelligence, cyber systems and the “internet of things.” As part of that, the document envisioned Beijing and Moscow creating a new financial system and a Eurasian digital currency based on alternative payment systems, such as blockchain, to bypass the Western dominance of global financial transactions.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied that Russia was working to undermine U.S. dominance of the global financial system, but he conceded it aimed to create alternatives, saying actions taken by “the collective West” were undermining trust without any assistance from Moscow. The Kremlin “is following [the situation] carefully and building a new system of economic neurons because the previous system turned out to be unreliable, false and dangerous,” he said in comments to The Post.

The belief that Russia has proved more militarily and economically resilient than the West anticipated has consolidated Putin’s domestic standing ahead of a presidential election in March, particularly with certain members of the Russian elite who have shown long-standing skepticism about the war in Ukraine and initial concern about the impact of Western sanctions.

“There has been a certain consolidation in the Russian elite,” said a Russian academic with close ties to the country’s senior diplomats. “There is a certain expectation that the situation will further change in Russia’s favor.”

Russian billionaires like Oleg Deripaska, who initially publicly spoke in opposition to the war in Ukraine, saying it would lead to economic crisis in Russia, now describe Russia’s break with the West as a catalyst for reshaping global economic patterns.

“Alternative payment systems and debt markets will be created: In China on the basis of the yuan, and in India and the Middle East on the basis of cryptocurrencies,” Deripaska wrote on Jan. 20 on Telegram, the messaging app. “In a few years, sanctions will no longer be a brake on global trade and investment.”

European security officials said that Moscow is very much Beijing’s junior partner and that it is unclear China has any real interest in aligning with the Kremlin’s grandiose visions. But Russia’s focus on using its global position to disrupt the West is intensifying, the officials said, including in the Middle East.

Russia is “not omnipotent, but they try to use all possibilities. They are very consistent and systematic,” said one senior European official who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

While most of the West still hopes for a return to the previous order, the senior European security official said, Russia’s billionaires “have understood that the old life is finished and now is the time to create a new future.”

The Russians, the official continued, “have passed through the Rubicon, and the West has not. The West wants to return to business as usual. But the Russians understood that this is impossible, and they are trying to build a new world.”

Since Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack on Israel, the Kremlin has appeared to jettison its carefully crafted post-Soviet relationship with Israel in favor of deepening ties with the Arab world. In October, Russia hosted a joint delegation of high-ranking Hamas members and Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Ali Bagheri Kani. Putin made a rare visit to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia in December, his first trip outside China, Iran and former Soviet states since the invasion of Ukraine.

“Through Iran, it is possible [for Moscow] to make this [Middle East] situation so acute that attention can be further distracted from Ukraine,” one Russian official said.

“Russia still has a big negative potential,” he said. “There are a lot of hot spots that Russia can interfere in.”

With a host of elections taking place in Europe this year, the State Department has warned that Russia will conduct “information operations” aimed at further undermining Western support for Ukraine.

“Russia is hoping that the number of elections in Europe this year could change what has been a remarkable coalition and disciplined opposition to its war,” James P. Rubin, U.S. special envoy and coordinator of the department’s Global Engagement Center.

And deep divisions in Washington, including over continued funding for Ukraine, have fostered the belief in Moscow and elsewhere that the United States is paralyzed, said Matthew Redhead, former head of Global Strategic Intelligence at HSBC and currently a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a British think tank.

“It means that hostile states like Russia and Iran and potentially China are going to start pushing the boundaries further to see what reaction they will get,” Redhead said. “It is an invitation to escalate.”

For Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the exiled business executive who spent 10 years in Russian jail after falling afoul of Putin, the West appears to be at an inflection point. How it responds to increasing global disorder — and Russian aggression — could determine the number of conflicts it faces in the decades to come.

“Putin of course is trying to undermine the world order because this for him is the only strategy to survive,” said Khodorkovsky, who is now based in London. After allowing Russia to cross red lines in Syria and then withdrawing from Afghanistan, followed by piecemeal support for Ukraine, Khodorkovsky said, “it looks from the outside like the U.S. is losing the Third World War.”

Gen. Richard Barrons, former commander of the British military’s Joint Forces Command, said the risks are growing of strategic failure for the West because of the lack of political will to supply Ukraine with adequate amounts of weapons and to turn around military industrial production.

“In terms of latent military power and economic strength, it is absolutely ridiculous that the West is being held hostage by something as relatively puny as Russia,” he said. “Putin believes that if he is stubborn enough for long enough, we, the feeble West, will walk away — and he could be right. … That won’t just be shameful. That will be an act of strategic self-harm.”

The Washington Post · by Catherine Belton · January 27, 2024

2. Three US troops are killed and 25 injured in drone strike by Iran-backed militia in Jordan, US says

Imagery and graphic map at the link:https://apnews.com/article/biden-american-service-members-killed-jordan-iran-5cb774fd835a558d840ae91263037489

Three US troops are killed and 25 injured in drone strike by Iran-backed militia in Jordan, US says

BY ZEKE MILLER

Updated 4:36 AM GMT+9, January 29, 2024

AP · January 28, 2024

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Three American troops were killed and 25 were injured Sunday in a drone strike in northeast Jordan near the Syrian border, the U.S. military said. President Joe Biden blamed Iran-backed militias for the first U.S. fatalities after months of strikes by the groups against American forces across the Middle East amid the Israel-Hamas war.

With an increasing the risk of military escalation in the region, U.S. officials were working to conclusively identify the precise group responsible for the attack, but they have assessed that one of several Iranian-backed groups was behind it.

Biden said the United States “will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner (of) our choosing.”

Iran-backed fighters in east Syria began evacuating their posts, fearing U.S. airstrikes, according to Omar Abu Layla, a Europe-based activist who heads the Deir Ezzor 24 media outlet. He told The Associated Press that the areas are the strongholds of Mayadeen and Boukamal.

According to a U.S. official, the number of troops wounded in the attack by a one-way attack drone may grow. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details not made public, said a large drone struck the base, which two other American officials identified as an installation in Jordan known as Tower 22. It is along the Syrian border and is used largely by troops involved in the advise-and-assist mission for Jordanian forces.

The small installation, which Jordan does not publicly disclose, includes U.S. engineering, aviation, logistics and security troops.

The U.S. military base at al-Tanf in Syria is just 20 kilometers (12 miles) north of Tower 22. The Jordanian installation provides a critical logistical hub for U.S. forces in Syria, including those at al-Tanf, which is near the intersection of the Iraq, Syria and Jordan borders.

Jordanian state television quoted Muhannad Mubaidin, a government spokesman, as insisting the attack happened across the border in Syria.

U.S. troops long have used Jordan, a kingdom bordering Iraq, Israel, the Palestinian territory of the West Bank, Saudi Arabia and Syria, as a basing point. U.S. Central Command put the toll at three killed and 25 injured.

Some 3,000 American troops typically are stationed in Jordan.

This is a locator map for Jordan with its capital, Amman. (AP Photo)

Since the war in Gaza began Oct. 7, Iranian-backed militias have struck American military installations in Iraq more than 60 times and in Syria more than 90 times, with a mix of drones, rockets, mortars and ballistic missiles. The attack Sunday was the first targeting American troops in Jordan during the Israel-Hamas war and the first to result in the loss of American lives. Scores of U.S. personnel have been wounded, including some with traumatic brain injuries, during the attacks.

The militias have said that their strikes are in retaliation for Washington’s support for Israeli in the war in Gaza and have also said they aim to push U.S. forces out of the region.

The U.S. in recent months has struck targets in Iraq, Syria and Yemen to respond to attacks on American forces in the region and to deter Iranian-backed Houthi rebels from continuing to threaten commercial shipping in the Red Sea.

Biden, who was in Columbia, South Carolina, on Sunday, was briefed by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, national security adviser Jake Sullivan, and principal deputy national security adviser Jon Finer, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said. He was expected to meet again with his national security team later Sunday.

The president called it a “despicable and wholly unjust attack” and said the service members were “risking their own safety for the safety of their fellow Americans, and our allies and partners with whom we stand in the fight against terrorism. It is a fight we will not cease.”

Syria is still in the midst of a civil war and long has been a launch pad for Iranian-backed forces there, including the Lebanese militia Hezbollah. Iraq has multiple Iranian-backed Shiite militias operating there as well.

Jordan, a staunch Western ally and a crucial power in Jerusalem for its oversight of holy sites there, is suspected of launching airstrikes in Syria to disrupt drug smugglers, including one that killed nine people earlier this month.

An umbrella group for Iran-backed factions known as the Islamic Resistance in Iraq earlier claimed launching explosive drone attacks targeting three areas in Syria, as well as one inside of “occupied Palestine.” The group has claimed responsibility for dozens of attacks against bases housing U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria since the Israel-Hamas war began.

___

Associated Press writers Bassem Mroue and Abby Sewell in Beirut, Omar Akour in Amman, Jordan, Jon Gambrell in Jerusalem and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.

ZEKE MILLER

Zeke is AP’s chief White House correspondent

twittermailto

AP · January 28, 2024

3. Cheap but lethally accurate: how drones froze Ukraine’s frontlines

Drones are having an impact on war everywhere and at all levels.

Cheap but lethally accurate: how drones froze Ukraine’s frontlines

Breakthrough for either side is almost impossible, say those in pulverised Kupiansk area

by Luke Harding in Kupiansk. Photographs by Alessio Mamo

The Guardian · by Luke Harding · January 25, 2024

For four months, Russian troops have been trying to seize the eastern Ukrainian village of Synkivka. On a map, this looks easy. Their forward position is on the edge of a forest. It is a mere 500 metres away from the Ukrainian frontline and a shattered collection of cottages.

Every few days the Russians attack. Their forays across open ground end in the same way: complete disaster. Armoured vehicles with men perched on top, speed across a landscape of moon-like craters and splintered trees. Soon it goes wrong. Some blow up on mines; others panic and reverse. The Ukrainians pick off fleeing infantry with drones and artillery. Typically, all the Russians die.

“It’s really fucked up down there,” Gleb Molchanov, a Ukrainian drone operator said, showing video he took from above the battlefield four miles north-east of the city of Kupiansk. The images are gruesome. Bodies can be seen lying in a zig-zag trench and frozen hollows. Nearby are the burnt-out carcasses of BMP-1 fighting vehicles, at least 10 of them. Despite this, the Russians keep trying.

Gleb Molchanov, a drone operator, shows a Chinese-made UAV can be fitted with grenades and a thermal camera. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian

Almost two years after Vladimir Putin’s all-out invasion, Ukraine has abandoned its offensive. Instead it is employing a strategy of active defence: keeping the Russians back, and waging the occasional counter-punch. Moscow, meanwhile, wants to go forward. It has mobilised tens of thousands of troops in the Kupiansk area. Many are former prisoners, recruited directly from jail and serving in “Storm-Z” units.

The Kremlin has two immediate goals. One is to take back Kupiansk, the gateway to Ukraine’s second city Kharkiv. Another is to capture the salient town of Avdiivka, not far from the occupied regional capital of Donetsk. So far Moscow has been unable to achieve either military objective. In the process it has lost spectacular numbers of troops, tanks and equipment.

Ukrainian drone targets Russian forces during attack on village of Synkivka – video

The difficulties experienced by Russia in Synkivka point to a wider problem facing both armies. “It’s a war of armour against projectiles. At the moment projectiles are winning,” Molchanov said. The Russians had some tactical success, flushing out Ukrainian soldiers from the forest and a few villages. But a significant breakthrough was almost impossible, he said, in an era of cheap and lethally accurate drones.

Footage taken from a Ukrainian drone above the village of Synkivka. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian

The result of Ukraine and Russia’s extensive use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is a kind of warfare that makes traditional Nato doctrine “pretty much obsolete”, Molchanov said. First-person view kamikaze drones cost $400 (£315) each. They are bought from the online Chinese marketplace Alibaba, he said. “Nobody really knows how to advance right now. Everything gets smashed up by drones and artillery,” he said.

Kupiansk was captured by Russia on day three of the invasion but lost seven months later. Putin has reportedly ordered his generals to seize back by the spring territory along the east bank of the Oskil River on which the key railway-city sits. That includes Synkivka, a one-time hamlet of three roads and a clubhouse , as well as the neighbouring villages of Petropavlivka and Kucherivka.

Drone footage taken by Gleb Molchanov shows strike on Russian hideout in Synkivka – video

Andrii Besedin, the head of Kupiansk’s military administration, said: “Their plan does not correspond with our plan.”

From his windowless basement office, he pointed out that previous Russian deadlines to take Ukrainian territory had come and gone. Moscow’s “meat grinder” tactics were ineffective, he said, adding: “They don’t care about human life, including their own people. Or us.”

A soldier walks through the snowy streets of then occupied Kupiansk in February 2022. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian

What happens next depends on whether Kyiv gets more weapons from the “civilised world”, Besedin said. “We have enough to defend, maybe. But it isn’t enough to beat the enemy.” He said arguments in Washington – where Republicans in Congress have blocked $61bn in security assistance to Kyiv – had a huge effect on Kupiansk and the fate of the 3,500 people who remain there.

With its troops stuck, a vengeful Russia pulverises the city. Last year, it destroyed Kupiansk’s museum, killing its director, and the apricot-painted palace of culture. It bombed the hospital, polyclinic and hilltop administration building. The market, meat processing factory, and universal fish company have been hit too. The latest civilian victim, 53-year-old Olena Lashkova, died in a strike on Thursday at her home in Kupiansk-Vuzlovy.

Besedin said Kupiansk was once a “sweet” place, with factories, jobs and schools. In summer, couples strolled in its landscape park while children swam in the river and played under willows. He said his predecessor as mayor had given up the city without a fight and then vanished, presumably to Russia. Asked whether Kupiansk had a future, Besedin answered: “Yes. We can help when the Donetsk and Luhansk regions are liberated.”

Despite Moscow’s onslaught, Besedin said some local residents refuse to leave. “We ask them every day. We have a hotline. But it depends on them,” he said. In September and January, the authorities carried out a forced evacuation of parents with children from under-fire villages. There are no civilians left in Synkivka but a few inhabitants – most of them elderly – cling on to their homes in nearby settlements, defying S-300 missiles and aviation bombs.

Two medics at Khakiv regional hospital where people injured in Russian attacks on Kupiansk are treated. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian

Many become casualties. Inna Diakiv, a neurosurgeon at Kharkiv’s regional hospital, said patients from Kupiansk and the surrounding district told her they wanted to be self-reliant. “They say they are guarding their properties or are unable to leave because of pets.” A tiny number are waiting for the Russians to come back, Diakiv believed. “They don’t say this openly. You can guess. Russia is why they got shrapnel wounds. It’s crazy,” she said.

Bohdan Voitsekhovskyi, the deputy head of the radical-right Freikorps volunteer unit, said Russian politics explained recent doomed attacks. In March, Putin is standing as president for a fifth time. “The elections are an imitation exercise,” said Voitsekhovskyi. “Nevertheless, the regime still needs to persuade people to vote for Putin and to show support. And so they capture a few hundred metres with enormous losses. They need to achieve something and to sell it as a success.”

Bohdan Voisekhovskyi, is deputy head of a volunteer unit fighting near Kupiansk. Photograph: Alessio Mamo/The Guardian

Predictions that Russia would launch a massive offensive in early January against Kupiansk turned out to be wrong. The governor of the Kharkiv region, Oleh Syniehubov, said the enemy was regrouping. Last week, Russian forces had launched two to five attacks a day, compared with 15 to 20 over new year. They had not assembled a strike group in the area and winter conditions were making operations difficult.

Molchanov said Moscow had yet to come up with a plan that would allow it to breach Ukraine’s defensive line. “We are in a kind of technological stalemate right now,” said the drone operator. Asked whether the Russians could break through, he replied: “The game is with them. They decide where and when to attack. But I don’t think they can get Kupiansk. Neither side can win without a trick or innovation.”

Last week, Molchanov and his team noticed footprints in the snow, outside Synkivka. They led to an underground hideout. It had been dug beneath the metallic skeleton of an abandoned Russian armoured vehicle. Molchanov zoomed in with his drone camera. Then he dropped a bomb. It was unclear whether anyone was inside. “My job is to kill Russians. They shouldn’t have come here. I don’t feel sorry for them,” he said.

The Guardian · by Luke Harding · January 25, 2024

4. Roger Donlon, first Medal of Honor recipient from Vietnam War, dies at 89

Thank you to the Washington Post for honoring Colonel Donlon.

I was unaware of this information re: Parkinson's and Agent Orange.

Excerpt:

Three years later, he married the former Norma Shinno Irving, who confirmed the death. Col. Donlon had Parkinson’s disease linked to exposure to the military defoliant Agent Orange, she said.

Roger Donlon, first Medal of Honor recipient from Vietnam War, dies at 89

In July 1964, the Army captain was repeatedly wounded as North Vietnamese forces attempted to overrun a camp

By Brian Murphy

January 26, 2024 at 6:54 p.m. EST

The Washington Post · by Brian Murphy · January 26, 2024

The first round of incoming fire set a roof ablaze at Camp Nam Dong, an outpost of South Vietnamese forces along with a 12-member U.S. Special Forces detachment near the Laotian border. Within minutes, North Vietnamese fighters were hitting hard with mortars, grenades and machine guns.

The commanding officer of Team A-726, an Army captain named Roger Donlon, was hurled through a door by a blast just after 2:45 a.m. A staff sergeant raced to the communications room and radioed the air base in Danang, about 30 miles to the east.

“Roger. Roger. Go ahead, Nam Dong,” came the reply.

“Request flare ship and an airstrike. … We are under heavy mortar fire.”

The base was surrounded. North Vietnamese soldiers and allied guerrillas, known to U.S. forces as Viet Cong or V.C., pressed closer through the jungle.

“The burning mess hall cast an eerie, dancing light over the camp, spectacular now with swirling smoke and the flashes of exploding shells. The V.C. mortars were zeroed in on us,” recalled Capt. Donlon, who was wounded four times during the battle and became the first Medal of Honor recipient from the Vietnam War for his defense of Nam Dong. He died Jan. 25 in Leavenworth, Kan., at 89, more than 35 years after retiring from the military with the rank of colonel.

For days before the attack on July 6, 1964, expectations grew that the North Vietnamese would attempt to overrun the camp — defended by more than 300 South Vietnamese soldiers and local militiamen, the American unit and an Australian military adviser. Vietnamese villagers nearby had become nervous, likely picking up clues of the North Vietnamese plans, Capt. Donlon recalled.

The camp was not a major military site but its location, in a valley near Laos, offered a critical vantage point to monitor and disrupt movements of North Vietnamese guerrillas.

Capt. Donlon was checking the guard roster when the first attack wave hit. A shell slammed into a wall. Soon, the command post was on fire. Capt. Donlon and Master Sgt. Gabriel Ralph Alamo raced inside to save as much ammunition and weapons as they could haul out.

A few yards away, a Vietnamese interpreter was hit by a blast. Both his legs were blown off just below the knees. “In 30 seconds he was dead,” wrote Capt. Donlon in his 1965 book, “Outpost of Freedom,” co-authored with journalist Warren Rogers.

Two Viet Cong battalions — totaling at least 800 fighters — moved forward. They reached the camp’s last line of defense. U.S. helicopters tried to bring in reinforcements but turned back to Danang because of heavy fire.

“Illuminate the main gate,” Capt. Donlon yelled for a flare, he recounted. In the blaze of light, he fired at three North Vietnamese fighters, killing two and hitting the third with a grenade blast as he tried to reach the cover of high grass. Capt. Donlon noticed he, too, had been hit. His left forearm was bleeding. A piece of shrapnel had ripped open a coin-sized wound in his stomach.

“But nothing hurt too much,” he recalled, “and my legs were okay.”

Capt. Donlon began crawling between defensive pits dug into the camp to check on his team and others. The Australian adviser, Warrant Officer Kevin Conway, was fatally wounded. Capt. Donlon was hit again. Shrapnel tore into his left leg. “For the first time,” he recounted, “I felt real pain … The bedlam of bursting grenades was too much.”

A few minutes later, a mortar exploded just yards from Capt. Donlon and a group of others. “I am going to die, I thought,” he wrote. He was knocked unconscious, laying halfway into the ammunition bunker with wounds to his left shoulder and another in his stomach. Alamo was dead. So was another member of Capt. Donlon’s team, Sgt. John L. Houston.

Capt. Donlon used strips of his T-shirt and one of his socks as bandages and tourniquets. The North Vietnamese, on loudspeakers, told the base to surrender or face being overrun. The mortar barrages kept hammering the camp.

Finally, at daybreak, came the sound of approaching aircraft. Airstrikes blasted the North Vietnam positions. “Except for sporadic small-arms fire,” he recalled, “the battle for Nam Dong was over.”

The dead included at least 57 South Vietnamese fighters, the two Americans, Conway and more than 60 North Vietnamese attackers. Capt. Donlon was presented with the Medal of Honor, the military’s highest award for valor, by President Lyndon B. Johnson in December 1964. (There are currently 64 Medal of Honor recipients alive.)

Air Force to West Point

Roger Hugh Charles Donlon was born in Saugerties, N.Y., on Jan. 30, 1934. His father worked at a coal and lumber yard; his mother was a homemaker.

He left Air Force pilot training in 1955 after failing eye tests. He then stayed two years at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., withdrawing because of personal reasons that included his age difference with other cadets.

He enlisted in the Army in 1958 and earned the green beret of the Special Forces at the U.S. Army Special Warfare School at Fort Bragg, N.C. (now Fort Liberty).

During a second tour in Vietnam, he severely injured his retina in 1972 while diving to the ground while under fire. He returned to the United States as antiwar marches and protests were near their peak. “Nobody likes being on the team not supported by the fans,” he told the Associated Press.

But he remained in the Army and served in command and training roles around the world including U.S. military adviser to the Royal Thai Army and battalion commander with U.S. Special Forces in Panama.

He received a bachelor’s degree at the University of Nebraska at Omaha in 1967 and a master’s degree in government in 1983 from Campbell University in Buies Creek, N.C. He retired from military service in 1988.

Col. Donlon’s first marriage to Carol Chadwick ended in divorce. In 1965, he met a widow whose husband had been killed in the Vietnam War. Three years later, he married the former Norma Shinno Irving, who confirmed the death. Col. Donlon had Parkinson’s disease linked to exposure to the military defoliant Agent Orange, she said.

Other survivors include a daughter from his first marriage; three sons from his second marriage; six grandchildren; one great-granddaughter, and two brothers. His son from his second marriage, Justin, died in 2022.

In 1998, Col. Donlon published a memoir, “Beyond Nam Dong.” He and his wife also worked with veterans’ groups including Wreaths Across America.

“The casualties of war,” he said in an interview in 2022, “are not limited to the battlefield.”

The Washington Post · by Brian Murphy · January 26, 2024

5. 50 years of ‘Robin Sage’: Warfare test for U.S. Special Forces continues this week across NC — mountains to coast

We are proud to be alumni of Pineland University.

50 years of ‘Robin Sage’: Warfare test for U.S. Special Forces continues this week across NC — mountains to coast

Yahoo · by Rodney OvertonJanuary 27, 2024 at 6:39 PM·3 min read2Link Copied

FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. (WNCN) — During the past nearly 10 days as North Carolina has dealt with arctic brittle cold, snow in the mountains, torrential rain and above-normal warmth, so too have dozens of U.S. Special Forces candidates from Fort Liberty while they continue their warfare test across the state — including areas around Raleigh and Fayetteville.

Now, 2024 marks 50 years since the Green Beret wargame was first called Robin Sage in 1974 — although a test without such a name dates back to the 1950s.

Special Forces candidates engage the enemy in Badin, North Carolina. The students are assigned to the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School engage enemy role players during the final phase of field training known as Robin Sage in central North Carolina, April 26, 2022. (U.S. Army photo by K. Kassens)

Robin Sage, the nearly two-week special field “final exam” for would-be Green Berets continues through February 1 as the candidates work with guerrilla fighters in the “unconventional warfare exercise.”

‘Robin Sage’ warfare exercise for US Special Forces starts next week across 26 North Carolina counties

Although Special Forces candidates bond throughout a year or more of qualification training, Robin Sage is the first time candidates from across the Special Forces specialties – medical, engineer, weapons, communications and officers – come together to form one Operational Detachment.

Residents in some North Carolina counties can sometimes hear gunfire and see occasional flares, according to a news release from officials at Fort Liberty.

Special Forces candidates assigned to the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School hike through woods near Raeford, North Carolina during the final phase of field training known as Robin Sage in central North Carolina, January 23, 2022. (U.S. Army photo by K. Kassens)

During the rough weeks of the fictional guerrilla war, the students plan, rehearse and execute their final missions in realistic training under the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School.

Any gunfire heard is blanks as the Special Forces students put their training to the test in the wargame nation called Pineland – with the test that began on January 19.

Throughout the exercise, Special Forces candidates and Robin Sage role-players conduct warfare training missions such as controlled assaults — and also live, eat and sleep in these civilian areas and other very remote spots.

Special Forces candidates assigned to the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School assault enemy role players in Rockingham, North Carolina as they take part in the final phase of field training known as Robin Sage in central North Carolina, September 28, 2021. (U.S. Army photo by K. Kassens)

“Military service members from units across Fort Liberty will also support the exercise. These military members act as realistic opposing forces and guerrilla freedom fighters, also known as Pineland’s resistance movement,” a news release said before the winter 2024 operation began.

In the past, soldiers being tested said the role-players enhanced the realism of the training.

In some cases, guerillas directed by the the Special Forces students respond to the enemy gunfire, return fire and maneuver through firefights. They also dodge gunfire while coordinating tactics before searching for downed enemies.

Enemy role players in Rockingham, North Carolina defend a vehicle and building while training with Special Forces candidates assigned to the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School during the final phase of field training known as Robin Sage in central North Carolina, September 28, 2021. (U.S. Army photo by K. Kassens)

This winter, like last fall, Carter County in Tennessee is included in the areas for the testing.

In North Carolina, the counties involved stretch from Avery County deep in the mountains to Brunswick County at the beach in the far southeast, adjacent to South Carolina.

The following North Carolina counties are also part of the exercise: Alamance, Anson, Bladen, Cabarrus, Chatham, Columbus, Cumberland, Davidson, Duplin, Guilford, Harnett, Hoke, Lee, Montgomery, Moore, Randolph, Richmond, Robeson, Rowan, Sampson, Scotland, Stanly, Union, and Wake.

Also included are the South Carolina counties of Chesterfield, Dillon and Marlboro.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to CBS17.com.

Yahoo · by Rodney OvertonJanuary 27, 2024 at 6:39 PM·3 min read2Link Copied

6. Where Is Hamas Getting Its Weapons? Increasingly, From Israel.

Where Is Hamas Getting Its Weapons? Increasingly, From Israel.

The very weapons that Israeli forces have used to enforce a blockade of Gaza are now being used against them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-weapons-rockets.html

• Share full article
• 
  
• 371

Israeli soldiers standing in what they say is a rocket factory that was photographed in January during an escorted tour by the military for international journalists in the central Gaza Strip.Credit...Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York Time​s

By Maria Abi-Habib and Sheera Frenkel

Maria Abi-Habib reported from London, and Sheera Frenkel from Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Jan. 28, 2024

Updated 12:58 p.m. ET

Sign up for the Israel-Hamas War Briefing.  The latest news about the conflict. Get it sent to your inbox.

Israeli military and intelligence officials have concluded that a significant number of weapons used by Hamas in the Oct. 7 attacks and in the war in Gaza came from an unlikely source: the Israeli military itself.

For years, analysts have pointed to underground smuggling routes to explain how Hamas stayed so heavily armed despite an Israeli military blockade of the Gaza Strip. But recent intelligence has shown the extent to which Hamas has been able to build many of its rockets and anti-tank weaponry out of the thousands of munitions that failed to detonate when Israel lobbed them into Gaza, according to weapons experts and Israeli and Western intelligence officials. Hamas is also arming its fighters with weapons stolen from Israeli military bases.

Intelligence gathered during months of fighting revealed that, just as the Israeli authorities misjudged Hamas’s intentions before Oct. 7, they also underestimated its ability to obtain arms.

What is clear now is that the very weapons that Israeli forces have used to enforce a blockade of Gaza over the past 17 years are now being used against them. Israeli and American military explosives have enabled Hamas to shower Israel with rockets and, for the first time, penetrate Israeli towns from Gaza.

“Unexploded ordnance is a main source of explosives for Hamas,” said Michael Cardash, the former deputy head of the Israeli National Police Bomb Disposal Division and an Israeli police consultant. “They are cutting open bombs from Israel, artillery bombs from Israel, and a lot of them are being used, of course, and repurposed for their explosives and rockets.”

Image

Explosives engineers in 2021 removing an unexploded Israeli missile in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip.Credit...Samar Abu Elouf for The New York Time​s

Weapons experts say that roughly 10 percent of munitions typically fail to detonate, but in Israel’s case, the figure could be higher. Israel’s arsenal includes Vietnam-era missiles, long discontinued by the United States and other military powers. The failure rate on some of those missiles could be as high as 15 percent, said one Israeli intelligence officer who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

By either count, years of sporadic bombing and the recent bombardment of Gaza have littered the area with thousands of tons of unexploded ordnance just waiting to be reused. One 750-pound bomb that fails to detonate can become hundreds of missiles or rockets.

Hamas did not respond to messages seeking comment. The Israeli military said in a statement that it was committed to dismantling Hamas but did not answer specific questions about the group’s weapons.VERTISEMENT

Israeli officials knew before the October attacks that Hamas could salvage some Israeli-made weapons, but the scope has startled weapons experts and diplomats alike.

Israeli authorities also knew that their armories were vulnerable to theft. A military report from early last year noted that thousands of bullets and hundreds of guns and grenades had been stolen from poorly guarded bases.

From there, the report said, some made their way to the West Bank, and others to Gaza by way of Sinai. But the report focused on military security. The consequences were treated almost as an afterthought: “We are fueling our enemies with our own weapons,” read one line of the report, which was viewed by The New York Times.

The consequences became apparent on Oct. 7. Hours after Hamas breached the border, four Israeli soldiers discovered the body of a Hamas gunman who was killed outside the Re’im military base. Hebrew writing was visible on a grenade on his belt, said one of the soldiers, who recognized it as a bulletproof Israeli grenade, a recent model. Other Hamas fighters overran the base, and Israeli military officials say some weapons were looted and returned to Gaza.

Image

An Israeli police officer in Ashkelon, Israel, carrying part of a mangled rocket fired from the Gaza Strip toward Israel on Oct. 9.Credit...Violeta Santos Moura/Reuter​s

A few miles away, members of an Israeli forensic team collected one of the 5,000 rockets fired by Hamas that day. Examining the rocket, they discovered that its military-grade explosives had most likely come from an unexploded Israeli missile fired into Gaza during a previous war, according to an Israeli intelligence officer.

The Oct. 7 attacks showcased the patchwork arsenal that Hamas had stitched together. It included Iranian-made attack drones and North Korean-made rocket launchers, the types of weapons that Hamas is known to smuggle into Gaza through tunnels. Iran remains a major source of Hamas’s money and weapons.

But other weapons, like anti-tank explosives, RPG warheads, thermobaric grenades and improvised devices, were repurposed Israeli arms, according to Hamas videos and remnants uncovered by Israel.

Israel-Hamas War: Live Updates

Updated 

Jan. 28, 2024, 1:47 p.m. ET1 hour ago

1 hour ago

• These are the countries that said they would pause funding to UNRWA.
• Far-right Israelis gather to advance the idea of resettling Gaza.
• The White House blamed an Iran-backed militia for the deadly strike.

Rockets and missiles require huge quantities of explosive material, which officials say is the most difficult item to smuggle into Gaza.

Yet Hamas fired so many rockets and missiles on Oct. 7 that Israel’s Iron Dome air-defense system could not keep up. Rockets struck towns, cities and military bases, giving cover to the militants who stormed into Israel. One rocket hit a military base believed to house part of Israel’s nuclear missile program.

Israel’s Iron Dome antimissile system intercepting rockets launched on Oct. 20 from the Gaza Strip, as seen from Ashkelon, in southern Israel.Credit...Amir Cohen/Reute​rs

Hamas once relied on material like fertilizer and powdered sugar — which, pound for pound, are not as powerful as military-grade explosives — to build rockets. But since 2007, Israel has enforced a strict blockade, restricting the import of goods, including electronics and computer equipment, that could be used to make weapons.

That blockade and a crackdown on smuggling tunnels leading into and out of Gaza forced Hamas to get creative.

Its manufacturing abilities are now sophisticated enough to saw into the warheads of bombs weighing up to 2,000 pounds, to harvest the explosives and to repurpose them.

“They have a military industry in Gaza. Some of it is above ground, some of it is below ground, and they are able to manufacture a lot of what they need,” said Eyal Hulata, who served as Israel’s national security adviser and head of its National Security Council before stepping down early last year.

One Western military official said that most of the explosives that Hamas is using in its war with Israel appear to have been manufactured using unexploded Israeli-launched munitions. One example, the official said, was an explosive booby trap that killed 10 Israeli soldiers in December.

The military wing of Hamas, the Qassam Brigades, has flaunted its manufacturing abilities for years. After a war in 2014 with Israel, it established engineering teams to collect unexploded munitions like howitzer rounds and American-made MK-84 bombs.

These teams work with the police’s explosive ordnance-disposal units, allowing people to safely return to their homes. They also help Hamas gear up for the next war.

“Our strategy aimed to repurpose these pieces, turning this crisis into an opportunity,” a Qassam Brigades commander told Al Jazeera in 2020.

Image

A Hamas explosives expert at a local police precinct in Khan Younis in 2021 laying out unexploded projectiles from the aftermath of a conflict with Israel that May. Credit...Mahmud Hams/Agence France-Presse — Getty Image​s

Qassam’s media arm has released videos in recent years showing exactly what they were doing: sawing into warheads, scooping out explosive material — usually a powder — and melting it down to reuse.

In 2019, Qassam commandos discovered hundreds of munitions on two World War I-era British military vessels that had sunk off the coast of Gaza a century earlier. The discovery, Qassam boasted, allowed it to make hundreds of new rockets.

Early in the current war, a Qassam video showed militants assembling Yassin 105 rockets in a sunless manufacturing facility.

“The most essential way for Hamas to obtain weaponry is through domestic manufacture,” said Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Middle East policy analyst who grew up in Gaza. “It’s just a tweak of chemistry and you can make pretty much whatever you want.”

Image

Rockets being fired toward Israel from the Gaza Strip on Oct 7.Credit...Fatima Shbair/Associated Pres​s

Israel restricts the mass importation of construction materials that can be used to build rockets and other weapons. But each new round of fighting leaves behind neighborhoods of rubble from which militants can pluck pipes, concrete and other valuable material, Mr. Alkhatib said.

Hamas cannot manufacture everything. Some things are easier to buy from the black market and smuggle into Gaza. Sinai, the largely uninhabited desert region between Israel, Egypt and the Gaza Strip, remains a hub for arms smuggling. Weapons from conflicts in Libya, Eritrea and Afghanistan have been discovered in Sinai, according to Israeli intelligence assessments.

According to two Israeli intelligence officials, at least a dozen small tunnels were still running between Gaza and Egypt before Oct. 7. A spokesman for the Egyptian government said its military had done its part to shut down tunnels on its side of the border. “Many of the weapons currently inside the Gaza Strip are the result of smuggling from within Israel,” the spokesman said in an email.

But the besieged streets of Gaza itself are increasingly a source of weapons.

Israel estimates that it has conducted at least 22,000 strikes on Gaza since Oct. 7. Each often involves multiple rounds, meaning tens of thousands of munitions have likely been dropped or fired — and thousands failed to detonate.

“Artillery, hand grenades, other munitions — tens of thousands of unexploded ordnance will be left after this war,” said Charles Birch, the head of the U.N. Mine Action Service in Gaza. These “are like a free gift to Hamas.”

Vivian Yee contributed reporting from Cairo, and Zakaria Zakaria from Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Image

An Israeli soldier standing near armaments during an official media tour organized by the military where it displayed a variety of weapons recovered from areas hit by the Hamas militants during their Oct. 7 attack.Credit...Aris Messinis/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Maria Abi-Habib is an investigative correspondent based in Mexico City, covering Latin America. She previously reported from Afghanistan, across the Middle East and in India, where she covered South Asia. More about Maria Abi-Habib

Sheera Frenkel is a reporter based in the San Francisco Bay Area, covering the ways technology impacts everyday lives with a focus on social media companies, including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, Telegram and WhatsApp. More about Sheera Frenkel

A version of this article appears in print on Jan. 28, 2024, Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Hamas Stocks Its Arsenal With Duds Fired by Israel. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

7. Statement From Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on an Attack Against U.S. and Coalition Forces in Northeastern Jordan Near the Syria Border

Statement From Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on an Attack Against U.S. and Coalition Forces in Northeastern Jordan Near the Syria Border

defense.gov

An official website of the United States Government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Immediate Release

Jan. 28, 2024 |×

Share

I am outraged and deeply saddened by the deaths of three of our U.S. service members and the wounding of other American troops in an attack last night against U.S. and Coalition forces, who were deployed to a site in northeastern Jordan near the Syrian border to work for the lasting defeat of ISIS. These brave Americans and their families are in my prayers, and the entire Department of Defense mourns their loss.

Iran-backed militias are responsible for these continued attacks on U.S. forces, and we will respond at a time and place of our choosing.

The President and I will not tolerate attacks on American forces, and we will take all necessary actions to defend the United States, our troops, and our interests.

jordan syria middle east Austin Defense Secretary

defense.gov

8. China Would Need 1.2 Million Troops to Invade Taiwan (It Could Be a Disaster)

One can hope. Somehow I don't think the remaining stay behind Japanese in WWII were of any strategic importance (e.g., the lone Japanese soldier who did not get the word or did not believe the war was over). But it is a legitimate question that needs to be asked and answered - how long will the Taiwnese people resist even after possible occupation by the PLA? Could resiitance make the PLA presence untenable and could that have a deterrent effect ? I doubt it because like all Armies that attack there will be a certain arrogance that will say we can get this done right this time. (note sarcasm).

Excerpts:

The final consideration is that Taiwan's military, while significantly smaller than the PLA, has been training to counter such an invasion for decades. Much like the Japanese were willing to fight for every inch at the end of World War II, the Taiwanese will show tenacity on par with those fighting to defend Ukraine. Even if it could conquer the island, it would face resistance for years.

Perhaps that is enough to convince Beijing that such a fight would only have losers.

China Would Need 1.2 Million Troops to Invade Taiwan (It Could Be a Disaster)

Taiwan has a potential defensive force of 450,000 troops – without any civilian militias that could likely be quickly organized. Using the traditional three-to-one ratio of attackers to defenders taught at war colleges to mount an invasion successfully, China would need more than 1.2 million troops.

The National Interest · by Peter Suciu · January 27, 2024

Could China Really Invade and Conquer Taiwan? During the Korean War, the United States-led amphibious invasion at Inchon in late 1950 involved some 75,000 troops and 261 naval ships. It was actually the largest such military seaborne landing since the Second World War and was dwarfed in scale by the D-Day landings on June 6, 1944 – which involved a total of 156,000 men. In addition, thousands of airborne troops landed deep behind enemy lines before the Normandy beach landings.

In both of those invasions, the local populace was generally friendly to the invading force, which was actually liberating occupied territory.

The situation would have been far different in the planned Operation Downfall, the proposed Allied invasion of the Japanese home islands. Hundreds of thousands of men would have been required for the initial landings to secure a beachhead, and Allied planners projected that more than six million troops would have been required to conquer and defeat Japan.

China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) could likely face a situation far worse than Operation Downfall if it were to actually launch an invasion of Taiwan. While the main island is significantly smaller than the Japanese home islands, it is far more heavily defended. Crossing the nearly 80-mile Taiwanese Strait (at its narrowest point) would be just the first of many problems the PLA would need to overcome.

Japan was essentially a spent force by the end of the Second World War; its navy was nearly destroyed while the Allies maintained air supremacy. The Japanese may have been prepared to fight to the last civilian, but they were expected to be armed with bamboo spears. By contrast, the Taiwanese have large stocks of missiles, thousands of tanks, and a vast network of fortified positions. Much of its population of 24 million is packed into dense urban centers including the capital city of Taipei.

It is a military planner's nightmare, fighting block by block to take control of the self-governing island while facing heavy resistance. While an air campaign could bring Taipei to its knees and then the peace table, such an effort would utterly destroy the island's infrastructure in the process. China would be left with a prize hardly worth winning.

In addition, the interior of the island is especially rugged – a mountainous jungle that could serve as the last redoubt that would take years to subdue. Such is a fact that the Japanese military already faced, and it didn't have to mount an invasion. Rather, Japan was granted control of the island as part of the Treaty of Shimonosek, which followed China's defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-95), but never fully maintained control. It faced guerilla activity for decades.

Rethinking the Possible on Taiwan

Beijing may have considered launching an invasion after Russia completed its conquest of Ukraine – but that conflict didn't turn out as many had expected. It could give China reason not to engage in such an attempted takeover.

First, Moscow largely didn't expect the international backlash and waves of sanctions, and it is easy to see that Beijing would face a similar international outrage. But then there is the fact that Russia's casualties have greatly exceeded anyone's predictions.

"When people talk about whether or not China can or cannot do it, they're actually talking about something different, the level of operational cost — the loss of ships, casualties — that China would have to pay to do it," Oriana Skylar Mastro, a fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, told The New York Times.

She added that American policymakers may still underestimate China's readiness to use force.

"They could do it," Mastro continued. "It's just that given Taiwan's defenses and given if the United States is able to come to Taiwan's aid, how much of a blood battle is this going to be?"

Recent studies issued by the U.S. Naval War College also indicated that Beijing lacks the equipment and skills needed to undertake such an invasion. That includes the amphibious transports that would be needed to deliver tanks and other vehicles. While there have been training exercises conducted using car ferries, most experts agree that such slow lumbering vessels could make for tempting targets for Taiwan's anti-ship missiles.

A Costly Invasion for China: 1.2 Million Troops Needed

Another study, this one from the Atlantic Council, also reported that Taipei has a potential defensive force of 450,000 troops – and that is without any civilian militias that could likely be quickly organized. Using the traditional three-to-one ratio of attackers to defenders taught at war colleges to successfully mount an invasion, China would need more than 1.2 million troops.

Its active force consists of just over two million, which wouldn't leave large reserves. It is unclear how many men would need to be maintained as a permanent force to maintain control of the Taiwanese islands.

Likewise, it would require thousands of ships, and have to cross the 80-mile strait. Such a fleet wouldn't have the element of surprise that was afforded to the Allied forces at either Normandy or Inchon. China would have to open its attack with an air campaign, which would likely devastate the infrastructure and alert Taipei that the invasion began. It would need to seize air bases and airports quickly.

But even landing the forces wouldn't be so easy. The entire western side of the main island is crisscrossed with rivers and canals. There are few beaches suitable for amphibious landings.

Then there is the fact that Taiwan isn't just a single island. There are more than a hundred islands, including those in the Matsu and Kinmen chain just off the coast of mainland China. The main island chain of Penghu, an archipelago of some 90 islands and islets – are also heavily defended.

The final consideration is that Taiwan's military, while significantly smaller than the PLA, has been training to counter such an invasion for decades. Much like the Japanese were willing to fight for every inch at the end of World War II, the Taiwanese will show tenacity on par with those fighting to defend Ukraine. Even if it could conquer the island, it would face resistance for years.

Perhaps that is enough to convince Beijing that such a fight would only have losers.

About the Author

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu.

The National Interest · by Peter Suciu · January 27, 2024

9. Poland and Korea Offer Lessons for Ending the Russia-Ukraine War

But didn't Ukraine have a substantial security agreement from Ruaai, the US, and the UK in 1993?

Poland and Korea Offer Lessons for Ending the Russia-Ukraine War

Permanent peace would require a unified and resolute negotiation effort from the West and a substantial security commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty.

The National Interest · by Matthew Zalewski · January 25, 2024

On March 18, 1921, the Treaty of Riga sealed an uneasy peace between Soviet Russia and the Second Polish Republic following the Polish-Soviet War. The conflict was nominally a Polish victory over the Soviet Union’s attempt to expand westward into the rest of Europe. As a result, portions of modern-day Ukraine and Belarus came under Polish rule, containing the Soviets to the periphery of the continent.

However, despite the territorial gains, the terms of the Treaty of Riga negatively affected Polish foreign policy over the next two decades. It hindered Poland’s alliance-building capability with other central and eastern European states. Additionally, the Polish government maintained a policy of conflict avoidance with the Soviets, even after Moscow violated certain treaty provisions.

The Treaty of Riga also enabled the Soviets to exploit Poland’s ethnic minorities, which already had difficult relations with the central government. Specifically, the Belarusian and Ukrainian national movements became co-opted by the Soviets and were instrumentalized to exacerbate the internal conflicts within Poland. This led to heightened repression by the Polish state and greater opposition from the ethnic minorities. The outcome was a divided Eastern and Central Europe, susceptible to both Stalin and Hitler. The case study of the Treaty of Riga, its negotiation process and subsequent execution, offer lessons for another one of Russia’s neighbors with which it is currently at war.

Negotiating with Moscow

During treaty negotiations, the Bolsheviks employed several tactics to gain an advantage and mitigate the initial shock of the Polish victory. One of the most crucial strategies was reneging, threatening to renege, and altering the interpretation of a given provision. For instance, the initial agreement acknowledged Poland’s claim to a portion of imperial Russian gold reserves, which were now under Soviet control. However, subsequent negotiations became more intricate, delving into arguments over what exactly was considered “Russian” gold and what was precisely included in the gold reserves. Later, the agreement was held contingent on other issues in the negotiation.

The final terms of the Treaty of Riga stipulated the Soviets would compensate the Poles with items other than gold for several years. Since payments could always be halted, these arrangements provided the Soviets with additional leverage. The Soviets utilized delay tactics in many initial treaty provisions, with detained Polish prisoners serving as bargaining chips long after the treaty’s signature. Poland’s other geopolitical problems further compounded the issue. Allies such as Britain and France eagerly encouraged expediting the peace agreement. Poland’s motivation also hinged on the hope of a future economic relationship with the Soviet Union. Similarly, such a situation could unfold today if Ukraine is pressured into accepting a less-than-favorable peace treaty under Russian persistence and international pressure. Likewise, any arrangement that relies on a future Russian commitment, such as arms inspections or coordination meetings, is highly likely to be used as a bargaining chip even after the formal treaty is concluded.

The fledgling Polish state made several mistakes that played into the hands of the Soviets. The Polish delegation was excessively large and included members from multiple political parties outside the government, leading to vulnerability to disagreement and factional decision-making. Additionally, Poland’s allies were disunified and focused on economic relations with Russia, anticipating the eventual collapse of the Soviet model and a return to imperial rule. There would be no use in ruining future imperial relations by overtly favoring Poland.

Today, the West needs to maintain cohesion through the long term, even when Russia attempts to prolong negotiations. Moscow will exploit any desire for a swift end to the Russia-Ukraine conflict to enhance its position, and Russian revanchism will persist in a different guise.

Terms and Compliance

The final terms of the Treaty of Riga featured significant Soviet territorial concessions to Poland. Additional concessions included payment of a portion of the Russian Imperial Treasury to Poland, restitution of various rolling stock, return of various national treasures and archives, and, most notably, a mutual commitment to respect each others’ sovereignty.

While these terms seemed acceptable initially, multi-year commitments and Poland’s lack of tools to enforce the treaty significantly reduced their benefits to Warsaw. As a result, the Soviets were more comfortable violating the treaty than the Poles in the succeeding years. As the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany strengthened, many central and eastern European countries shifted toward a policy of non-provocation, aiming for strict neutrality to remain sovereign. A similar situation could arise today if the future peace agreement for Ukraine lacks a long-term, reliable enforcement mechanism.

A Ukrainian Negotiated Peace

Ukraine alone, just as Poland alone, would find it challenging to enforce peace with Russia. Poland experienced growing power disparity with the Soviets as the latter recovered from World War I and the Russian Civil War. In the case of Ukraine and Russia, even if a bilateral agreement were signed, there would be little recourse for Ukraine if Russia violated its terms. If Ukraine responded with cross-border retaliation, it would risk a resumption of war on its soil, and it would have to rely on the goodwill of its allies to underwrite its sovereignty. It could even stoke fears of provoking Russia when addressing actions below the threshold of war, such as information operations or the establishment of pro-Russian entities within Ukraine.

An arrangement between Ukraine and Russia, similar to the Minsk Agreements, is unstable unless ongoing external support rectifies the power disparity between the two factions. Over time, the power disparity between Ukraine and Russia will continue to diverge as Russia recovers from the present conflict. Ukraine could adopt an “Israeli Model” and modernize its economy for a qualitative advantage, but this is uncertain and contingent on many factors beyond its control.

A Truly Lasting Peace

A lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia would necessitate a security underwriter with a vested interest in maintaining a long-term armistice, leveling the power disparities between Kiev and Moscow. This is not possible with partners who are only willing to offer diplomatic condemnations and, at best, sanctions if a provocation occurs.

For a lasting armistice to endure, Ukraine needs legally binding guarantees supporting its peace, including repercussions for provocations below the threshold of war. These guarantees could include North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) membership, European Union (EU) membership (with an untested but legally binding defense clause), a separate multilateral treaty, or a combination of all three.

Given the likelihood of Russia pushing the limits of the agreement and testing Western resolve— much like the Soviets did in the years following the Treaty of Riga—we are assuming some degree of continuity between Soviet and now Russian foreign policy. The presence of foreign troops may be needed not only on Ukraine’s border with Russia but also on the border with Belarus, where provocations can occur with some degree of Russian deniability.

The Korean Armistice

Some argue that a Russo-Ukrainian peace should be modeled on the Korean Armistice, involving the United States, China, and (implicitly) the Soviet Union underwriting the peace for their respective counterparts. The great powers underwriting this peace could enforce the agreement and were invested in avoiding regional conflicts that could spiral out of control. To fulfill its commitment, the United States continuously maintains sizable forces on the Korean peninsula. Korea’s mountainous terrain favors the defense, making renewed offensives difficult. The stalemate led to a scenario where maintaining the armistice remained in the long-term interest of both sides and has only crystallized over time.

Even if the Republic of Korea succeeded in reunification on its terms, it would face reintegrating an economically backward region along with a populace that has been isolated for several decades. In addition, there would be significant political ramifications concerning China. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) is even less likely to accomplish such a feat as the Kim Regime’s primary interest is maintaining the status quo.

Implementation of a Ukraine and Russia Treaty

To replicate the Korean model, several conditions must be met. These include an agreement supported by credible security guarantors, sustained resolve not subject to the whims of election cycles, and defensible terrain. Regardless of the form of the security agreement, it must respond decisively across the spectrum of conflict to uphold the armistice. Failure to achieve this could lead Russia to provoke and take action below the threshold of war, degrading the agreement’s validity and weakening Ukraine. Ensuring long-term resolve through legally binding channels undermines Russia’s strategy of reliance on the whims of election cycles or public forgetfulness to resume the conflict.

Drawing insights from the Treaty of Riga and the Korean Armistice, a future agreement needs security guarantors with a lasting interest in maintaining the new status quo. While France and Germany held powerful geopolitical influence, they lacked the political will motivated by self-interest when facilitating the Minsk peace process. Additionally, the terrain of Ukraine is naturally flat and conducive to large mechanized offensives. It necessitates the implementation of a heavily fortified (and costly) border between Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus. These border defenses must be of sufficient depth to address the Russian military’s reliance on mass.

The proposed model entails substantial expenses to maintain and tie down military forces for decades. It may necessitate Western military garrisons, combined exercises, and planning sessions, among other considerations. Given Russia's tendency to engage in cross-border incidents and provocative military exercises, potentially reigniting the conflict, a deep and prolonged external commitment would be essential.

While this would demand significant resources over decades, the benefits would be worthwhile, as it establishes an effective check on Russia with the responsibility distributed among multiple state actors. Negotiating away Russian revanchism is an unlikely prospect. Therefore, any agreement's validity relies on adequate deterrence measures. Throughout ceasefire or peace negotiations, Russia would likely conduct operations below the threshold of war, weakening Ukraine and exerting pressure on negotiators.

To that end, the West must ensure that Ukraine retains powerful military capabilities, making it disadvantageous for Russia to refrain from signing an agreement. The rush to secure a peace treaty should be avoided, as it might result in an agreement that is too flimsy and laden with concessions. Achieving negotiations and lasting peace requires unified international support, as Ukraine, on its own, may find it challenging to enforce peace all on its own.

Matthew Zalewski is a United States Army Foreign Area Officer and Ph.D. Candidate at Salve Regina University. This article is his work alone and does not reflect the official position of the United States Army, Department of Defense, or any entity of the United States Government.

The National Interest · by Matthew Zalewski · January 25, 2024

10. The ICJ Ruling’s Hidden Diplomacy

By the way, who is restringing Hamas?

Excerpts:

The court has given the United States and Europe a new tool to demand Israel change its approach in Gaza. The ruling offers the Biden administration an opportunity to emphasize its strong displeasure, backed by international law, with the dehumanizing rhetoric that has come from members of Israel’s right wing cabinet. And it has provided Washington with an opportunity to demand that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu do more than merely restate Israel’s aims to “eradicate” Hamas but also hold accountable those in his coalition and in the military who use the language of destruction of Gaza and its Palestinian population.

But more than that, the United States should respond to the decision by acknowledging the foundational point that Israel has an obligation to prevent acts that can be characterized as genocidal. The administration need not share South Africa’s view that Israeli acts are in fact genocidal—a view that the ICJ itself has not, and may not ultimately, uphold. But it does need to wrestle with the fact that the court, in a ruling backed by an overwhelming majority, has expressed serious legal concern with Israeli actions. Even as it supports Israel’s right to self-defense, the United States can bolster the court’s demands for concrete Israeli steps to prevent and punish violence against civilians in Gaza and rampant destruction of the infrastructure that makes Gaza livable.

The United States is no mere bystander, either to Israeli military action or to the enforcement of international law. Indeed, Washington has deployed the power of the ICJ’s authority in the past, launching the modern era’s use of the court for real-time international justice when it brought an ICJ claim against Iran in 1979 demanding in 1979 that it release the American hostages held at the U.S. embassy in Tehran. The court has given the United States an opportunity to reaffirm that historic commitment, and the Biden administration should take it.

The ICJ Ruling’s Hidden Diplomacy

How the Court’s Considered Measures Can Help America Restrain Israel

By David Kaye

January 26, 2024

Foreign Affairs · by David Kaye · January 26, 2024

With one eye on the law and another on its power, the International Court of Justice in The Hague has issued a preliminary ruling in favor of South Africa’s claim that Israel’s military assault in Gaza may be plausibly characterized as genocide. In a nearly unanimous vote, the court’s international panel of 17 judges ordered that Israel must do everything it can to prevent acts of genocide, clamp down on domestic incitement to genocide, and ensure immediate and effective humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza.

Some may read the ICJ’s order as a limited legal intervention that refuses South Africa’s principal request for a ruling that ends Israel’s devastating campaign. The judges even offered an olive branch to the Israeli government, pointedly emphasizing that all parties to the conflict in Gaza “are bound by international humanitarian law” and calling for the “immediate and unconditional release” of the more than 100 Israeli hostages that remain in the custody of Hamas and other groups in Gaza.

But the court’s ruling also contains a hidden ambition: it challenges all states—and especially the United States—to take international law seriously at a time of increasing violence and conflict and decreasing authority of international legal institutions. Indeed, at a time when the Biden administration’s efforts to limit the war’s harm to civilians seem to be flailing, the court threw it a lifeline, a path to a new policy toward the conflict that is rooted in international norms. The White House should embrace the court’s ruling, deploying it as a new diplomatic tool to end Israel’s military operation and force Hamas to release the hostages it still cruelly and unconscionably holds in Gaza.

A MOMENTOUS MIDDLE GROUND

The January 26 ruling marks only the beginning of the ICJ case. South Africa’s claim against Israel will likely involve years of litigation over jurisdiction and the ultimate merits of the claim of genocide, which the court has now authorized to go forward. In the meantime, how the United States and Europe respond to the court’s ruling is more important than the decision itself. If Washington and other Western powers simply circle around the Israeli flag, they risk doing further damage to international law and the so-called rules-based international order that they have embraced in previous ICJ cases, such as Ukraine’s 2022 claim against Russia’s aggression and The Gambia’s 2019 genocide claim against Myanmar for its treatment of the Rohingya. They risk further a large number of governments around the world, including much of the Global South, that have supported the court in the past and that broadly support the South African case. Indeed, a rhetorical attack on the court’s ruling would also have domestic political consequences for U.S. President Joseph Biden as he begins a difficult election campaign, given the widespread disillusionment of the Arab-American community that has already resulted from the administration’s seemingly unconditional embrace of Israel since Hamas’s October 7 attack.

The stakes are particularly high given the relative restraint of the ICJ ruling and the middle ground it takes. A more aggressive order would have badly complicated a U.S. response. For instance, had the court acceded to South Africa’s request that it order an end to Israel’s military operation, Israel and the United States would have almost certainly dismissed the court and the measures it adopted. Although ICJ President Joan Donoghue’s careful reading of the judgment reflected the gravity of the situation in Gaza, she did so in tempered language, avoiding some of the vivid evocation of destruction and death that South Africa employed in its 84-page claim and in its three hours of oral argument before the court in mid-January. Alternatively, the court could have dismissed South Africa’s claim and adopted Israel’s moral outrage that it even had to answer to the claim of genocidal intent following Hamas’s atrocities—an approach that would have flown in the face of overwhelming world concern for extraordinary loss of life in Gaza.

Instead, as most close observers expected, the court rested its order on the cold black letters of its own law. It carefully located its own jurisprudence in the context of recent ICJ cases dealing with claims of genocide and issued six so-called preliminary measures—the courts version of injunctive relief—that broke no new legal ground and, in effect, restated Israel’s obligations under international law. On each of the major threshold questions the court followed its own rules closely. Drawing on the template of similar past cases, the judges agreed that South Africa had met the low burden of showing that the court would likely have jurisdiction to entertain a genocide claim against Israel, while emphasizing that this finding did not mean that the court has established that any violations of the Genocide Convention have in fact occurred.

More explosively, and yet equally rooted in ICJ jurisprudence, the court walked through a series of UN findings about the devastation in Gaza after more than three months of Israel’s campaign, finding that the “rights claimed by South Africa, and for which it is seeking protection, are plausible”—the low bar South Africa had to cross for the court to issue provisional measures. In reading the judgement, Donoghue also noted statements by “senior Israeli officials”—including Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Israeli President Isaac Herzog—that South Africa and others characterized as dehumanizing if not genocidal. The court responded to South Africa’s claim of urgency, another threshold requirement in the jurisprudence, with perhaps its most serious statement: “In these circumstances, the court considers that the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip is at serious risk of deteriorating further before the court renders its final judgment.”

The court’s order is, despite its apparent moderation, damning. It has allowed litigation to move forward on South Africa’s claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, placing a virtual sword of Damocles over not only Israel, in its future conduct in Gaza, but also those, like the United States, that have given it such strong support. It has found plausible South Africa’s assertion that Palestinian rights must be protected against genocidal acts. Even Barak, Israel’s appointee to the court, joined the demands that Israel must prevent public and direct incitement to genocide and take “immediate and effective measures” to enable humanitarian assistance. These are very serious outcomes that reflect global legal concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. At the same time, the power of the court’s ruling lies in the judges’ careful effort to isolate it from the language of politics or advocacy and anchor it in legal precedent. And the court’s substantive decision not to seek what it genuinely has no power to enforce without UN Security Council backing—an end to Israel’s military operation—gives the measures it has called for all the more importance. The orders are binding on the parties, as the court notes. But what the court is demanding, in effect, is for Israel to uphold what many already recognize as its existing obligations under the Genocide Convention.

WHAT WASHINGTON MUST DO

In the weeks before the court’s January 26 ruling, the United States joined Israel in characterizing the South African case as without merit. The United States could make that argument in court, if it so decides, as an intervenor in the case as it moves forward. But the issue raised by the ICJ’s preliminary ruling is different. The Biden administration now faces an acute dilemma that cannot be resolved with superficial statements about the need for humanitarian access to Gaza. The court’s challenge to the United States is that geopolitics alone cannot be the means by which the conflict is wound down. International law must play a crucial role, and legal obligations have meaning. Failure by the United States to uphold these almost universally acknowledged legal standards, moreover, would seriously undercut its own legitimacy as a leader of the rules-based global order.

The court has given the United States and Europe a new tool to demand Israel change its approach in Gaza. The ruling offers the Biden administration an opportunity to emphasize its strong displeasure, backed by international law, with the dehumanizing rhetoric that has come from members of Israel’s right wing cabinet. And it has provided Washington with an opportunity to demand that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu do more than merely restate Israel’s aims to “eradicate” Hamas but also hold accountable those in his coalition and in the military who use the language of destruction of Gaza and its Palestinian population.

But more than that, the United States should respond to the decision by acknowledging the foundational point that Israel has an obligation to prevent acts that can be characterized as genocidal. The administration need not share South Africa’s view that Israeli acts are in fact genocidal—a view that the ICJ itself has not, and may not ultimately, uphold. But it does need to wrestle with the fact that the court, in a ruling backed by an overwhelming majority, has expressed serious legal concern with Israeli actions. Even as it supports Israel’s right to self-defense, the United States can bolster the court’s demands for concrete Israeli steps to prevent and punish violence against civilians in Gaza and rampant destruction of the infrastructure that makes Gaza livable.

The United States is no mere bystander, either to Israeli military action or to the enforcement of international law. Indeed, Washington has deployed the power of the ICJ’s authority in the past, launching the modern era’s use of the court for real-time international justice when it brought an ICJ claim against Iran in 1979 demanding in 1979 that it release the American hostages held at the U.S. embassy in Tehran. The court has given the United States an opportunity to reaffirm that historic commitment, and the Biden administration should take it.

• DAVID KAYE is a Professor at the UC Irvine School of Law and and 2023–2024 Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Public International Law at Lund University in Sweden. 

Foreign Affairs · by David Kaye · January 26, 2024

11. Report: 80 percent of Gaza Strip's tunnel network still intact

Photos at the link: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-28/ty-article/report-80-percent-of-gaza-strips-tunnel-network-still-intact/0000018d-4fab-d35c-a39f-effbcb0a0000

Report: 80 percent of Gaza Strip's tunnel network still intact

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, Israel has only managed to destroy 20-40 percent of Hamas' tunnel infrastructure in Gaza, slowed by concern over hostages' welfare

haaretz.com · by Haaretz

Approximately 80 percent of Gaza's intricate network of tunnels remain intact despite weeks of Israeli attempts to destroy them, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.

Israeli and American officials told the Journal that it is difficult to know the total number of existing tunnels, but it is estimated that between 20 and 40 percent of them have been destroyed or remain inactive, most of them in the northern Gaza Strip.

About two weeks ago, senior Israeli security officials told the New York Times that the estimated length of the entire tunnel network in the Gaza Strip is between 700 and 500 km (over 300 miles) – roughly the equivalent of half of New York City's subway system.

• Hamas tunnels, ambushes and fear of friendly fire: 24 hours with IDF soldiers in Gaza City
• Report: Israel flooding Hamas tunnels; IDF retrieves bodies of two hostages from Gaza
• 85-year-old freed Israeli hostage says she confronted Hamas chief in Gaza tunnel

At the end of last year, Israel installed a system of pumps in the northern Gaza Strip to flood the tunnels with seawater, as a part of an operation called Sea of Atlantis. Despite warnings that the plan could harm sewage infrastructure and buildings, and damage the fresh water reservoirs, Israel carried out the plan on several occasions. Another pump was even installed in Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip at the beginning of the month, noted the Journal.

A tunnel where hostages were held in Khan Yunis and which was destroyed by IDF forces last week.Credit: IDF

According to American officials, the operation turned out to be less effective than anticipated, largely due to obstructions and wall barriers which stopped the water flow.

Israeli officials also told the Journal that hostages were being held in a Hamas control center under Khan Yunis, where Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar is also hiding.

Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, in Gaza.Credit: Mahmud Hams / AFP

"The question is: Is there a real way to get the hostages out alive?" an official said. "Otherwise, we would have been much more forceful in our approach." Former Israeli officials and military analysts said that a raid on the control center could endanger the lives of the Israeli hostages.

Officials added that the army's plan at this stage focuses on damaging the connections between tunnels and shafts, in order to block the movement of Hamas leaders and terrorists, rather than completely destroying of the tunnel system.

American sources explained that Israeli troops trained to deal with tunnels specialize in destroying and detonating them, and not in searching for hostages or senior Hamas officials. According to the sources, the IDF will need to transfer additional forces in order to locate the tunnels and destroy them throughout the war.

Click the alert icon to follow topics:

• Yahya Sinwar
• Hamas hostages
• 2023 Israel-Gaza War
• Hamas

haaretz.com · by Haaretz

12. Navy lowers bar to enlist again amid continued recruiting woes

But I doubt they will be eligible for nuclear power school.

Navy lowers bar to enlist again amid continued recruiting woes

The Navy missed its 2023 recruiting goal by nearly 6,000

By Michael Lee Fox News

Published January 28, 2024 1:11pm EST

foxnews.com · by Michael Lee Fox News

Video

Why is the US Army facing a recruiting crisis?

Fox News senior national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin has the latest on why the Army is expected to fall short of its 2023 goal on America Reports.

The U.S. Navy will start to enlist applicants who have not graduated from high school or obtained a GED as the service continues to struggle with its recruiting goals.

"We get thousands of people into our recruiting stations every year that want to join the Navy but do not have an education credential. And we just turn them away," Vice Adm. Rick Cheeseman, the Navy's chief of personnel, said of the change, according to a report in The Associated Press.

The new plan will allow recruits who don't have an education credential to enlist as long as they score a 50 or above out of 99 on the qualification test, according to the report, marking the first time the Navy has allowed such recruits since the year 2000.

US MILITARY IS 'WEAK,' IN DANGER OF NOT BEING ABLE TO DEFEND NATIONAL INTERESTS: STUDY

The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71) leaves its San Diego home port Jan. 17, 2020. (U.S. Navy via Getty Images)

Cheeseman said the Navy turned away over 2,400 potential recruits last year because they lacked an education credential, roughly 500 of whom could have scored high enough to get in under the new rules.

"I’m hoping all my recruiters have called all 2,442 of them in the last 72 hours, and we’ll see how it goes... We'll try to get some test takers this weekend," Cheeseman told the AP.

The move marks the second time the Navy has lowered certain standards in a bid to fight its continued recruiting woes, coming just over a year after it allowed for a higher percentage of recruits who scored low on the Armed Services Qualification Test.

The Navy failed to meet its goal of enlisting 37,700 new recruits last year, bringing in just 31,834. That goal is higher this year, Cheeseman said, with the Navy looking to bring in 40,600 recruits and have a total end strength of 337,800.

The U.S. Armed Forces Recruiting Station in Times Square, New York City. (Roberto Machado Noa/LightRocket via Getty Images)

US FORCES STRIKE 2 HOUTHI ANTI-SHIP MISSILES, TWO DEFENSE OFFICIALS SAY

"I need these sailors. So it’s a stretch goal. We’re telling our recruiters to go get 40,600 people to join the Navy," Cheeseman said. "We don’t fully expect to get that many. But we’re going for it."

The move to lower entry standards is rare and has been resisted by other branches of the military, with leaders fearing that the lower performing recruits are more likely to wash out of boot camp or fall victim to disciplinary issues during their time in service.

Cheeseman acknowledged that risk and said recruits enlisted under the lower test score standards last year did wash out of boot camp at a slightly higher rate, 11.4%, than those who achieved higher scores before enlistment, 6.4%.

The Navy turned away over 2,400 potential recruits last year because they lacked an education credential. (US Navy )

Nevertheless, the Navy felt it had to make the move in order to grow the pool of potential recruits and meet the demands of the service.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"We just finally decided, OK, let’s go," Cheeseman said. "My, argument for accepting that risk is that we have capacity for boot camp. We’re not filling the seats. So I’m willing to take a risk."

Reached for comment by Fox News Digital, a Navy spokesperson said the new policy would benefit "the Navy by expanding the potential applicant pool of highly qualified and motivated future Sailors who may have been impacted by COVID-19 trends of non-traditional schooling, early exit from high school to support their family, or a variety of other individual circumstances."

"Sailors who enlist under this policy change can achieve personal and professional growth by earning their GED while gaining experience in cutting-edge technologies and learning professional skills that allow them to exceed their expectations while serving in the Navy," the statement continued.

The spokesperson said that the Navy anticipates the about 500-2,000 additional Navy enlistments per year by opening up to what are considered "tier 3" applicants for the first time since 2000.

"The Navy has not lowered its standards by opening accessions to Tier 3 applicants. Future Sailors have and continue to qualify for ratings based on ASVAB line scores (subtests) and not based on the AFQT composite score. Every Sailor is qualified for the rating in which they are assigned. Tier 3 applicants must score in the 50th percentile or higher on the AFQT. Graduation from skill training remains the standard for rating entry," the spokesperson said, adding that the potential sailors would also have "the opportunity to use free academic skills training programs and test preparation courses to assist them with earning a GED while serving."

foxnews.com · by Michael Lee Fox News

13. Hungary Far-Right Would Lay Claim to Neighbouring Region, if Ukraine Loses War

Hungary Far-Right Would Lay Claim to Neighbouring Region, if Ukraine Loses War

By Reuters

|

Jan. 28, 2024, at 4:00 a.m.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2024-01-28/hungary-far-right-would-lay-claim-to-neighbouring-region-if-ukraine-loses-war

REUTERS

An aerial view shows the village of Dertsen where the majority of residents are ethnic Hungarians, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Zakarpattia region, Ukraine November 29, 2023. REUTERS/Thomas Peter

BUDAPEST (Reuters) - Hungary's far-right Our Homeland party would lay claim to a western region of Ukraine that is home to about 150,000 ethnic Hungarians if Ukraine loses its statehood due to Russia's invasion, the party's leader said late on Saturday.

Our Homeland leader Laszlo Toroczkai made the remarks at a conference where the party, which has six lawmakers in the 199-strong Hungarian parliament, hosted far-right leaders from Germany's AfD and the Dutch Forum for Democracy, among others.

"Regarding the war in Ukraine, our message is very simple: immediate ceasefire, peace and a resolution through talks," Toroczkai said in a video posted on his party's website, calling for autonomy for ethnic Hungarians in western Ukraine.

Recommended Videos

Powered by AnyClip

The EU Will Open Negotiations on Ukrainian Accession

16.9K

10

Play Video

The EU Will Open Negotiations on Ukrainian Accession

NOW PLAYING

The Kremlin Denies Putin Reached Out to U.S. With Regards to Ending War in Ukraine

Ukraine Counteroffensive Awaits Weapons: Zelenskiy Aide

William Cohen on Hungary Vetoing Aid for Ukraine

Underground havens: Kyiv subway sheltering residents amid Russian shelling

"If this war ends up with Ukraine losing its statehood, because this is also on the cards, then as the only Hungarian party taking this position, let me signal that we lay claim to Transcarpathia," he said, drawing applause from the crowd.

The Hungarian Foreign Ministry and the Ukrainian Embassy in Budapest did not immediately respond to emailed questions for comment about Torockzai's remarks.

In a December interview on public radio, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban expressed support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, according to a summary of his remarks published by government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto is due to meet his Ukrainian counterpart, Dmytro Kuleba and Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal in western Ukraine on Monday to prepare the ground for a possible meeting between leaders of the two countries.

Budapest has clashed with Kyiv over what it says are curbs on the rights of roughly 150,000 ethnic Hungarians to use their native tongue.

Last month all European Union states except Hungary, which is also a member of NATO, agreed to start EU accession talks with Ukraine. The bloc's leaders bypassed Orban's opposition by getting him to leave the room when the decision was made.

But leaders could not overcome his resistance to revamping the EU budget to channel 50 billion euros to Kyiv and are expected to revisit the issue at an emergency summit next Thursday.

(Reporting by Boldizsar Gyori and Gergely Szakacs; Editing by William Maclean)

Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters.

14. Record winter warmth smashes highs in D.C., Southeast

I am in the wrong place. It is 20 degrees here in Seoul.

Jan 26, 2024 -Energy & Environment

Record winter warmth smashes highs in D.C., Southeast

https://www.axios.com/2024/01/26/record-warm-january-washington?utm_source=pocket_saves

• Jacob Knutson
• ,
• Andrew Freedman

Map of temperature anomalies on Jan. 26 across the eastern U.S. Image: Weatherbell.com

A January thaw for the record books is firmly established across much of North America, with Washington, D.C., setting an all-time January high temperature record of 80°F Friday, as similar milestones fell elsewhere.

Why it matters: The record warmth is by far the earliest 80-degree temperature D.C. had ever seen, coming weeks before the previous 80-degree high and just one week after snow blanketed the nation's capital.

• In an average year, the city doesn't see 80-degree temperatures until around March 28, per the Washington Post's Capital Weather Gang.
• In many locations in the U.S., the winter is the fastest warming season, with record-breaking thaws happening more frequently.

By the numbers: Reagan National Airport, the observing site for the city, reached 80 degrees around 2pm ET, breaking the previous monthly record of 79°F, set on Jan. 26, 1950.

• The previous earliest 80-degree temperature in Washington came on Feb. 21 in 2018.
• Washington's Dulles International Airport had peaked at 79°F around 2 pm on Friday.
• Charleston, S.C. had reached 83°F Friday afternoon, tying the city's monthly record for January.
• Wilmington, N.C. beat its all-time January record as well, with a preliminary high of 83°F Friday.

The big picture: Cold air has been in short supply this winter in parts of the country, particularly the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast. A cold spell during early to mid-January has given way to a thaw projected to last into February, as a relatively mild Pacific flow of air dominates weather patterns.

• The record warmth on Friday resulted from a low pressure area moving to the west of the Appalachians, as a warm front pushed north, past Washington and Baltimore.

• But zooming out, much of North America is experiencing milder-than-average conditions right now, with temperatures of 20-35°F above average in Canada, and pulses of mild air pushing across the U.S.

Between the lines: According to a recent analysis from Climate Central, cold spells are moderating quickly across the U.S. due to human-caused global warming.

• Since 1970, the coldest day of the year has warmed by an average of 7°F across 242 locations the climate research and communications group analyzed.
• The areas that have seen coldest days moderate the most are the Ohio Valley and Northwest.
• Researchers also found that while extreme cold events are still occurring in a warming world, they are becoming less frequent and milder nationwide.

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