|
Quotes of the Day:
"Another voice, Mercy Otis Warren, a philosopher and historian during our revolution put it this way, "The study of the human character at once opens a beautiful and a deformed picture of the soul. We there find a noble principle implanted in the nature of people, but when the checks of conscience are thrown aside, humanity is obscured." I have had the privilege for nearly half a century of making films about the US, but I have also made films about us. That is to say the two letter, lowercase, plural pronoun. All of the intimacy of "us" and also "we" and "our" and all of the majesty, complexity, contradiction, and even controversy of the US. And if I have learned anything over those years, it's that there's only us. There is no them. And whenever someone suggests to you, whomever it may be in your life that there's a them, run away. Othering is the simplistic binary way to make and identify enemies, but it is also the surest way to your own self imprisonment, which brings me to a moment I've dreaded and forces me to suspend my longstanding attempt at neutrality."
– Ken Burns
"Let us realize that: the privilege to work is a gift, the power to work is a blessing, the love of work is success!"
– David O. McKay
"Formal education will make you a living; self-education will make you a fortune."
– Jim Rohn
1. Undergraduate Commencement Address by Ken Burns
2. After Ali Khamenei, What's Next in Iran?
3. U.S. lawmakers ignore China’s warning, meet with Taiwan’s new leader
4. Tanks reach Rafah's centre as Israel presses assault
5. Marine Corps Stand-In Forces: A House of Cards By Anthony Zinni & Jerry McAbee
6. Today’s Generals and Admirals, Children of a Lesser God By Gary Anderson
7. Departing Afghanistan A poem for Memorial Day By William H. McRaven
8. This Memorial Day, we should recognize a different top 1% – those who serve and sacrifice
9. Remarks by President Biden at the 156th National Memorial Day Observance | Arlington, VA
10. Marines say no more ‘death by PowerPoint’ as Corps overhauls education
11. US Army vessels supporting Gaza aid break free, beach on Israeli coast
12. Cold War-Era Bradley Fighting Vehicle Dominates Ukrainian Battlefield - More May Come
13. The US defense secretary will visit Cambodia, one of China's closest allies, after regional talks
14. Remarks by President Biden in Commencement Address to the United States Military Academy at West Point
15. Remarks by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III at the United States Naval Academy Commencement (As Delivered)
16. Return to Reforger: A Cold War Exercise Model for Pacific Deterrence
17. Is the Quad becoming a Potemkin alliance?
18. What Do I Owe the Dead of My Generation’s Mismanaged Wars?
19. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, May 27, 2024
20. Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, May 27, 2024
1. Undergraduate Commencement Address by Ken Burns
A very thought provoking read.
Excerpts:
Okay, let me speak directly to the graduating class. Watch out, here comes the advice. Listen. Be curious, not cool. Insecurity makes liars of us all. Remember, none of us get out of here alive. The inevitable vicissitudes of life, no matter how well gated our communities, will visit us all. Grief is a part of life, and if you explore its painful precincts, it will make you stronger. Do good things, help others. Leadership is humility and generosity squared. Remember the opposite of faith is not doubt. Doubt is central to faith. The opposite of faith is certainty. The kinship of the soul begins with your own at times withering self-examination. Try to change that unchangeable human nature of Ecclesiastes, but start with you. "Nothing so needs reforming," Mark Twain once chided us, "As other people's habits." [audience laughs]
Don't confuse success with excellence. Do not descend too deeply into specialism. Educate all of your parts, you will be healthier. Do not get stuck in one place. "Travel is fatal to prejudice," Twain also said. Be in nature, which is always perfect and where nothing is binary. Its sheer majesty may remind you of your own atomic insignificance, as one observer put it, but in the inscrutable and paradoxical ways of wild places, you will feel larger, inspirited, just as the egotist in our midst is diminished by his or her self regard.
...
Remember what Louis Brandeis said, "The most important political office is that of the private citizen." Vote. You indelibly... [audience applauding] Please, vote. You indelibly underscore your citizenship, and most important, our kinship with each other when you do. Good luck and godspeed.
Undergraduate Commencement Address by Ken Burns
brandeis.edu
Honorary degree recipient Ken Burns delivers the Undergraduate Commencement speech at Brandeis University's 73rd Commencement Exercises on May 19, 2024.
Transcript
Brandeisian, love it.
President Liebowitz, Ron, Chair Lisa Kranc, and other members of the board of trustees, Provost Carol Fierke, fellow honorees, distinguished faculty and staff, proud and relieved parents, calm and serene grandparents, distracted but secretly pleased siblings, ladies and gentlemen, graduating students of the class of 2024, good morning.
I am deeply honored and privileged that you have asked me here to say a few words at such a momentous occasion that you might find what I have to say worthy of your attention on so important a day in all of your lives. Thank you for this honor.
Listen, I am in the business of history. It is not always a happy subject on college campuses these days, particularly when forces seem determined to eliminate or water down difficult parts of our past, particularly when the subject may seem to sum an anachronistic and irrelevant pursuit, and particularly with the ferocious urgency this moment seems to exert on us. It is my job, however, to remind people of the power our past also exerts, to help us better understand what's going on now with compelling story, memory, and anecdote. It is my job to try to discern patterns and themes from history to enable us to interpret our dizzying and sometimes dismaying present.
For nearly 50 years now, I have diligently practiced and rigorously tried to maintain a conscious neutrality in my work, avoiding advocacy if I could, trying to speak to all of my fellow citizens. Over those many decades I've come to understand a significant fact, that we are not condemned to repeat, as the saying goes, what we don't remember. That is a beautiful, even poetic phrase, but not true. Nor are there cycles of history as the academic community periodically promotes. The Old Testament, Ecclesiastes to be specific, got it right, I think. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again. There is nothing new under the sun. What those lines suggest is that human nature never changes or almost never changes. We continually superimpose that complex and contradictory human nature over the seemingly random chaos of events, all of our inherent strengths and weaknesses, our greed and generosity, our puritanism and our prurience, our virtue, and our venality parade before our eyes, generation after generation after generation. This often gives us the impression that history repeats itself. It does not. "No event has ever happened twice, it just rhymes," Mark Twain is supposed to have said. I have spent all of my professional life on the lookout for those rhymes, drawn inexorably to that power of history. I am interested in listening to the many varied voices of a true, honest, complicated past that is unafraid of controversy and tragedy, but equally drawn to those stories and moments that suggest an abiding faith in the human spirit, and particularly the unique role this remarkable and sometimes also dysfunctional republic seems to play in the positive progress of mankind.
During the course of my work, I have become acquainted with hundreds if not thousands of those voices. They have inspired, haunted, and followed me over the years. Some of them may be helpful to you as you try to imagine and make sense of the trajectory of your lives today.
Listen, listen. In January of 1838, shortly before his 29th birthday, a tall, thin lawyer prone to bouts of debilitating depression addressed the young men's lyceum in Springfield, Illinois. "At what point shall we expect the approach of danger?" He asked his audience, "Shall we expect some trans-Atlantic military giant to step the earth and crush us at a blow?" Then he answered his own question. "Never. All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa could not by force take a drink from the Ohio River or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all time or die by suicide." It is a stunning, remarkable statement, one that has animated my own understanding of the American experience since I first read it more than 40 years ago. That young man was of course Abraham Lincoln, and he would go on to preside over the closest this country has ever come to near national suicide, our civil war, and yet embedded in his extraordinary, disturbing, and prescient words is also a fundamental optimism that implicitly acknowledges the geographical forcefield two mighty oceans east and west and two relatively benign neighbors north and south have provided for us since the British burned the White House in the War of 1812 and inspired Francis Scott Key.
Lincoln's words that day suggest what is so great and so good about the people who happen to inhabit this lucky and exquisite country of ours. That's the world you now inherit: our work ethic and our restlessness, our innovation and our improvisation, our communities and our institutions of higher learning, our suspicion of power. The fact that we seem resolutely dedicated to parsing the meaning between individual and collective freedom; What I want versus what we need. That we are all so dedicated to understanding what Thomas Jefferson really meant when he wrote that mysterious phrase, "The pursuit of happiness". Hint, it happens right here in the lifelong learning and perpetual improvement this university is committed to.
But the isolation of those two oceans has also helped to incubate habits and patterns less beneficial to us: our devotion to money and guns and conspiracies, our certainty about everything, our stubborn insistence on our own exceptionalism blinding us to that which needs repair, especially with regard to race and ethnicity. Our preoccupation with always making the other wrong at an individual as well as a global level. I am reminded of what the journalist I.F. Stone once said to a young acolyte who was profoundly disappointed in his mentor's admiration for Thomas Jefferson. "It's because history is tragedy," Stone admonished him, "Not melodrama." It's the perfect response. In melodrama all villains are perfectly villainous and all heroes are perfectly virtuous, but life is not like that. You know that in your guts and nor is our history like that. The novelist, Richard Powers recently wrote that, "The best arguments in the world," — and ladies and gentlemen, that's all we do is argue — "the best arguments in the world," he said, "Won't change a single person's point of view. The only thing that can do that is a good story." I've been struggling for most of my life to do that, to try to tell good, complex, sometimes contradictory stories, appreciating nuance and subtlety and undertow, sharing the confusion and consternation of unreconciled opposites.
But it's clear as individuals and as a nation we are dialectically preoccupied. Everything is either right or wrong, red state or blue state, young or old, gay or straight, rich or poor, Palestinian or Israeli, my way or the highway. Everywhere we are trapped by these old, tired, binary reactions, assumptions, and certainties. For filmmakers and faculty, students and citizens, that preoccupation is imprisoning. Still, we know and we hear and we express only arguments, and by so doing, we forget the inconvenient complexities of history and of human nature. That, for example, three great religions, their believers, all children of Abraham, each professing at the heart of their teaching, a respect for all human life, each with a central connection to and legitimate claim to the same holy ground, violate their own dictates of conduct and make this perpetually contested land a shameful graveyard. God does not distinguish between the dead. "Could you?"
[Audience applauding]
"Could you?" A very wise person I know with years of experience with the Middle East recently challenged me, "Could you hold the idea that there could be two wrongs and two rights?"
Listen, listen. In a filmed interview I conducted with the writer James Baldwin, more than 40 years ago, he said, "No one was ever born who agreed to be a slave, who accepted it. That is, slavery is a condition imposed from without. Of course, the moment I say that," Baldwin continued, "I realize that multitudes and multitudes of people for various reasons of their own enslave themselves every hour of every day to this or that doctrine, this or that delusion of safety, this or that lie. Anti-Semites, for example," he went on, "are slaves to a delusion. People who hate Negroes are slaves. People who love money are slaves. We are living in a universe really of willing slaves, which makes the concept of liberty and the concept of freedom so dangerous," he finished. Baldwin is making a profoundly psychological and even spiritual statement, not just a political or racial or social one. He knew, just as Lincoln knew, that the enemy is often us. We continue to shackle ourselves with chains we mistakenly think is freedom.
Another voice, Mercy Otis Warren, a philosopher and historian during our revolution put it this way, "The study of the human character at once opens a beautiful and a deformed picture of the soul. We there find a noble principle implanted in the nature of people, but when the checks of conscience are thrown aside, humanity is obscured." I have had the privilege for nearly half a century of making films about the US, but I have also made films about us. That is to say the two letter, lowercase, plural pronoun. All of the intimacy of "us" and also "we" and "our" and all of the majesty, complexity, contradiction, and even controversy of the US. And if I have learned anything over those years, it's that there's only us. There is no them. And whenever someone suggests to you, whomever it may be in your life that there's a them, run away. Othering is the simplistic binary way to make and identify enemies, but it is also the surest way to your own self imprisonment, which brings me to a moment I've dreaded and forces me to suspend my longstanding attempt at neutrality.
There is no real choice this November. There is only the perpetuation, however flawed and feeble you might perceive it, of our fragile 249-year-old experiment or the entropy that will engulf and destroy us if we take the other route. When, as Mercy Otis Warren would say, "The checks of conscience are thrown aside and a deformed picture of the soul is revealed." The presumptive Republican nominee is the opioid of all opioids, an easy cure for what some believe is the solution to our myriad pains and problems. When in fact with him, you end up re-enslaved with an even bigger problem, a worse affliction and addiction, "a bigger delusion", James Baldwin would say, the author and finisher of our national existence, our national suicide as Mr. Lincoln prophesies. Do not be seduced by easy equalization. There is nothing equal about this equation. We are at an existential crossroads in our political and civic lives. This is a choice that could not be clearer.
[Audience applauding]
Listen, listen. 33 years ago, the world lost a towering literary figure. The novelist and storyteller, not arguer, Isaac Bashevis Singer. For decades he wrote about God and myth and punishment, fate and sexuality, family and history. He wrote in Yiddish a marvelously expressive language, sad and happy all at the same time. Sometimes maddeningly all knowing, yet resigned to God's seemingly capricious will. It is also a language without a country, a dying language in a world more interested in the extermination or isolation of its long suffering speakers. Singer, writing in the pages of the Jewish Daily Forward help to keep Yiddish alive. Now our own wonderfully mongrel American language is punctuated with dozens of Yiddish words and phrases, parables and wise sayings, and so many of those words are perfect onomatopoeias of disgust and despair, hubris and humor. If you've ever met a schmuck, you know what I'm talking about. [audience laughs] Toward the end of his long and prolific life, Singer expressed wonder at why so many of his books written in this obscure and some said useless language would be so widely translated, something like 56 countries all around the world. "Why," he would wonder with his characteristic playfulness, "Why would the Japanese care about his simple stories of life in the shtetls of Eastern Europe 1,000 years ago?" "Unless," Singer paused, twinkle in his eye, "Unless the story spoke of the kinship of the soul." I think what Singer was talking about was that indefinable something that connects all of us together, that which we all share as part of organic life on this planet, the kinship of the soul. I love that.
Okay, let me speak directly to the graduating class. Watch out, here comes the advice. Listen. Be curious, not cool. Insecurity makes liars of us all. Remember, none of us get out of here alive. The inevitable vicissitudes of life, no matter how well gated our communities, will visit us all. Grief is a part of life, and if you explore its painful precincts, it will make you stronger. Do good things, help others. Leadership is humility and generosity squared. Remember the opposite of faith is not doubt. Doubt is central to faith. The opposite of faith is certainty. The kinship of the soul begins with your own at times withering self-examination. Try to change that unchangeable human nature of Ecclesiastes, but start with you. "Nothing so needs reforming," Mark Twain once chided us, "As other people's habits." [audience laughs]
Don't confuse success with excellence. Do not descend too deeply into specialism. Educate all of your parts, you will be healthier. Do not get stuck in one place. "Travel is fatal to prejudice," Twain also said. Be in nature, which is always perfect and where nothing is binary. Its sheer majesty may remind you of your own atomic insignificance, as one observer put it, but in the inscrutable and paradoxical ways of wild places, you will feel larger, inspirited, just as the egotist in our midst is diminished by his or her self regard.
At some point, make babies, one of the greatest things that will happen to you, I mean it, one of the greatest things that will happen to you is that you will have to worry, I mean really worry, about someone other than yourself. It is liberating and exhilarating, I promise. Ask your parents.
[Audience laughs]
Choose honor over hypocrisy, virtue over vulgarity, discipline over dissipation, character over cleverness, sacrifice over self-indulgence. Do not lose your enthusiasm, in its Greek etymology the word enthusiasm means simply, "god in us". Serve your country. Insist that we fight the right wars. Denounce oppression everywhere.
[Audience applauding]
Convince your government, as Lincoln understood that the real threat always and still comes from within this favored land. Insist that we support science and the arts, especially the arts.
[Audience cheering]
They have nothing to do with the actual defense of our country; They just make our country worth defending.
[Audience applauding]
Remember what Louis Brandeis said, "The most important political office is that of the private citizen." Vote. You indelibly... [audience applauding] Please, vote. You indelibly underscore your citizenship, and most important, our kinship with each other when you do. Good luck and godspeed.
[Audience applauding]
brandeis.edu
2. After Ali Khamenei, What's Next in Iran?
Excerpts:
But Khatiri, himself a participant in the 2009 Green Movement, thinks the death of Khamenei alone will be enough to bring Iranians to the streets.
“Such a gigantic event would undoubtedly cause a huge popular uprising. Now, it is possible that the regime has already prepared for such a scenario to immediately crack down on it. So whether it will be successful or not is a separate question,” he said. “But it will happen regardless of whom they announce, because the people are not fed up with Khamenei—the people are fed up with the system. It is the theocracy they oppose.”
After Ali Khamenei, What's Next in Iran?
New urgency surrounds the eventual succession to Iran’s supreme leader.
thedispatch.com · by Charlotte Lawson · May 28, 2024
TEL AVIV, Israel—The May 19 death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi brought renewed attention to Iran’s looming succession crisis. After more than three decades of consolidating his own power as Iran’s final decision-maker, 85-year-old Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei may have laid the groundwork for regime infighting and popular unrest in the event of his death.
Raisi’s death in a helicopter crash earlier this month left Iran without its top contender to replace Khamenei. A hardline cleric with experience heading the judiciary before claiming the presidency in 2021, Raisi was also “considered a loyal lieutenant to Iran’s supreme leader,” Jason Brodsky, the policy director for the think tank United Against Nuclear Iran, told The Dispatch. “And no other person in the Islamic Republic’s political elite has been able to claim they presided over two branches of government like Raisi has, so that is a loss for the system.”
Now, the supreme leader’s hope for a smooth succession to protect both his legacy and the long-term stability of the Islamic Republic is far from assured. Khamenei’s second-eldest son, Mojtaba, has been named as his father’s possible replacement, but his appointment could cause divisions among the regime’s elite and pushback from its core support base. And among the Iranian people, no candidate can overcome decades of intensifying opposition to the revolutionary government.
Accordingly, the question of Khamenei’s heir apparent is “one of the most classified issues in Iran,” Meir Javedanfar, Iranian politics lecturer at Reichman University in Herzliya, Israel, said in an interview with The Dispatch. “The very fact that the regime is keeping the issue of Khamenei’s succession a top secret shows that it’s very worried about the consequences of revealing the candidates before Khamenei dies, because it will lead to infighting.”
Khamenei’s own ascent to Iran’s supreme leadership may prove instructive. The once-fringe figure was not the first choice of revolutionary leader Ruhollah Khomeini, who in 1985 named Ayatollah Hussein-Ali Montazeri as his deputy supreme leader and successor. But Montazeri became disillusioned with the regime near the end of Khomeini’s life, leading to his falling out with the ayatollah and leaving the Islamic Republic without a clear choice for supreme leader after its founder’s death in 1989. Khamenei, who held the ceremonial position of president at the time, came to power as a compromise candidate.
In the years that followed, however, Khamenei systematically purged his potential rivals—some through political bans, and others via suspected assassinations. Ahmad Khomeini, son of the late ayatollah and a powerful player in the supreme leader’s office, was sidelined by Khamenei before dying at age 49 of reported cardiac arrest in 1995—under what many believe were suspicious circumstances. Akbar Rafsanjani, Iran’s president between 1989 and 1997 and one of the revolutionary government’s most influential figures, likewise died suddenly of suspected poisoning in 2017.
“Look at it as Lenin versus Stalin. Khamenei really became the Stalin of the Islamic Republic,” Shay Khatiri, a vice president and senior fellow of the military affairs think tank Yorktown Institute, told The Dispatch. “Khomeini was the guy who created the revolution and died soon after. And then it became Khamenei’s regime, and a much more oppressive one.”
With Khamenei having spent decades molding the supreme leadership into a position of virtually unchecked power, the precedent he set makes picking the next leader all the more difficult. Power brokers within the regime—foremost among them the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the clergy—are unlikely to agree on a compromise candidate who could turn on them after he assumes the post.
With Raisi out of the picture, the likeliest outcome following the supreme leader’s death may be the creation of a council to assume his responsibilities, Khatiri argues. “Unless one side, such as the IRGC, really manages, through intimidation and other means, to force his guy through, it is very unlikely that any of the current actors would make compromises on one person,” he said. “What they’re going to say is, ‘Khomeini and Khamenei were otherworldly men. Their virtues are clear to all of us. Is there anybody on earth who reaches the level of their virtues? No, of course not. So we need a group of men who combined have the wisdom and the virtues that these two men had.’”
But if running Iran remains a one-man job, Mojtaba Khamenei may be the likeliest contender to replace his father. The 55-year-old holds no official title but has grown his power within the regime as a close confidant of the elder Khamenei. He also has an extensive clerical background, a prerequisite for the job, and deep connections to the country’s security and intelligence apparatus.
In 2009, Mojtaba helped rig Iran’s presidential contest in favor of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose reelection set off a series of protests known as the Green Movement as supporters of second-place finisher Mir-Hossein Mousavi took to the streets. Mojtaba Khamenei also was allegedly involved in violently suppressing the demonstrations. He was sanctioned by the U.S. in 2019 for working with the IRGC Quds Force and the Basij—a plainclothes paramilitary force known for violently suppressing protests—to “advance his father’s destabilizing regional ambitions and oppressive domestic objectives.”
But Mojtaba’s selection as supreme leader would risk isolating the regime’s already small base of supporters, which may see it as a continuation of the deposed shah’s hereditary system of rule. Such a move may also provoke another mass uprising of the kind Iran has witnessed nearly every year since 2018. “The regime has to take into consideration the question of stability once the new successor is announced,” Javedanfar said.
But Khatiri, himself a participant in the 2009 Green Movement, thinks the death of Khamenei alone will be enough to bring Iranians to the streets.
“Such a gigantic event would undoubtedly cause a huge popular uprising. Now, it is possible that the regime has already prepared for such a scenario to immediately crack down on it. So whether it will be successful or not is a separate question,” he said. “But it will happen regardless of whom they announce, because the people are not fed up with Khamenei—the people are fed up with the system. It is the theocracy they oppose.”
thedispatch.com · by Charlotte Lawson · May 28, 2024
3. U.S. lawmakers ignore China’s warning, meet with Taiwan’s new leader
U.S. lawmakers ignore China’s warning, meet with Taiwan’s new leader
The meeting by a bipartisan delegation from Washington occurred as China heightens demands for the United States to back away from support for the island democracy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/05/27/taiwan-meeting-congress-china/
By Abigail Hauslohner, Michelle Ye Hee Lee and Vic Chiang
May 27, 2024 at 11:53 a.m. EDT
Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te tries on a cowboy hat, a gift from Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), during their meeting inside the presidential office building in Taiwan on Monday, in this photo made available by the Taiwanese presidential office. (Liu Shu Fu/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
Listen
6 min
Share
Comment
375
Add to your saved stories
Save
TAIPEI, Taiwan — A bipartisan delegation of U.S. lawmakers met Monday with Taiwan’s new leader, Lai Ching-te, the first such visit since Lai’s inauguration last week, and one that the lawmakers and Taiwanese officials said demonstrates the steadfastness of U.S. support for Taiwan at a time of escalating tensions with China.
China, which claims Taiwan as part of its territory even though the Chinese Communist Party has never ruled the island, last week responded to Lai’s inauguration with large-scale military drills, surrounding the island in a blockade-style exercise that involved more than 100 aircraft and dozens of warships.
“America is and always will be a reliable partner, and no amount of coercion or intimidation will slow down or stop the routine visits by the Congress to Taiwan,” Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and leader of the delegation, said Monday at a joint news conference with Lai.
McCaul, who traveled with Reps. Young Kim (R-Calif.), Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), Andy Barr (R-Ky.), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), said the delegation had come to demonstrate the U.S. commitment to Taiwan and understand the Lai administration’s priorities and objectives — a typically bipartisan approach for U.S. administrations and lawmakers, but also one that Republicans have increasingly scrutinized as China ramps up its military displays and other actions to isolate Taiwan.
China has criticized U.S. interactions with Taiwan, particularly by high-level officials, as a violation of the sovereignty it claims over the island. In 2022, in reaction to a visit to Taiwan by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), China launched a barrage of missiles into the sea near Taiwan in a retaliatory show of force.
“China urges relevant U.S. lawmakers to stop playing the ‘Taiwan card,’ stop meddling in China’s internal affairs, stop supporting and indulging ‘Taiwan independence’ secessionist forces, and stop damaging China-U.S. relations and the peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said in a news briefing Monday, after Lai’s televised meeting with the lawmakers.
The United States has maintained formal relations with China since 1979, under a one-China policy that acknowledges Beijing’s claims over the island democracy without endorsing them. But it also has less-formal ties with Taiwan, operating the American Institute in Taiwan — an embassy in all but name — and selling arms to Taiwan to help it defend itself.
The island has seen a dramatic increase in congressional visits over the past three years, as lawmakers have expressed growing concerns about the potential for a Chinese invasion of the island. Last year, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) hosted Lai’s predecessor at a gathering of members of Congress in California, marking the highest-level meeting to date on U.S. soil. The rise in such exchanges has infuriated Beijing.
Last week, the Chinese government took the rare step of calling for an end to congressional delegations to Taiwan, going beyond its more general opposition to interactions between Taiwanese and U.S. officials.
“They sent me a warning: ‘Do not visit Taiwan because you’re in violation of the one-China policy,’” McCaul told reporters Monday at a joint news conference with Taiwanese Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung. “I say to them: They’re in violation.”
In a largely symbolic move, China also has issued sanctions against U.S. lawmakers. Most recently, Beijing sanctioned former representative Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), who served until recently as chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and has called for a more confrontational U.S. policy toward China. In May, months after Gallagher led a congressional delegation to Taiwan, Beijing said it would freeze the congressman’s current and future assets in China and deny him entry to the country. The Hudson Institute, a think tank where Gallagher serves as a fellow, said he had no assets there.
Beijing also distrusts Lai, who advocated earlier in his career for Taiwan’s formal independence and whom Beijing has branded a “worker for Taiwan independence.” Lai has since tempered his views and is now a key proponent of his party’s efforts to maintain peace with Beijing while repelling its aggression.
Lai pledged in his inaugural speech to continue his predecessor’s approach to maintaining the cross-strait status quo. But he and the visiting American lawmakers on Monday also spoke of their determination to increase the island’s cooperation with Washington and the need to bolster Taiwan’s defenses.
“I deeply admire former president Ronald Reagan’s approach of ‘peace through strength,’” Lai said Monday in his first remarks as president to international media outlets. “Therefore, moving forward, I will enhance reform of and bolster national defense, demonstrating to the world the Taiwanese people’s determination to defend our homeland.”
He thanked Congress for its recent approval of supplemental security assistance for Taiwan. “We will continue to deepen cooperation with the U.S. and other like-minded countries to jointly maintain regional peace, stability and prosperous development,” Lai said.
The United States cut its formal ties with Taiwan as part of its official recognition of China. But it has continued under multiple administrations to have an informal relationship with Taiwan, under the terms of the Taiwan Relations Act. The 1979 act authorizes U.S. funding for Taiwan’s defenses and lays out U.S. opposition to any moves by China to seize or harass the island.
Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeatedly indicated in recent years that China is willing to take Taiwan by force, if necessary, and has said that China’s “reunification” with Taiwan, now a self-governing island of 23 million people, is “inevitable.”
The Biden administration and Congress have gradually expanded U.S. support for Taiwan in response, including $4 billion in recently approved security assistance for the region. McCaul reiterated that support but added, “We do have to be careful with certain red lines we know the PRC has — not to cross those lines, because that would end up in a catastrophic war,” referring to China by its official name, the People’s Republic of China. McCaul did not say how lawmakers define those red lines.
But with a U.S. presidential election looming, Republicans have also been increasingly critical of President Biden’s foreign policy agenda, including what they characterize as an insufficiently bold response to Chinese aggression.
“We need to communicate strength and deterrence to communist China, which means that we follow through with these defense articles,” Rep. Andy Barr, a co-chair of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus and a delegation member, said in an interview Monday. Barr added that the United States needed to become “more integrated” with Taiwan “militarily, economically and diplomatically.”
Share
375
Comments
By Abigail Hauslohner
Abigail Hauslohner is a Washington Post national security reporter focused on Congress. In her decade at the newspaper, she has been a roving national correspondent, writing on topics ranging from immigration to political extremism, and she covered the Middle East as the Post's Cairo bureau chief. Twitter
By Michelle Lee
Michelle Ye Hee Lee is The Washington Post's Tokyo bureau chief, covering Japan and the Korean peninsula. Twitter
By Vic Chiang
Vic Chiang joined The Washington Post’s China Bureau in 2022. He was previously a reporter at Deutsche Welle in Taipei, where he covered news of China and Taiwan with a focus on politics and human rights.
4. Tanks reach Rafah's centre as Israel presses assault
Tanks reach Rafah's centre as Israel presses assault
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-forces-press-rafah-offensive-despite-global-outcry-2024-05-28/?utm
By Nidal Al-Mughrabi
May 28, 20245:25 AM EDTUpdated 10 min ago
Item 1 of 5 Smoke rises following Israeli strikes during an Israeli military operation in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, May 28, 2024. REUTERS/Hatem Khaled
[1/5]Smoke rises following Israeli strikes during an Israeli military operation in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, May 28, 2024. REUTERS/Hatem Khaled Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab
CAIRO, May 28 (Reuters) - Israeli tanks reached the centre of Rafah for the first time on Tuesday, witnesses said, three weeks into a ground operation in the southern Gaza city that has sparked global condemnation.
The tanks were spotted near Al-Awda mosque, a central Rafah landmark, the witnesses told Reuters. The Israeli military said its forces continued to operate in the Rafah area without commenting on reported advancements into the city centre.
Overnight, its forces pounded the city with airstrikes and tank fire, residents said, pressing its offensive despite an international outcry over an attack on Sunday that sparked a blaze in a tent camp, killing at least 45 Palestinians, more than half of them children, women and the elderly.
Since that strike, at least 26 more people have been killed by Israeli fire in Rafah, officials in the enclave run by Hamas militants said.
Israeli tanks pushed towards western neighbourhoods and took positions on the Zurub hilltop in western Rafah in one of the worst nights of bombardment reported by residents. On Tuesday, witnesses reported gunbattles between Israeli troops and Hamas-led fighters in the Zurub area.
Witnesses in Rafah said the Israeli military appeared to have brought in remote-operated armoured vehicles and there was no immediate sign of personnel in or around them. An Israeli military spokesperson had no immediate response.
Since Israel launched its incursion by taking control of the border crossing with Egypt three weeks ago, tanks had probed around the edges of Rafah and entered some of its eastern districts but had not yet entered the city in full force.
Reacting to Sunday night's attack in a camp where families displaced from assaults elsewhere in Gaza had sought shelter, global leaders urged the implementation of a World Court order to halt Israel's assault.
Residents said the Tel Al-Sultan area, the scene of Sunday's deadly strike, was still being heavily bombarded.
"Tank shells are falling everywhere in Tel Al-Sultan. Many families have fled their houses in western Rafah under fire throughout the night," one resident told Reuters over a chat app.
Around one million people have fled the Israeli offensive in Rafah since early May, the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) reported on Tuesday.
Israel has kept up attacks despite a ruling by the top U.N. court on Friday ordering it to stop, arguing that the court's ruling grants it some scope for military action there.
Spain, Ireland and Norway will officially recognise a Palestinian state on Tuesday, despite an angry reaction from Israel, which has found itself increasingly isolated after more than seven months of conflict in Gaza.
The three nations have painted their decision as a way to speed efforts to secure a ceasefire in Israel's war with Hamas.
More than 36,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel's offensive, Gaza's health ministry says. Israel launched the operation after Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israeli communities on Oct. 7, killing around 1,200 people and seizing more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.
Israel says it wants to root out Hamas fighters holed up in Rafah and rescue hostages it says are being held in the area.
Coming soon: Get the latest news and expert analysis about the state of the global economy with Reuters Econ World. Sign up here.
Reporting by Nidal al-Mughrabi and Dan Williams Editing by Ros Russell
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
Nidal Al-Mughrabi
Thomson Reuters
A senior correspondent with nearly 25 years’ experience covering the Palestinian-Israeli conflict including several wars and the signing of the first historic peace accord between the two sides.
5. Marine Corps Stand-In Forces: A House of Cards By Anthony Zinni & Jerry McAbee
Conclusion:
The Marine Corps has transformed to irrelevance. The poster child for its new look is the SIF, a “house of cards,” supporting a flawed operational concept. Even on paper, the SIF has minimal utility to confront threats from adversary general purpose forces or unconventional/irregular forces like those operating today in places like Ukraine, Syria, and Gaza where belligerents are effectively using combined arms together with emerging technologies to locate and destroy the opposition using fires and maneuver to great effect. No amount of slick talking points or empty words can alter the facts. Now is the time for a serious discussion about the future of the Marine Corps. Whatever the forum for this discussion, the participants must be balanced on both sides of the argument. The nation has gotten itself into this mess by only listening to one side of the conversation. The Congress must be willing to listen to both sides of this national security issue, preferably in open committee.
Marine Corps Stand-In Forces: A House of Cards
By Anthony Zinni & Jerry McAbee
May 28, 2024
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2024/05/28/marine_corps_stand-in_forces_a_house_of_cards_1034266.html?mc_cid=e0600439e7&mc_eid=70bf478f36
How did the United States Marine Corps transform itself from the world’s premier expeditionary force-in-readiness to a poor parody of the French Maginot Line in just four years? In his Force Design 2030 plan, the 38th Commandant of the Marine Corps radically redesigned and restructured the Marine Corps to operate as a defensively oriented, narrowly specialized regional force under Navy command to attack and sink Chinese warships in the South China Sea. This new mission came at the expense of providing much needed crisis response and global force projection capabilities to all Geographic Combatant and Functional Commands in an increasingly unstable world. The crown jewel of this new warfighting organization are called Stand-in Forces (SIFs), which are small isolated detachments of Marines, armed with anti-ship missiles, persistently spread across islands in the so-called “contested” areas of hostilities: specifically the first island chain.
To fund these largely experimental units, the Marine Corps divested proven capabilities needed to fight and win today anywhere in the world, an unwise and unproven approach termed “divest to invest.” The Corps jettisoned all its tanks and bridging, most of its cannon artillery and assault breaching, and much of its infantry and new, state-of-the art aviation at a time when these certain capabilities are showing to be critical in ongoing conflicts.
In an act that can only be described as negligence, the Commandant reduced the Corps’ long-standing requirement for 38 amphibious ships to 31 and stood silent as the Navy decimated the Maritime Prepositioning Squadrons (MPS) by reducing their numbers from 3 to 2 and the total number of ships from 17 to 7. The loss of MPS ships together with the reduction in the number of major amphibious assault ships – and their poor state of maintenance and availability – make it doubtful that the Marine Corps has the capability to project even a limited Marine Expeditionary Force in time to influence events before or after hostilities commence.
Some pundits hailed the Commandant’s plan as revolutionary, brave, and brilliant. Others saw it for what it was – a national security disaster and the death blow to the nation’s global 911 force.
Much has already been written about the adverse impacts of what has been recently renamed Force Design, but not as much scrutiny has been applied to the SIF concept, which is a complete “house of cards.” The best definition of this term comes from the Cambridge English Dictionary: “a complicated organization or plan that is very weak and can easily be destroyed or easily go wrong.” And there in a nutshell is the SIF. Not unlike the French Maginot Line that was built prior to World War II to protect France’s eastern border against invasion, the McNamara Line that was designed to prevent the infiltration of South Vietnam from the North and Laos, or Japan’s island strategy to protect the homeland during the Second World War, the SIF concept will fail during hostilities.
Let’s examine three loadbearing cards holding up the entire structure, each of which will fall of its own weight:
The first and arguably the most fragile card is logistics. The Marine Corps has no viable plan for inserting, repositioning, resupplying, or supporting the SIFs. The Marines have stated a requirement for 35 small, slow moving, and lightly defended ships (originally termed Light Amphibious Warships but more recently called Landing Ship Medium) as the lynchpin for logistical support. The Navy has consistently balked at the number of ships as well as the concept for ship design and employment. And the Marine Corps’ concept of employment simply does not make sense. Consider the statement by the Marine general in charge of requirements that the ship is “meant to look like a commercial vessel that could ‘hide in plain sight.’” Or his even more egregious statement that “As war nears, … the new amphibious ship ‘goes into hiding, it goes into bed-down somewhere.’” Given the vast distances of the Western Pacific, the SIFs cannot be logistically supported without ships. The LSM is not the answer. It is not survivable, nor is it even remotely likely to be built in the numbers the Marines say are needed.
The second card is survivability. We know from experience that lightly armed, isolated units inside “contested” areas can be easily overwhelmed by superior forces. One needs to look no further that the Marine Defense Battalions formed prior to World War II. These battalions were manned and equipped with the best trained and most modern equipment then available. Not long after the Japanese attacked Peal Harbor, the garrison at Wake Island was overwhelmed and the battalion on Midway would have suffered the same end had the U.S. Navy not defeated the Japanese aircraft carriers in the waters offshore during the epic Battle of Midway. The same fate awaits the SIFs if isolated inside the contested areas. They cannot hide. They will be found, and if judged a threat, destroyed.
The third card is duplication and obsolescence. The Marines have essentially destroyed the combined arms capability of the operating forces to stand up 14 Naval Strike Missile (NSM) batteries and 3 Tomahawk Land Attack Missile Batteries. The Marines intend to only keep 3 NSM batteries permanently forward deployed, while the sole purpose of the other 11 batteries is to serve a rotational pool of manpower and equipment. The Corps’ contribution to the other services’ anti-ship capabilities is minimal and duplicative. Worse, the other services are all investing in long-range, hypersonic missiles while the Marines are largely buying short-range, subsonic missiles that will be obsolete in the near future, if not already. The end result is that Marines will be marginalized, at best, on far flung island with ineffective missiles.
The Marine Corps has transformed to irrelevance. The poster child for its new look is the SIF, a “house of cards,” supporting a flawed operational concept. Even on paper, the SIF has minimal utility to confront threats from adversary general purpose forces or unconventional/irregular forces like those operating today in places like Ukraine, Syria, and Gaza where belligerents are effectively using combined arms together with emerging technologies to locate and destroy the opposition using fires and maneuver to great effect. No amount of slick talking points or empty words can alter the facts. Now is the time for a serious discussion about the future of the Marine Corps. Whatever the forum for this discussion, the participants must be balanced on both sides of the argument. The nation has gotten itself into this mess by only listening to one side of the conversation. The Congress must be willing to listen to both sides of this national security issue, preferably in open committee.
General Anthony Zinni (U.S. Marine Corps, ret.) is a career infantry officer. His last assignment was Commander, United States Central Command.
Brigadier General Jerry McAbee (U.S. Marine Corps, ret.) is a career artillery officer. His last assignment was Deputy Commander, United States Marine Corps Forces, Central Command
6. Today’s Generals and Admirals, Children of a Lesser God By Gary Anderson
Excerpts:
How do we fix our flag officer problem? Careerism is a problem, but there is a difference between careerism and ambition. We need our generals to be ambitious. The problem comes when institutionalized careerism stifles competence. We cannot go back to the military of the 1930s and 40s. Many of the most successful officers of that era would be considered to be socially unacceptable today. Patton and Ernest King were notorious womanizers. Bull Halsey drank too much when ashore, and probably when at sea. By today's standards, Curtis Le May would be considered a homicidal maniac. However, we can largely replicate the best military education and career practices that made them great operational artists and strategists. I am suggesting three fixes as a start. All will take Congressional action. The fixes needed will require a more extensive evaluation than a single OPED can over, but there is some low hanging fruit that should be considered.
...
The list above is just a starting point. Even if the legislative fixes suggested were enacted tomorrow, it would take a decade to see results, but that does not mean that we should not try.
Today’s Generals and Admirals, Children of a Lesser God
By Gary Anderson
May 28, 2024
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2024/05/28/todays_generals_and_admirals_children_of_a_lesser_god_1034268.html?mc_cid=e0600439e7&mc_eid=70bf478f36
Photo: In this Sept. 12, 2021 photo by the U.S. Navy and provided by the Soviak family, U.S. Marine Corps Sgt. Samuel Roth, left, and Cpl. Alex Neuberger stand watch over their high school classmate and friend, Navy Hospital Corpsman 3rd Class Maxton W. Soviak, in their hometown of Berlin Heights, Ohio. Soviak, a Sailor assigned to 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, Calif., was killed during an attack at the Abbey Gates of Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan, Aug. 26, 2021 while supporting Operation Allies Refuge. Soviak, one of 13 service members killed in the attack, was laid to rest Sept. 13 following a public memorial service at his alma mater Edison High School, where he starred on the football team alongside Roth and Neuberger. (U.S. Navy Mass Communication 2nd Class Jonathan Clay via AP)
It was 2012 when I first realized that our current group of four star military leaders are largely inept at best and incompetent at worst. I was serving as a Department of State advisor in Afghanistan, and it became obvious that the four star American who commanded all NATO forces (ISAF) was either ignorant or willfully ignoring the fact that the Afghan Army would never be able to take over the war effort. Despite this, he was enthusiastically carrying out the Obama administration's "Afghanization" program which was transferring military responsibility for whole districts and provinces to Afghan Army control despite the actual situation on the ground. That's when I became convinced that we were losing the war. Nearly everyone realized this except the generals who were running it. While home on leave, I accepted an invitation from an old friend who was a high ranking Defense Department official to visit him at the Pentagon and give my impression of the war. When I expressed my pessimism, he was shocked. He had been receiving optimistic reports from the field.
As the decade progressed, this trend continued downhill. It became increasingly obvious that the senior officers of the Navy had lost control of their shipbuilding and ship repair programs and had no idea how to fix the problem. The dysfunction persists today. The recent ignominious return to home port of the USS Boxer just a few days after it had sailed and the problems aboard the aircraft carrier George Washington are emblematic of the dire situation.
The idiotic 2019 decision by the then Commandant of the Marine Corps to shift the focus of the Corps from that of a world-wide force in readiness to a China-centric anti ship organization was met with disbelief by the entire retired community. Dissent in the active duty ranks recently forced his successor to issue a gag order to the students at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College from criticizing the new doctrine.
Perhaps the most egregious example of military incompetence came with the evacuation of Afghanistan in 2021. The senior officers in charge of the evacuation at Central Command meekly acceded to State Department demand to use Kabul's indefensible Karzai Airport rather than the more secure Bagram Air Base resulting in the ignominious debacle that occurred. It is hard to imagine a George Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower, or Chester Nimitz condoning or tolerating such incompetence. Whatever war gods created such men seem to have deserted us. What is left seems to be children of a lesser god.
In reality, the fault is not in the gods but in a system that we humans created. Somewhere along the line, our process for educating and selecting our senior military leaders went badly off the rails and reforming it should be a priority.
For some time, I have blamed the Goldwater-Nichols reforms of the joint interoperability system for the problem. I believed, and still do, that the hoops the system makes mid grade officers and colonels, and navy captains jump through to become eligible for flag rank is creating a talent pool that is a mile-wide and an inch deep. However, I have come to conclude that the problem lies much deeper. We have civilianized the officer corps to an alarming extent. I don't suggest that all of our flag level officers are incompetent. I have known several exceptionally good ones, but they largely seem self-taught.
In the days of Eisenhower, Nimitz, Hap Arnold, and Alexander Vandegrift, the U.S. military was an insular enclave. Officers were expected to be apolitical and aloof from the temptations of civil society. Many considered themselves to the secular equivalent of warrior monks although celibacy was never a requirement. When stationed in the Washington DC area, the Eisenhower and Patton families would spend holiday weekends at the Civil War battlefields in Northern Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania where the future generals could study the effects of terrain on military operations and imagine how the emergence of the tank would impact the future of warfare.
Vietnam began to erode that ethos. The military mindset became seen as part of the problem. We know now that the situation was much more complex, but the military was an easy target. In many ways this drove career service people to become much more insular. Being spit at while wearing a uniform in public will do that. It became a popular notion to "civilianize" the military and the officer corps in particular.
This culminated in the congressionally mandated Skelton military education reform initiatives which paralleled the Goldwater-Nichols legislation. Command and Staff Colleges and War Colleges were required to have a civilian professor co-teach with the military "den daddy" in each seminar group to provide a presumably civilizing point of view. Many promising military officers were sent to topflight graduate business public policy schools and think tanks in lieu of command and staff college or war college assignments. The culture of such places is bound to rub off, and I believe it did. Harvard and Wharton teach that career advancement is an end rather than a means. Places like the Kennedy School and the Center for a New American Security encourage their visiting interns to contemplate the grand political and strategic implications of military decisions. Recognizing the tactical implications of selecting an airfield for an evacuation operation or the logistic implications of re supplying a remote missile base in the South China Sea are not taught in those places, but those are the skills where many of our recent generals and admirals have shown deficiencies.
The trend of sending promising officers to Ivy League schools actually started before Vietnam. General William Westmoreland was a Harvard Business graduate: perhaps that is where he got the notion that body counts were a useful measure of effectiveness. Had he attended a command and staff college rather than postgraduate school at Columbia, General mark Milley might have been more assertive in his role of Chairman of the JCS in picking out a better evacuation site than Karzai International Airport. Perhaps if he had attended a war college rather than Johns Hopkins former Marine Corps Commandant David Berger would have some better knowledge of the capabilities of the Red Chinese Navy. If so, he might not have come up with the absurd notion that a few marine platoons firing anti-ship missiles from isolated islets in the South China Sea would deter or defeat Beijing's fleet.
Is it any wonder that for twenty years, general officers educated in this environment refused to admit that they were creating an Afghan army that would not be able to sustain itself once we left? The special forces advising the Afghans knew it, the Afghans knew it, and I believe the generals themselves knew it. However, the likes of Harvard business and the Kennedy School had taught them well. They knew it would not help their post-retirement careers to rock the boat while in uniform.
How do we fix our flag officer problem? Careerism is a problem, but there is a difference between careerism and ambition. We need our generals to be ambitious. The problem comes when institutionalized careerism stifles competence. We cannot go back to the military of the 1930s and 40s. Many of the most successful officers of that era would be considered to be socially unacceptable today. Patton and Ernest King were notorious womanizers. Bull Halsey drank too much when ashore, and probably when at sea. By today's standards, Curtis Le May would be considered a homicidal maniac. However, we can largely replicate the best military education and career practices that made them great operational artists and strategists. I am suggesting three fixes as a start. All will take Congressional action. The fixes needed will require a more extensive evaluation than a single OPED can over, but there is some low hanging fruit that should be considered.
First, we should consider the elimination of the Goldwater-Nichols requirement that every prospective general officer or admiral must complete a joint staff tour to be eligible for flag rank. To meet this requirement, hundreds – if not thousands – of joint billets had to be created which has led to bloated staffs and caused prospective flag officers to be jacks of all trade and masters of none. Being the graves registration officer at a joint base in Tampa will not likely produce a future Eisenhower or Nimitz.
The second potential fix flows from the first. We should examine the possibility of creating a joint staff track system which would allow officers to pursue a joint career at the major/lieutenant commander (04/05) level that would lead to general/flag officer promotion for the best of them. That would solve the problem that Goldwater-Nichols tried to address at a time when joint staff officers were considered to be cast offs, this would free up officers who want to command divisions, corps, and fleets to hone their skills as operations officers and chiefs of staff before striking for general officer or flag rank.
The third potential fix would be for all promising majors and lieutenant commanders to attend their service's command and staff college to hone their skills as practitioners of the art of war. Those who choose a joint track would attend the Armed Forces Staff College. There would be no opt outs for Ivy League schools and think tanks at that level. War colleges would remain the institutions where officers of all services and career tracks would intermix with civilian students and professors. War colleges are where we should be emphasizing the importance of synthesizing military actions with political and diplomatic objectives.
We should not stop giving advanced degrees at command and staff colleges. Such degrees are useful in competing for post-retirement jobs, and they have become an entitlement for mid-grade officers even though they have little military value.
The list above is just a starting point. Even if the legislative fixes suggested were enacted tomorrow, it would take a decade to see results, but that does not mean that we should not try.
Gary Anderson is a retired Marine Corps Colonel who lectures at The George Washington University's Elliott School of International Affairs, He was the Chief of Staff of the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab and served as a Special Advisor to the Deputy Secretary of Defense.
7. Departing Afghanistan A poem for Memorial Day By William H. McRaven
Departing Afghanistan
A poem for Memorial Day
By William H. McRaven
https://www.theatlantic.com/books/archive/2024/05/poem-william-h-mcraven-departing-afghanistan/678511/
The poem emerges from a period of deep reflection and personal soul-searching: Had all the losses, over 20 years, been worth the fight? In its emphasis on the experience of service members, and in its haunting refrain, “Departing Afghanistan” provides neither a defense nor an explanation. After all, the decision to go to Afghanistan and to leave Afghanistan was never the decision of the service members.
Instead, for this Memorial Day, Admiral McRaven offers a probing inquiry and a sustaining melody—and a message to the service members that, as McRaven put it to me: “for twenty years they fought with courage and convictions, they kept Americans safe and they should have no regrets as we depart Afghanistan.”
— Walt Hunter
The Hindu Kush will be quiet now,
silence will come to the ancient lands.
The roar of the planes
will fade in the night
as we depart Afghanistan.
The scholars will chide us
and the pundits will pan,
why did we stay so long
when we should have been gone—
gone from Afghanistan.
But the fight was a good one,
noble and right,
no matter how long it took.
Not a soul has been lost on American soil,
not a single building shook.
For 20 years our people were safe,
living their lives in peace,
raising their families across the land,
because our soldiers fought—
fought in Afghanistan.
It was a tragic waste, some will say,
the loss of so many men.
The rows and rows of headstones
on the graves at Arlington.
But a noble life is never a loss,
no matter where they may fall.
To the soldier who did their duty,
they’re a hero forever, for all.
Make no mistake about it,
we came for a righteous cause.
We fought with courage and conviction.
We fought for the betterment of all.
And for those who cheer our final days,
be careful about what you wish.
For the fate of the Afghan people
is unlikely to be filled with bliss.
The children will weep as their future fades
and old women will cry to their men.
“They weren’t so bad,”
the elders will say,
as we depart Afghanistan.
We pray for the people of Afghanistan,
they are warm and kindly souls.
We pray that their future
will be filled with success
as the days and years unfold.
I hope those we saved will remember us,
and the innocents we harmed will forgive.
But to those who bore arms against us,
may you regret each day that you live.
The winds will howl through the vacant FOBs,
through the plywood and houses of tin.
The tarmacs will rot
in the noonday sun
as we depart Afghanistan.
Some will say it was right.
Some will say it was wrong.
Let the history books decide.
But every soldier did their best,
of that, no one can deny.
We ache for those warriors we lost
and the loved ones who bear the pain.
If only we could have saved them all,
and brought them home again.
The Hindu Kush will be quiet now
and silence will come to the ancient lands.
For those who served
let there be no regrets
as we depart Afghanistan.
William H. McRaven is a retired naval officer.
8. This Memorial Day, we should recognize a different top 1% – those who serve and sacrifice
This Memorial Day, we should recognize a different top 1% – those who serve and sacrifice
We need to bridge the gulf that exists between military and civilian society for three compelling reasons.
Peter BesharOpinion contributor
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2024/05/27/memorial-day-thank-military-service-armed-forces/73721464007/
1:19
1:45
In the civilian world, “the 1%” refers to those Americans with the largest concentration of wealth and influence.
Over the past two years, I have been exposed to a different top 1% – those Americans who volunteer to serve in the armed forces. On this Memorial Day weekend, this 1% deserves our admiration and utmost respect.
In the fall of 2021, I was nominated by President Joe Biden to serve as the general counsel of the Department of the Air Force. Prior to taking on this role, I had spent nearly 20 years as a senior executive of a global professional services company with 80,000 employees.
In those two decades in industry, I could count on one hand the number of close friends who served in our armed forces. The son of a Goldman Sachs banker who attended the Naval Academy and is serving as a helicopter pilot. A high school boyfriend of my eldest daughter who joined the Army. Indeed, when my then college-age son expressed an interest in joining the Marines, professors and friends asked why he would want to pursue such a path.
In early 2022, I walked into the Pentagon and stepped into another world – a tightknit community where military families, generation after generation, have served their country with honor and distinction.
From ground troops to Space Force guardians
The first general I met was John “Jay” Raymond, a four-star who served as the Space Force’s first chief of space operations. In an unbroken line dating to the Civil War, Gen. Raymond’s ancestors have served in the armed forces.
Other top brass like Gen. Charles Q. Brown, now chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had a parent and a grandparent who served.
This same legacy of service pervades the enlisted ranks. Indeed, nearly 80% of Army recruits have a relative in uniform.
These soldiers, marines, sailors, airmen and guardians know firsthand the privilege and sacrifices that are part of wearing that uniform.
Yet, what about the 99% who do not?
How to support the top 1% who defend our freedom
We need to bridge the gulf that exists between military and civilian society for three compelling reasons:
First, to meet the national security challenges confronting our country. Our principal adversaries, particularly China and Russia, have developed new forms of attack such as hypersonic missiles and counterspace weapons that pose a significant threat to our national security.
One of our enduring strengths as a nation is the awesome creativity of our entrepreneurs. The Defense Department is acutely aware that it needs to harness technological innovations from the private sector to counter these threats. The notion of a reusable rocket that could launch scores of satellites into space and then descend majestically back to earth for its next mission was inconceivable until industry made it a reality. And just weeks ago, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall flew in a fighter jet controlled by artificial intelligence in a dogfight against a human pilot.
Imagine if GPS got lost.We at Space Force worry about it so you don't have to.
Second, the military needs to draw from a deeper pool of talent to meet its recruiting goals. To attract highly skilled cyber and tech talent from industry, DoD is experimenting with new career paths for military personnel.
Congress recently passed, and the president signed into law, a landmark initiative called the Space Force Personnel Management Act that broadens our ability to leverage expertise in the private sector for part-time roles in the military.
And for the first time in history, the Space Force has commissioned cyber experts from industry directly into the service as lieutenant colonels and captains.
Third, it is the right thing to do. The responsibility for protecting our country should not fall exclusively on the broad shoulders of a tiny sliver of our population. Leaders across society should also have a more direct connection to the consequences of any decision to commit forces.
Our most sacred obligation as a nation is to support the brave men and women of our armed forces who defend our freedoms. On this Memorial Day weekend, we should recognize and emulate these patriots as the true top 1% of our society.
Peter Beshar serves as the general counsel to the U.S. Air Force.
9. Remarks by President Biden at the 156th National Memorial Day Observance | Arlington, VA
Remarks by President Biden at the 156th National Memorial Day Observance | Arlington, VA | The White House
whitehouse.gov · by The White House · May 27, 2024
Arlington National Cemetery
Arlington, Virginia
11:24 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, thank you, thank you. Please be seated.
One hundred and sixty years ago this month, in the midst of the Civil War, the first American soldier was laid to rest at these hallowed grounds. Private William Christman, a farmworker from Pennsylvania, had enlisted just seven weeks before. There was no formal ceremony to consecrate this new sanctuary, no fanfore — fanfare.
It came at a turning point in the war. As fighting shifted east, the casualties quickly mounted in the bloody, grinding campaign.
Over the next year, William would be joined in death, as he was in life, by his brother-in-arms in this final resting place. And these hills around us would be transformed from a former slave plantation into a national strine — shine for those American heroes who died for freedom, who died for us.
My fellow Americans, Jill, Vice President Harris, the Second Gentleman Emhoff, Secretary Austin, General Brown; most importantly, the veterans and service members, families, and survivors — we gather at this sacred place at this solemn moment to remember, to honor — honor the sacrifice of the hundreds of thousands of women and men who’ve given their lives for this nation.
Each one, literally, a chain in the link — a link in the chain of honor stretching back to our founding days. Each one bound by common commitment — not to a place, not to a person, not to a President, but to an idea unlike any idea in human history: the idea of the United States of America.
Today, we bear witness to the price they paid. Every white stone across these hills, in every military cemetery and churchyard across America: a father, a mother, a son, a daughter, a brother, a sister, a spouse, a neighbor — an American.
To everyone who has lost and loved someone in the service of our country, to everyone with a loved one still missing or unaccounted for, I know how hard it can be. It can reopen that black hole in the middle of your chest, bringing you back to the exact moment you got that phone call, heard that knock on the door, or held the hand when the last breath was taken. I know it hurts. The hurt is still real, still raw.
This week marks nine years since I lost my son, Beau. Our losses are not the same. He didn’t perish on the battlefield. He was a cancer victim from a consequence of being in the Army in Iraq for a year next to a burn pit — a major in the U.S. National — Army National Guard, living and working, like too many, besides that toxic burn pit.
And as it is for so many of you, the pain of his loss is with me every day, as it is with you — still sharp, still clear. But so is the pride I feel in his service, as if I can still hear him saying, “It’s my duty, Dad. It’s my duty.”
Duty. That was the code of — my son lived by and the creed all of you live by, the creed that generations of service members have followed into battle.
On the grounds around us lie fallen heroes from every major conflict in history to defend our independence, to preserve our Union, to defeat fascism; built powerful alliances, forged in fires of two world wars.
Members of the Greatest Generation, who 80 years ago next week, took to the beaches of Normandy and liberated a continent and literally saved the world.
Others who stood against communism in Korea and Vietnam.
And not far from here, in Section 60, lie over a thousand — a thousand — 7,054 women and men who made the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan and Iraq, who signed up to defeat terrorists, protect our homeland after 9/11.
Decade after decade, tour after tour, these warriors fought for our freedom and the freedom of others, because freedom has never been guaranteed. Every generation has to earn it; fight for it; defend it in battle between autocracy and democracy, between the greed of a few and the rights of many. It matters.
Our democracy is more than just a system of government. It’s the very soul of America. It’s how we’ve been able to constantly adapt through the centuries. It’s why we’ve always emerged from every challenge stronger than we went in. And it’s how we come together as one nation united.
And just as our fallen heroes have kept the ultimate faith with our country and our democracy, we must keep faith with them.
I’ve long said we have many obligations as a nation. But we only have one truly sacred obligation: to prepare those we send into battle and to pr- — take care of them and their families when they come home and when they don’t.
Since I took office, I’ve signed over 30 bipartisan laws supporting servicemen, veterans and their families and caregivers, and survivors.
Last year, the VA delivered more benefits and processed more claims than ever in our history. And the PACT Act, which I was proud to have signed, has already guaranteed one million claims helping veterans exposed to toxic materials during their service — one million.
For too long, after fighting for our nation, these veterans had to fight to get the right healthcare, to get the benefits they had earned. Not anymore.
Our nation came together to ensure the burden is no longer on them to prove their illness was service-related, whether it was Agent Orange or toxic waste, to ensure they protected them — they just have to protect the United States — because it’s assumed that their death was a consequence of the exposure.
On this day, we came together again to reflect, to remember, but above all, to recommit to the future they fought for — a future grounded in freedom, democracy, opportunity, and equality. Not just for some, but for all.
America is the only country in the world founded on an idea — an idea that all people are created equal and deserve to be treated equally throughout their lives.
We’ve never fully lived up to that, but we’ve never, ever, ever walked away from it. Every generation, our fallen heroes have brought us closer.
Today, we’re not just fortunate heirs of their legacy. We have a responsibility to be the keepers of their mission. That — that truest memorial of their lives: the actions we take every day to ensure that our democracy endures, the very idea of America endures.
Ladies and gentlemen, 160 years ago, the first American solider was laid to rest on these hallowed grounds. There were no big ceremonies, no big speeches, no family mour- — family members to mourn their loss, just the quiet grief of the rolling green hills surrounding them.
Today, we join that grief with gratitude: gratitude to our fallen heroes, gratitude to the families left behind, and gratitude to the brave souls who continue to uphold the flame of liberty all across our country and around the world.
Because of them, all of them, that we stand here today. We will never forget that. We will never, ever, ever stop working for — to make a more perfect Union, which they lived and which they died for.
That was their promise. That’s our promise — our promise today to them. That’s our promise always.
God bless the fallen. May God bless their families. And may God protect our troops.
Thank you. (Applause.)
whitehouse.gov · by The White House · May 27, 2024
10. Marines say no more ‘death by PowerPoint’ as Corps overhauls education
Properly used PowerPoint does not have to be a bad thing. It is just a communication tool and we need to consider hobbies to communicate information. "Don't hate the player, hate the game."
It is not the Powerpoint that needs changing but the teaching/communications techniques.
Marines say no more ‘death by PowerPoint’ as Corps overhauls education
marinecorpstimes.com · by Todd South · May 24, 2024
WASHINGTON, D.C. ― Marines and those who teach them will see more direct, problem-solving approaches to how they learn and far less “death by PowerPoint” as the Corps overhauls its education methods.
Decades of lecturers “foot stomping” material for Marines to learn, recall and regurgitate on a test before forgetting most of what they heard is being replaced by “outcomes-based” learning, a method that’s been in use in other fields but only recently brought into military training.
“Instead of teaching them what to think, we’re teaching them how to think,” said Col. Karl Arbogast, director of the policy and standards division at training and education command.
RELATED
Here’s what’s in the Corps’ new training and education plan
New ranges, tougher swimming. Inside the Corps' new training blueprint.
By Jonathan Lehrfeld and Irene Loewenson
Arbogast laid out some of the new methods that the command is using at the center for learning and faculty development while speaking at the Modern Day Marine Expo.
“No more death by PowerPoint,” Arbogast said. “No more ‘sage on the stage’ anymore, it’s the ‘guide on the side.’”
To do that, Lt. Col. Chris Devries, director of the learning and faculty center, is a multiyear process in which the Marines have developed two new military occupational specialties, 0951 and 0952.
The exceptional MOS is in addition to their primary MOS but allows the Marines to quickly identify who among their ranks is qualified to teach using the new methods.
Training for those jobs gives instructors, now called facilitators, an entry-level understanding of how to teach in an outcomes-based learning model.
Devries said the long-term goal is to create two more levels of instructor/facilitator that a Marine could return to in their career, a journeyman level and a master level. Those curricula are still under development.
The new method helps facilitators first learn the technology they’ll need to share material with and guide students. It also teaches them more formal assessment tools so they can gauge how well students are performing.
For the students, they can learn at their own pace. If they grasp the material the group is covering, they’re encouraged to advance in their study, rather than wait for the entire group to master the introductory material.
More responsibility is placed on the students. For example, in a land navigation class, a facilitator might share materials for students to review before class on their own and then immediately jump into working with maps, compasses and protractors on land navigation projects in the next class period, said John deForest, learning and development officer at the center.
That creates more time in the field for those Marines to practice the skills in a realistic setting.
Marines with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 268, Marine Aircraft Group 24, 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, fire M240-B machine guns at the Marine Corps Air Station Kaneohe Bay range, Hawaii, March 5. (Lance Cpl. Tania Guerrero/Marine Corps)
For the infantry Marine course, the school split up the large classroom into squad-sized groups led by a sergeant or staff sergeant, allowing for more individual focus and participation among the students, Arbogast said.
“They have to now prepare activities for the learner to be directly involved in their own learning and then they have to steer and guide the learners correct outcome,” said Timothy Heck, director of the center’s West Coast detachment.
The students are creating products and portfolios of activities in their training instead of simply taking a written test, said Justina Kirkland, a facilitator at the West Coast detachment.
Students are also pushed to discuss problems among themselves and troubleshoot scenarios. The role of the facilitator then is to monitor the conversation and ask probing questions to redirect the group if they get off course, Heck said.
That involves more decision games, decision forcing cases and even wargaming, deForest said.
We “put the student in an active learning experience where they have to grapple with uncertainty, where they have to grapple with the technical skills and the knowledge they need,” deForest said.
That makes the learning more about application than recall, he said.
About Todd South
Todd South has written about crime, courts, government and the military for multiple publications since 2004 and was named a 2014 Pulitzer finalist for a co-written project on witness intimidation. Todd is a Marine veteran of the Iraq War.
11. US Army vessels supporting Gaza aid break free, beach on Israeli coast
US Army vessels supporting Gaza aid break free, beach on Israeli coast
militarytimes.com · by Beth Sullivan · May 26, 2024
Four U.S. Army vessels supporting the maritime humanitarian aid mission in Gaza broke free from their moorings due to heavy sea states Saturday, U.S. Central Command said.
Two of the vessels are anchored on the beach near the floating pier off the Gaza coast, while the third and fourth vessels are beached on the Israeli coast near Ashkelon, a coastal city approximately eight miles north of the Gaza Strip.
RELATED
Three US troops on Gaza pier mission sustain non-combat injuries
U.S Central Command leaders said two of the injuries were minor, while a third required evacuation to an Israeli hospital.
No injuries have been reported and the U.S.-built pier remains fully functional, CENTCOM said, adding that no U.S. personnel will enter Gaza.
Recovery efforts are underway with the assistance and support of the Israeli Navy and the Israel Defense Forces, according to CENTCOM.
RELATED
Gaza aid pier mission involving US troops is off to a chaotic start
A U.S.-involved effort to deliver aid to Gaza has begun tumultuously, with aid trucks overrun and at least one person feared dead over the weekend.
The U.S.-involved effort to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip uses an obscure military capability called Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore, or JLOTS, that generally involves sailors and soldiers.
The Gaza pier mission got off to a troubled start after U.S. soldiers and sailors stabbed the floating pier into a Gaza beach earlier this month, with the flow of aid temporarily interrupted when delivery trucks were overran, resulting in the death of at least one individual, The Associated Press reported.
Last week U.S. officials said three U.S. service members involved in the Gaza pier mission suffered noncombat-related injuries. Officials described two injuries as “minor” and “routine” but declined to elaborate on the nature of an injury that resulted in one service member being medically evacuated to a hospital in Israel.
U.S. forces have facilitated the transfer of 1.2 million pounds of aid into Gaza via the floating pier since it became operational, the U.S. Department of Defense said May 23.
About Beth Sullivan
Beth Sullivan is the Night and Weekend Editor for Military Times.
12. Cold War-Era Bradley Fighting Vehicle Dominates Ukrainian Battlefield - More May Come
I remember getting our new Bradleys at Vilseck in 1983-84 in the 3d ID and then going through training there and at Graf and Hohenfels. The article notes the controversy - it was an expensive death trap and indicative of the waste of the military industrial congressional complex (MICC).
Who would have thought we would be reading testimonials such as this.
Excerpts:
Designed in the 1970s to counter the heavily-armed Soviet-era BMP IFVs, the Bradley was long considered to be over-equipped, over-complicated, and above all over-priced – with each Bradley shipped to Ukraine being worth around $4 million each, once depreciation and transport are considered.
The late 1990s cost overruns in the Bradley program even became the basis of a Hollywood comedy directed by Richard Benjamin and starring Kelsey Grammer. The movie’s plot contrasted greedy arms contractors with brave US officer risking their careers to protect US troops from going to war in a dangerous and ineffective weapon system.
A generation later Ukrainian soldiers, who mostly haven’t seen the film, have nothing but praise for the Bradley. The versions sent by Washington to Kyiv are 1990s-vintage vehicle with thick slabs of additional armor bolted onto the sides, front and the turret. Ukrainian fighter say a Bradley can take a hit like few vehicles on the battlefield and say its mobility on the battlefield is unsurpassed.
Cold War-Era Bradley Fighting Vehicle Dominates Ukrainian Battlefield - More May Come
kyivpost.com · by Stefan Korshak · May 27, 2024
Kyiv’s troops say the US “battle taxi” can kill anything Russia might throw at it, but more importantly, no vehicle on the battlefield saves lives like the Bradley.
by Stefan Korshak | May 27, 2024, 6:58 pm
Bradley M2A2 Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) on operations in the Donetsk sector, March 5 2024. Photo: Anton Sheveliov, Ukraine Defense Ministry.
Heavy Russian fire recently knocked out a Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) during combat in east Ukraine, but a second one showed up and safely evacuated everyone. The US vehicle, which first saw service in 1981, was pounded by rockets, hammered by shells and struck by FPV explosive drones, but got everyone on aboard home in one piece.
Daytime video published by Ukraine’s 47th Mechanized Brigade on May 26 shows a single Bradley M2A2 IFV driving at speed along a dirt road.
JOIN US ON TELEGRAM!
Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.
It pulls up to another Bradley smoking, but not burning, after having been hit by at least a half dozen Russian heavy artillery rounds including cluster munitions. More artillery rounds impact around the two vehicles as the second Bradley drops its rear door ramp, and crewmen from the disabled Bradley race towards it through smoke and explosions.
Advertisement
All three crewmen, one limping, make it safely aboard, as the Bradley doing the evacuation takes a direct hit from an FPV drone, and then is rocked by an unidentified anti-tank projectile. The gunner aboard the evacuation Bradley, meanwhile, lights up a nearby target with bursts from his 25mm chain gun. As the rear door cranks shut the Bradley commander initiates a ring of smoke grenades that helps conceal the Bradley which then retreats at high speed in a cloud of dust, Russian artillery strikes straddling the dirt road, the Bradley and its passengers make it out to safety.
Other Topics of Interest
There is a proposal to train Ukrainian Armed Forces (AFU) soldiers within Ukraine itself, rather than transporting them across Europe.
Screenshot of a Russian army drone video showing the Bradley rescue incident.Kyiv Post geo-located the incident to farmland near the village of Ocheretyne, the scene of heavy fighting for weeks to the west of the Donetsk region town of Avdiivka. Independent Ukrainian news agencies said the video had been edited but said the combat almost certainly took place as depicted and described by Ukrainian army sources.
Advertisement
The Bradleys of the 47th Brigade have been effectively halting Russian assaults in the Ocheretyne and adjacent sectors, for weeks, as widely confirmed by official Ukrainian sources, as well as Russian and Ukrainian mil-bloggers. The May 27 Russian Defense Ministry daily situation report noted that in the Brigade’s sector, its forces were on the defensive against attacks by Ukrainian Bradleys.
Designed in the 1970s to counter the heavily-armed Soviet-era BMP IFVs, the Bradley was long considered to be over-equipped, over-complicated, and above all over-priced – with each Bradley shipped to Ukraine being worth around $4 million each, once depreciation and transport are considered.
The late 1990s cost overruns in the Bradley program even became the basis of a Hollywood comedy directed by Richard Benjamin and starring Kelsey Grammer. The movie’s plot contrasted greedy arms contractors with brave US officer risking their careers to protect US troops from going to war in a dangerous and ineffective weapon system.
A generation later Ukrainian soldiers, who mostly haven’t seen the film, have nothing but praise for the Bradley. The versions sent by Washington to Kyiv are 1990s-vintage vehicle with thick slabs of additional armor bolted onto the sides, front and the turret. Ukrainian fighter say a Bradley can take a hit like few vehicles on the battlefield and say its mobility on the battlefield is unsurpassed.
Advertisement
A Bradley vehicle commander Stepan call sign “Barbie” said, in a December interview with veteran Ukrainian military correspondent Andriy Tsaplienko, “One of the most critical factors about this vehicle is that it really saves lives. This vehicle will go to places no other vehicle could possibly get to.”
A May 25 video published by United24, a Ukraine support group, featured a Ukrainian Bradley driver stating that he drove his vehicle over three anti-tank land mines and that he and his crew not only survived the blasts, but were able to reach safety at speed. A single anti-tank mine of the kind deployed in Ukraine would be considered sufficient to stop most vehicles. While Kyiv Post KP couldn’t confirm the claim it is known that the Bradley’s suspension system and under body are often described as “resilient.”
The Bradley’s baptism of fire in Ukraine, in June 2023, was bloody. The 47th Brigade was tasked to spearhead Kyiv’s entire summer offensive. It was required to drive along narrow clearance lanes through Russian minefields covered by anti-tank missiles and attack helicopters which resulted in as many as two dozen Bradleys being knocked out and the offensive stalled.
Advertisement
Since then, the Brigade has become more adept in using its vehicles and the Bradley has developed a reputation for lethality, reliability, crew safety, speed and ability to cover even the worst ground at speed. The Bradley is armed with the 25mm chain gun and the TOW II anti-tank missile. During the Bradley’s development critics said the missile was a waste of money because a Bradley would always lose to tank s that could fire faster in a long-range shoot out.
In Ukraine the TOW has proved to be deadly even against Russia’s latest tanks, particularly as battlefield encounters often take place at short range where, to the surprise of naysayers the Bradley’s fast-firing chain gun has shot much more powerful Russian tanks to pieces before they have a chance to engage.
According to reports from Washington, Ukraine’s Armed Forces soon be getting more Bradleys.
Up until April 2024 Ukraine had received 186 of a promised 200 US Bradleys and had lost around 68. Shortly after Congress restarted arms shipments to Ukraine, in late April 2024, a Department of Defense fact sheet suggested it intended to up the total for delivery to 300.
Advertisement
Latest, upgrade of the Bradley, which will replace older models transferred from US forces to Ukraine under the April Congressional arms assistance bill. Photo: Business Insider
Open sources identify the 47th Mechanized Infantry Brigade as the only Ukrainian combat formation operating the Bradley, the actual number currently being fielded remains a military secret. Ukrainian army equipment issue rules, suggest the maximum number of Bradleys a Brigade fields would be around 100. Taking in to account the now expected deliveries this would either see the 47th double in size or, more likely, a second brigade would be equipped with the IFV.
According to international and local reports Ukraine’s armed forces are currently forming at least five new combat brigades although the equipment they might be issued with is not publicly reported.
The 47th Brigade was raised from scratch in February 2023 and was made up with green, newly recruited soldiers led by a small cadre of combat-experienced officers and NCO before being issued with Bradleys. Its lackluster performance after its June 2023 baptism of fire led to the brigade commander being sacked amid what some media reported as poor leadership in the then still-green brigade.
Advertisement
To suggest a correction or clarification, write to us here
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter
Please leave your suggestions or corrections here
Stefan Korshak
Stefan Korshak is the Kyiv Post Senior Defense Correspondent. He is from Houston Texas and is a Yalie. He has worked in journalism in the former Soviet space for more than twenty years, and from 2015-2019 he led patrols in the Mariupol sector for the OSCE monitoring mission in Donbass. He has filed field reports from five wars and enjoys reporting on nature, wildlife and the outdoors. You can read his blog about the Russo-Ukraine war on Facebook, or on Substack at https://stefankorshak.substack.com, or on Medium at https://medium.com/@Stefan.Korshak
13. The US defense secretary will visit Cambodia, one of China's closest allies, after regional talks
China only has one formal ally by treaty, north Korea. But the point is taken, Cambodia is well under the influence of China.
The US defense secretary will visit Cambodia, one of China's closest allies, after regional talks
BY SOPHENG CHEANG
Updated 6:05 AM EDT, May 25, 2024
AP · May 25, 2024
FILE - U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, center, Vietnam Minister of Defense Phan Van Giang, right, and Thai Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwon, left, listen to a speech by Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, during the 9th ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting Plus in Siem Reap, Cambodia, Wednesday, Nov. 23, 2022. U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is scheduled to make an official visit to Cambodia, one of China’s closest allies in Southeast Asia, after holding talks with his Chinese counterpart at an annual security conference in Singapore, officials said in a statement issued Friday, May 24, 2024. (AP Photo/Heng Sinith, File)
Share
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (AP) — U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is scheduled to make an official visit to Cambodia, one of China’s closest allies in Southeast Asia, after holding talks with his Chinese counterpart at an annual security conference in Singapore, officials said.
A U.S. Defense Department statement issued in Washington on Friday said Austin would travel next week to Singapore, Cambodia and France.
He will visit Cambodia June 4 after attending the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. Among the talks he is planning there is one with his Chinese counterpart Adm. Dong Jun, the Defense Department said. The encounter would be part of an effort to patch up ties that have deteriorated over Beijing’s aggressive policies toward Taiwan and its vast territorial claims in the South China Sea.
U.S. relations with Cambodia have been frosty for years, in large part because of Phnom Penh’s close ties with China. Washington has also been vocal about what it sees as Cambodia’s poor human rights record, which has seen continuing clampdowns on political dissidents and critics.
Cambodia is Beijing’s closest ally in Southeast Asia, and Washington is particularly concerned that a naval base in southern Cambodia on the Gulf of Thailand has been upgraded with Chinese assistance to serve as a strategic outpost for China’s navy.
Cambodian officials deny China will have any special basing privileges and say their country maintains a neutral defense posture.
The Defense Department statement said that Austin will meet with senior officials in Cambodia on his first visit there since attending a gathering of Asian defense ministers in November 2022.
“We are now working with the U.S. Embassy in Phnom Penh to arrange his meetings with the Cambodian leaders,” Cambodian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Chum Sounry said Saturday in response to a query from The Associated Press. “The visit will be another important step to advance the Cambodia-U.S. relations.”
It will also be Austin’s first visit to Cambodia since Hun Manet became prime minister last year, succeeding his father Hun Sen, who held office for 38 years. The handover has led to speculation of a reset in U.S.-Cambodian relations, though so far Hun Manet has maintained his father’s policies.
Hun Manet was Cambodia’s army commander before becoming prime minister last August. Both Austin and he graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point — Austin in 1975 and Hun Manet in 1999, as Cambodia’s first cadet there.
From Cambodia, Austin will go to France to attend events commemorating the 60th anniversary of the World War II D-Day landing, the Defense Department said.
On Friday, Austin underwent a medical procedure at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Washington, resuming his duty after temporarily transferring power to his deputy, Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said in a statement.
Austin is continuing to deal with bladder issues that arose in December following his treatment for prostate cancer, Ryder said.
AP · May 25, 2024
14. Remarks by President Biden in Commencement Address to the United States Military Academy at West Point
Remarks by President Biden in Commencement Address to the United States Military Academy at West Point | West Point, NY | The White House
whitehouse.gov · by The White House · May 25, 2024
United States Military Academy at West Point
West Point, New York
10:38 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, thank you, thank you. (Applause.)
General Gilland, Secretary Wa- — Wormuth, General George, members of Congress. And, by the way, one of the members of Congress up here, I’m flying up with him, and he’s bragging about being from this district and maybe graduated from this academy. Stand up, Ryan. Stand up, Congressman. Fellow graduate right there. (Applause.)
Faculty, staff, soldiers, officers, family, and friends –most of all, West Point Class of 2024.
In 1776, British forces had driven General Washington’s army out of New York City. The British Navy dominated the coast of New England. If they could control the Hudson, they could cut colonies half — divide and conquer, a classic strategy.
But General Washington saw it coming. He knew there was a place on the Hudson where the river bent with a plateau overhead. The Americans placed artillery batteries along the river, stretched an iron chain across the water, and built a fort on a plain called West Point.
West Point, George Washington said — (applause) — George Washington said West Point was the “key of America.” He was right. The British never captured the Hudson. They failed to divide and conquer us. And a few years later, they surrendered at the Battle of Yorktown. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah!
THE PRESIDENT: You got it, man. (Applause.)
The most powerful empire in the world defeated by an army of ordinary people driven by the sacred cause of freedom. And I might add, you’re about to become full-time members of the most honorable and the most consequential fighting force in the history of the world — that’s not hyperbole — of the world. That’s the truth. (Applause.)
Ever since, men and women of West Point have stayed true to this mission. And today, 1,036 graduates of the Class of 2024 will join the Long Gray Line that has never failed us and never, ever will. (Applause.)
Together, you survived the Beast Barracks and countless hours of PT. You completed rigorous academics at th- — America’s first, toughest engineering school in the country. You met the highest standards of discipline.
And, of course, no one is perfect. Even Ulysses S. Grant and Dwight D. Eisenhower were written up from time to time — you know I’m not kidding — (laughter) — when they were cadets here at West Point.
If that sounds familiar to you, maybe I can help you today. In keeping with a longstanding tradition, as Commander-in-Chief, I absolve all cadets on restriction for minor conduct offenses. (Applause.) If you have any questions, the Superintendent can clarify what “minor” means. (Laughter.)
Of course, your time here wasn’t all difficult. The class did plenty of celebrating every time you beat Navy. (Applause.) Now, look, lots of West Point classes have some wins over Navy. But not every class, over a four-years period, beats Navy 51 times. (Applause.) As they say in Delaware, “You done good.”
A few weeks ago, I was honored to present the Commander-in-Chief’s Trophy to the Black Knights at the White House. I told them I don’t take sides. But my son, Beau, was a decorated major in the United States Army. He spent a year in Iraq. And he always made it clear who he expected the family to root for in the game in Philadelphia. (Laughter.)
Parenthetically, I was appointed by my — the fellow I ran against when I was 29 years old to the Naval Academy. I was one of 10. I wanted to play football. And my — the day I was supposed to go down for the interview, a classmate of mine who was also one of the 10 appointed to be chosen from — a kid named Steve Dunning — came to pick me up. And I had found out two days earlier they had a quarterback named Roger Staubach and a halfback named Joe Bellino. I said, “Hell, I’m not going there.” (Laughter.)
I went to Delaware. (Laughter.) Not a joke. (Laughter.)
And, by the way, that — that same fellow, he was a wonderful man. I had — in our last debate, when I was 29 years old, he — the first question he was asked at the debate was, “Do you have any regrets, Senator Boggs?” And he said, “No.” Then we came to the very end of the debate, where I spoke and then he was to conclude. He stood up, and he said, “You know, I was asked if I had any regrets. I said no, but I have one: Had Joe Biden gone to the Naval Academy when I appointed him, he’d still have seven months left on and wouldn’t be able to run.” (Laughter.)
Cadets, as proud as your country is today, your families are even prouder. (Applause.) At R-Day four years ago, because of the pandemic, they could not spend the day on post. It was a challenging way to begin the West Point experience. So, I’m thrilled today so many of your loved ones get to see you here.
To everyone who helped raise these remarkable young people, this is your day as well. Because we know, as the English poet John Milton wrote, “They also serve who only stand and wait.”
Cadets, it’s time for you to stand up now and thank your parents. Stand up. (Applause.) Turn and thank them. You owe them big.
The Class of ‘24 is an extraordinary group. You include the Army’s all-time home run leader; athletes who have swum laps around Manhattan Island, which I could never quite figure out — (applause) — and the son of an Iraqi interpreter for the American forces, one of your class’s two Rhodes Scholars.
You hail from all 50 states and 12 countries. Some of you are third-generation West Pointers. Others are the first in your family to join the U.S. Armed Forces. (Applause.) And at least one of you has a twin brother graduating from Annapolis this year. (Laughter and applause.)
I tell you what, I don’t want to be at that family reunion. (Laughter.) Every time you show up to the Army-Navy game, I don’t know how the hell you’re going to do it. But any rate. (Laughter.)
Look, I wish I could praise every single cadet one by one, because you deserve it. You make our entire nation proud, and that’s not hyperbole. You do.
As your Commander-in-Chief, let me say again: Congratulations. You’ve earned every bit of what you’ve (inaudible) going to get today.
Look, the motto of this class, “Like None Before,” was an appropriate choice for your class, because you’re graduating into a world — as a student of history, I can tell you — “like none before.” I’ve been a senator since I was 29 years old, never left government. And ladies and gentlemen, the world is not only changing rapidly, it’s also the pace of change is accelerating. And the range of missions that our servicemen are carrying out are “like none before” as well.
There’s never been a time in history when we’ve asked our military to do so many different things in so many different places around the world all at the same time.
Right now, American soldiers are supporting brave Ukrainians in their fight for freedom. Our soldiers are working around the clock to keep munitions and equipment moving by land, sea, and air. They’re training Ukrainians on how to use advanced weapons systems, like HIMARS, Patriots, and Abrams tanks, and they’re sharing lessons in Tactical Combat Casualty Care with Ukrainian medics and surgeons.
There are no American soldiers at war in Ukraine. I’m determined to keep it that way. But we are standing strong with Ukraine, and we will stand with them. (Applause.) We’re standing against a man who I’ve known well for many years, a brutal tyrant. We may not — we — and we will not — we will not walk away.
Putin was certain that NATO would fracture. I remember them — right after being elected president, before — right after I was sworn in, and we talked about this very issue. In the fall, he had tied — that fall, he decided to — look, I shouldn’t get into this, probably — (laughter) — because it gets me a little excited. But Putin was certain that NATO would fracture.
I said to him in Switzerland that, “You want the Finlandization of Ukraine; you’re going to get the Finlandization — you’re going to get the NATO-ization of Europe.” He had a brazen vision, which we stepped up and stopped. Instead, today, the greatest defense alliance in the history of the world is stronger than ever. Finland and Sweden are our newest members, and they’re tough.
In the Middle East, while we conduct urgent diplomacy to secure an immediate ceasefire that brings hostages home, our Army and Navy have deployed a temporary pier in — on the Mediterranean in record time to increase lifesaving aid to the Palestinians. The U.S. Air Force has conducted food drops, delivering tens of thousands of meals to the people of Gaza.
In the face of Iran’s recent unprecedented attack on Israel, we brought partners together, including Arab nations, to repel the sustained assault.
The man running the operation on the ground: General Erik Kurilla, head of U.S. Central Command, West Point ‘88. General Kurilla did a superb job.
I was in the Situation Room with our national security team. He was on the screen from the region. He knew the attack was coming, but we weren’t sure precisely when it would begin. Then, at 6:34 p.m., the general said to me, “Mr. President, we just got multiple ballistic missile launches from Iran toward Israel.” Six minutes later, he said, “There are 30 missiles in the air.” Four minutes after that, he said, “There’s 75 missiles in the air.” Then he said, “Over 100 missiles in the air.”
Under incredible pressure, General Kurilla and the Combined Joint Task Force performed exceptionally from sea, air, and bases nearby. Thanks to the — 99 percent of the missiles and drones of Iran never reached their targets because of the quality of our forces. We swiftly ended — (applause) — we swiftly ended what could have been a devastating attack, and we deescalated the conflict, when it easily could have gone the other way.
On the other side of the world, in the Indo-Pacific, we deepened our alliances. We’ve created new ones, like AUKUS, our new strategic partnership with Australia and the United Kingdom. Or the trilateral cooperation we’ve forged with Japan and the Republic of Korea that no one thought was possible: two of our allies cooperating on strategic defense thanks to our leadership. We’ve begun the new trilateral partnership with Japan and the Philippines as well.
We elevated the Quad — together with Japan, India, and Australia — to advance free, open, secure, and prosperous Indo-Pacific. We’re standing up for peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits. And we’ve depended on our strategic partnership with Vietnam.
I wonder if the classes of ‘74 are here today could have imagined that they were sitting where you were at the same time and ar- — during Vi- — Vietnam.
The upshot of all this: Across vastly different regions and very different challenges, our women and men in uniform are hard at work strengthening our alliances, because no country has allies like ours; investing in deterrence, so anyone who thinks they can threaten us thinks again; defending our values by standing up to tyrants; and safeguarding the peace by protecting freedom and openness.
Thanks to the U.S. Armed Forces, we’re doing what only America can do as the indispensable nation, the world’s only superpower, and the leading democracy in the world.
Never forget: America is the strongest when we lead not only by our example of our power but by the power of our example. You can clap for that. (Applause.)
I want to mention one additional way we’ve made progress. Every member of our Armed Forces must always be safe and respected in the ranks. For the first time in nearly a decade, rates of sexual assault and sexual harassment have gone down across the active-duty forces. (Applause.) It’s long past time to end the scourge of sexual violence in the military once and for all. And we can do this.
Cadets, make no mistake, there remains a hard-power world. You can’t draw any other conclusion when powerful nations try to coerce their neighbors or terrorists attempt evil plots. That’s why I’m making historic investments in our military, overhauling our defense industrial base.
For decades, America has had the most powerful military in the world. And that happens because we choose to make it happen. I have always been willing to use force when required to protect our nation, our allies, our core interests.
And when anyone targets American troops, we will deliver justice to them. That happened earlier this year, when three heroic members of the U.S. Army Reserve were killed in an unmanned drone attack near — in northeast Jordan.
In response, we launched dozens of successful airstrikes against Iran-backed militants. And we’ll never forget to honor the memory of those warriors who gave their lives in the fight against terrorism.
Cadets, West Point had made you — has made you leaders of character. In minutes, you’ll be United States Army officers. In time, some of you will serve in powerful roles at headquarters, the Pentagon, even in the White House. You’ll confront challenges that previous generations of soldiers couldn’t imagine.
When that happens, hold fast to your values you learned here at West Point: duty, honor, country.
Hold fast to your honor code, which says, quote, “We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate those who do,” end of quote.
And above all, hold fast to your oath. On your very first day at West Point, you raised your right hands and took an oath — not to a political party, not to a president, but to the Constitution of the United States of America — against all enemies, foreign and domestic. (Applause.)
Members of the Long Gray Line have given their lives for that Constitution. They have fought to defend the freedoms that it protects: the right to vote, the right to worship, the right to raise your voice in protest. They have saved and sacrificed to ensure, as President Lincoln said, a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the Earth.”
West Pointers know better than anyone: Freedom is not free. It requires constant vigilance.
And for ev- — from the very beginning, nothing is guaranteed about our democracy in America. Every generation has an obligation to defend it, to protect it, to preserve it, to choose it. Now, it’s your turn.
Remember what over a thousand graduates of West Point wrote to the Class of 2020 four years ago: The oath you’ve taken here, quote, “has no expiration date,” they said. Not for you, not for your country. It’s important to your nation now as it’s ever been. Keep it, honor it, and live it.
Cadets, let me close with this. In the early days of our nation, as General Washington said, West Point was the “key of America.” Today, you’re still the key because of your commitment to protect what makes America “America.”
We’re unique in the world. We’re the only country in the world founded on an idea. Other countries are founded based on geography, ethnicity, religion, or other attributes, but we’re the only one founded on an idea — not figuratively, literally. And the idea is we’re all created equal, deserve to be treated equally throughout our lives.
But ideas need defenders to make them real. That’s what you, the Class of 2024, are all about: defenders of freediom –fr- — freedom, champions of liberty, guardians — and I mean this — guardians of American democracy.
And just as this historic institution helped make America free over two centuries ago, and just as generations of West Point graduates have kept us free through every challenge and danger, you must keep us free at this time, “like none before.”
I know you can. I know you will.
For we are the United States of America, and there is nothing — nothing beyond our capacity when we do it together.
May God bless you all. And may God protect our troops.
Congratulations, Class of 2024. (Applause.)
10:58 A.M. EDT
whitehouse.gov · by The White House · May 25, 2024
15. Remarks by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III at the United States Naval Academy Commencement (As Delivered)
Remarks by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III at the United States Naval Academy Commencement (As Delivered)
May 24, 2024
As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III
defense.gov
Well, good morning, Class of 2024.
[Graduates respond, "Good morning, sir."]
Let's try that again.
[Laughter]
Good morning, Class of 2024!
[Graduates respond loudly, "Good morning, sir!"]
Right. That's more like it.
Secretary Del Toro, Admiral Franchetti, and General Smith: thanks for your leadership of the Navy and the Marine Corps.
It's great to see so many distinguished guests, ambassadors, public officials, including Governor Wes Moore. And Governor, I'm glad that I'm not the only Army guy here today.
[Laughter]
Let me also acknowledge a close friend and mentor of mine, Admiral Mike Mullen of the Class of 1968.
[Applause]
Admiral, congratulations on the naming of the future DDG 144 as USS Michael G. Mullen. Hooah!
[Applause]
Vice Admiral Davids, family, friends, Midshipmen, and above all, the Class of 2024: it is indeed.
[graduates respond]
...it is indeed an honor to join you today.
And it's great to be back at this ceremony for my second year in a row. So this is starting to be a habit.
[Laughter]
I'm just so happy that you were eager to bring back an old West Point guy.
[Laughter and shouts of, "Beat Army!"]
OK, I'm glad we got that out of the way.
[Laughter]
And for anyone who thinks that the second installment can't be as good as the first— hey, just think of "Top Gun: Maverick."
[Laughter and applause]
Now, you should start getting used to some new titles.
So congratulations, Ensigns and Second Lieutenants!
[Applause]
Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? I think so.
Today, we welcome these outstanding Sailors and Marines to the greatest Navy and Marine Corps on Earth — and the most powerful fighting force in history.
[Applause]
Now, I know that I'm standing between you and your first salutes. So I'm going to keep this pretty brief. Because I believe that a good commencement speaker should be tall —
[Laughter]
— but a good commencement speech should be short.
[Laughter and applause]
You know, the Class of 2024 didn't have an easy road to get to this day.
During your plebe year, liberty was rare. And I'm told that you used some unconventional tactics to protest.
[Laughter]
More specifically, you threw printers out of windows and off bridges.
[Laughter and applause]
And I understand that one intrepid member of this class even climbed up the Chapel Dome to put a printer on top.
[Laughter and applause]
Which is pretty impressive, considering how long it took the Class of 2024 to climb Herndon.
[Laughter, cheers, and applause]
Now, as a former service-academy cadet, I understand this sort of thing. Which brings me to an important piece of business.
To all Midshipmen still serving restrictions for minor infractions: you are hereby absolved.
[Applause]
You know, that never gets old.
[Laughter]
I mentioned that this is my second consecutive year on the Yard. But for two guests with us today — Dan and Nancy Martineau—it's their third.
[Applause]
Dan served in the Marine Corps for 20 years. And Nancy is an Air Force veteran.
[Applause]
They are also the parents of Second Lieutenant Sean Martineau of the Naval Academy Class of 2022.
[Applause]
And of Ensign Thomas Martineau of the Class of 2023.
[Applause]
And of Christopher and Kelly, who will be commissioned today as Ensigns.
[Applause]
Now, that is an outstanding military family.
And so is every other family here today.
You know, you can feel the pride in these Sailors and Marines. And that's because of the thousands of loved ones and sponsors that are here today.
So graduates, their values guided you. Their encouragement fueled you. And their love sustained you.
So your day is also their day.
So Class of 2024: please stand up, face your families, and give them a round of applause!
[Applause and cheers]
OK, take your seats.
[Graduates respond]
This is a great day, and a proud day. But it's also a day of reflection and remembrance.
And I know that two of your own are no longer with us. So I would ask that we take a moment to remember Midshipman Luke Bird and Midshipman Mason Halsey.
We are all deeply grateful that the Bird and Halsey families are here with us today.
Now, I want to say a few words about the challenges facing America's newest Lieutenants and Ensigns.
You have lived by your class motto: "From Adversity, Victory." And during a once-in-a-generation pandemic, that's exactly what you showed.
For weeks, you could rarely leave your rooms. So you bonded with your teammates over Google Meet.
And your classes were rough as well. You still passed Plebe Chemistry — eventually.
[Laughter]
And I know that you were "shotgunned" into new companies to start your Youngster year.
And I hope that you'll see your years here as a long lesson in grit, adaptability, and discipline. You put in the reps and sets to succeed as a team and grow as teammates. And that's exactly what we'll continue to expect of you—today and every day.
The United States has the most capable Navy and Marine Corps in the world.
And make no mistake.
We're going to keep it that way.
And you are going to keep it that way.
[Applause]
You know, last year, I told the Class of 2023 [graduates respond] that they would learn that "the lifeblood of the rules-based international order is actually seawater."
And over the past year, we've seen how important your mission is.
Sea power is a beacon projecting American power and American principle to the world.
Our allies and partners depend on it. Our foes and rivals envy it.
And so today, from the South China Sea to the Red Sea, we're seeing new challenges to the open world of rules, rights, and responsibilities built with American leadership after World War II.
And in times like these, freedom of navigation rides on the bow waves of U.S. Navy ships.
As officers, you will help us increase American security and model American values worldwide. Our Sailors and Marines let the U.S. military project power anywhere on Earth.
And so we're depending on you to secure the world's sea lanes for the free flow of ships, commerce, and ideas.
We're depending on you to sail, fly, and operate wherever international law allows.
We're depending on you to deepen old alliances and forge new friendships.
And we're depending on you to deter conflict and to keep the peace.
As Admiral Arleigh Burke said back in 1961, U.S. Navy officers must "understand not only how to fight a war, but how to use the tremendous power which they operate to sustain a world of liberty and justice."
That's your mission.
And you will be tested.
Just ask last year's graduates.
Two members of the Class of 2023 have asked me to pass along a message today.
Those Ensigns were aboard the USS Carney. And they helped defend freedom of navigation in the Red Sea. They helped those in distress at sea. They helped degrade the capabilities of the Iranian-backed Houthi militia. And they helped shoot down missiles and UAVs.
In fact, the Carney conducted 51 engagements in six months, which is the most direct Navy engagement with a foe since World War II.
[Applause]
And the message of those Ensigns on the Carney to the Class of 2024 is this: You are ready.
Believe it.
You are ready because, as one of those Ensigns put it, "The Academy is the ultimate team-building exercise."
And what comes next is not a drill.
You will lead Sailors and Marines through tension and uncertainty. Your teammates will look to you for leadership. For grace under pressure. For calm under fire.
And you will be ready.
Ensigns and Lieutenants, long after you leave the Yard, you'll steer by the values that you learned on the Yard. And those values will be your North Star.
You'll uphold your convictions with courage. Hold yourself accountable. Treat others with dignity and respect. And defend our democracy and our Constitution with honor, courage, and commitment.
Because leadership isn't just about what you do.
It's about who you are.
Now, I know that today marks a milestone after years of formal education. But as Sailors and Marines, your education is just beginning.
You know, Admiral Nimitz was once talking to a young Marine. And the Admiral said, "Today is a very special day for me because it was just 63 years ago that I entered the Naval Academy."
And the Marine said, "Well, Admiral, do you think you'll make a career of it?"
[Laughter]
And Admiral Nimitz replied, "Yes, I think I shall."
And the Admiral added, "I'm still learning every day. I'm still trying to do my best."
And so that's what we'll ask of you as well. Don't think that your education is anywhere close to being over.
And I hope that you'll commit yourselves today to lifelong learning.
You'll learn from your peers. From your leaders. From your Sailors and Marines. From the allies and partners you'll serve alongside.
And you'll need to keep learning and growing — because your mission will only get more complex.
And Ensigns and Lieutenants, your character, judgment, and integrity, and courage will let you play a central role in the next chapter of American history.
So we are counting on you.
We know that you'll all make us proud.
We know that you'll excel.
We know that you'll keep turning adversity into victory.
Congratulations, Class of 2024!
[Applause]
May God bless you and your families. May God bless our troops. And may God continue to bless the United States of America.
[Applause]
defense.gov
16. Return to Reforger: A Cold War Exercise Model for Pacific Deterrence
I participated in Reforger in 1984 and 85 and Team Spirit in 1987 through the final one in 1993. I wonder why the authors did not use the ROK/US Allaince's Team Spirit as a reference point as well? At one time it was the largest exercise in the free world and it certainly had major deployments from CONUS as well as the region that might have lessons for the INDOPACIFIC (afterall Korea is in the INDOPACIFIC or actually the Asia-Pacific, but I am not going to get into a debate about the importance of the Asian landmass).
Return to Reforger: A Cold War Exercise Model for Pacific Deterrence - Modern War Institute
mwi.westpoint.edu · by Michael Greenberg, Benjamin Phocas · May 28, 2024
Share on LinkedIn
Send email
From the Baltics to Taipei, allied governments continue to evaluate America’s staying power and willingness to employ hard power in defense of democracy. Recently, the standoff in Congress over funding for wars in Ukraine and Israel raised further questions about American resolve. Of course, this is not the first time this situation has existed. During the Cold War, the United States conducted annual emergency deployment readiness exercises in Europe to alleviate allied concerns about American military capability and commitment. These exercises strengthened American deterrence in Europe—and provide a blueprint that could be applied to other strategic problem sets facing the United States today.
Annually, beginning in the late 1960s, and stretching until 1993, thousands of US and NATO troops flooded into the German countryside, occupying pre-positioned weapons depots in a simulated defense of West Germany. These exercises were collectively named Reforger (Return of Forces to Germany). Their purpose was to assess and verify the capability of the US military and its NATO allies. Reforger trained the operation plan for moving troops across the Atlantic; a rapid process of reception, staging, onward movement, and integration with pre-positioned equipment; and deployment to the likely battlefields of West Germany.
It is time for the US military to consider a reintroduction of Reforger-style exercises—but in the Indo-Pacific. The initiation of these exercises would accomplish two major goals in the region: (1) test and improve the capability of the US military to rapidly deploy at the theater level, and (2) deter aggression through a demonstration of US capability and commitment to the defense of Pacific allies.
In 2022, President Joe Biden firmly stated the United States would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion, rhetorically breaking from a decades-long policy of strategic ambiguity. If a firm commitment to defend Taiwan is to be US policy, the US military should set the physical conditions for implementation. By the end of 2023, it was evident that American defense support would mirror the president’s rhetoric, with a grant to Taiwan for $80 million. This was significant because it was the first time US military aid to Taiwan was not in the form of a loan, punctuating American commitment to Taiwanese defense on top of billions of dollars in arms sales. However, in the wake of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, there remains broad international concern that American commitments to allies will not be fulfilled in the face of adversity. Taiwan is not the only potential flashpoint in the Indo-Pacific region, but its seriousness—and the United States’ commitment to deterring and if necessary defending again Chinese aggression—highlights both the imperative of being able to flow combat resources into the theater and the importance of signaling US resolve.
Throughout the height of the Cold War, the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact members had the advantage of having millions of troops stationed along the Iron Curtain. In the event of hostilities and facing this numerical mismatch, the United States planned to rapidly deploy combat power to the continent to halt advancing Soviet armor formations. The Reforger exercises allowed US military planners to test systems and familiarize troops with defensible terrain, and at the highest levels these exercises signaled to the Soviet Union the United States and NATO’s capability and resolve to defend West Germany. These exercises encompassed all branches of service, testing the joint capabilities of critical assets such as Air Mobility Command and Military Sealift Command. Reforger 75 also incorporated elements of the US Marine Corps’s 36th Marine Amphibious Unit, the first Marine operation on European soil since World War I.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the need for rapid deployment of corps and divisions to distant battlefields dwindled. Following the Gulf War and the subsequent drawdown of US defense spending and forces in the 1990s, the post-9/11 wars brought two decades of highly orchestrated deployments. The muscle memory of how to conduct large-scale rapid deployments ebbed as the patch chart (deployment schedule) became rotational and predictable. Pacific Pathways has been an effective way to activate Pacific deployment muscle memory, promoting ally and partner interoperability and forcing planners and operations officers to troubleshoot long-distance sustainment issues in the area of responsibility of US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM). And its continued evolution—under the name Operation Pathways—has expanded these important opportunities. However, even the largest of these exercises—Talisman Sabre involves thirty-five thousand personnel from thirteen nations—are much smaller than the total numbers involved in Reforger. And the scale of exercises has a direct impact on their deterrent effect vis-à-vis competitors like China or Russia. While INDOPACOM has also executed joint Warfighter exercises to enhance readiness in the Pacific, the time has come to consider a Reforger-level exercise with allies and partners in the region. To do so, of course, American officials should socialize the idea with these allies and partners to build consensus on location, scope, and a rotational schedule. But this fits naturally with the approach the United States already takes in the region. As General Charles Flynn, commanding general of US Army Pacific, has said, “We don’t do anything in any of these countries without their invitation.” In this new era of strategic competition and preparation for high-intensity, multidomain conflict, the US military’s capability to rapidly surge forces must be seriously tested, which has not occurred at the scale of the Reforger exercises in decades.
Stress Test
Across the globe, US allies and interests face the threat of aggression from states such as Russia and China and nonstate violent organizations that seek to benefit from a redrawn global political, economic, and military order. These threats, in the Western Pacific, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East, are far from American shores, and in the event of a large-scale conflict, would pose a myriad of challenges in the rapid deployment of large formations. This capability to mobilize in force to defend allies and partners was last put on display in late 1990 when Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait prompted a massive multimonth buildup of multiple US corps elements and numerous coalition combat units.
The US Army currently deploys single brigade combat teams to Korea and Europe as rotational readiness units. The US government’s ability to call upon Civil Reserve Air Fleet and Merchant Marine assets at a scale necessary to wage conventional war has remained largely untested since the 1990s with the exceptions of the buildup ahead of the Iraq invasion in 2003 and to some extent the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. With changes ongoing across the US military, the timeline for the mobilization and deployment of theater-level assets and formations could deviate from planning timelines. The US Navy’s National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF) is on order to deploy a fleet of one hundred heavy-lift assets in the event of a national emergency. Can strategic planners count on the accuracy of timeline estimates by the Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) if they are not tested at regular intervals? Within the NDRF, even with the Ready Reserve Force of forty-six civilian-operated reserve merchant vessels that can be activated in five to ten days, the head of MARAD was “not at all confident” that ships could be crewed in a crisis, much less deployed.
At lower echelons of the US military, training exercises are conducted to ensure unit readiness. Tactical-level units like companies and battalions conduct live-fire events culminating in brigade-wide exercises at the Army’s combat training centers. An Indo-Pacific version of Reforger would be a higher-level readiness exercise beyond corps-level staff exercises like Yama Sakura to certify that US combat forces are ready and able to effectively deploy in the region. The establishment of the Joint Pacific Multinational Readiness Center offers an important organizational foundation on which to build out a larger readiness exercise. The training center already manages certification exercises for different units throughout the Indo-Pacific; its expertise could be leveraged to coordinate resources for the exercise and eventually measure units’ performance and facilitate after-action reviews.
History has demonstrated that the rapid mobilization and deployment of forces can win or lose a war, and if the system created for the deployment of troops and equipment has faults that are identified but not addressed, the system will likely fail in combat. The consequences for failure in wartime are much steeper than they are in the relatively safe confines of a training environment.
Demonstration of Commitment
The reintroduction of Reforger exercises would serve a dual purpose. The US military would get a chance to train for a major conflict, and this training would be highly visible, both to allies and partners and to potential adversaries. The demonstration of the power and reach of the US military, and the accompanying message of resolve and commitment to defend US allies and interests, would elevate deterrence, promote American interests, and strengthen alliances.
Since February 2022,the Department of Defense has “deployed or extended over 20,000 additional forces to Europe in response to the Ukraine crisis,” a strong demonstration to Russia that the United States will stand by its NATO allies. Permanent force realignment is taking place, with Poland, Romania, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Germany all hosting augmented US forces. In INDOPACOM, an optimal version of a Reforger-style exercise would also include allied forces and partners. The coalition involved in the signing of the AUKUS submarine deal in March 2023 represents a good starting point for exercises designed to contain aggression in the Indo-Pacific and would demonstrate overall Western resolve. Continued Indo-Pacific security relationships with Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the Philippines could also be leveraged to include these Pacific allies in operational planning and considerations.
Despite recent high-level exchanges between the superpowers, President Xi Jinping of China explicitly warned President Biden in December 2023 that Beijing still plans to reunify the mainland with Taiwan, and in a New Year’s address told the Chinese public, “The reunification of the motherland is a historical inevitability.” In January 2024, the Chinese defense ministry also reiterated that China will “never compromise or yield on the Taiwan issue.” Rather than be reactive to an invasion—or a crisis that emerges around any of the flashpoints in the region—the United States must coordinate with regional militaries on force flow. A Reforger-style exercise will demonstrate to China that the United States is still committed to its Pacific allies and partners.
A Reforger-style exercise for the Indo-Pacific coordinated by a strong bloc of interoperable US allies and partners offers the region enhanced strategic clarity. The United States should explore regional governments’ willingness to conduct the exercise in locations that already host Operation Pathways. Of course, there are risks involved, the greatest of which is a massive Chinese escalation. Any escalation would increase the chances of miscalculation and confrontation between the superpowers. Ultimately, however, the political environment in the region may make key allies and partners receptive to this significant step even if it might draw the ire of China. And fortunately, after the Biden-Xi Summit in November 2023, the US military and People’s Liberation Army reopened the US-China hotline. This hotline could be used to communicate American intentions and mitigate the risks of escalation during an exercise.
Any increase in American troop presence in the Indo-Pacific region will be heavily scrutinized. A Reforger-style exercise held in Taiwan itself could be seen as a direct contradiction of the United States’ longstanding “One China” policy; this option is not on the table right now and would likely provoke a crisis the United States can ill afford amid heightened tensions in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Historically, China has reacted belligerently to American acknowledgements of Taiwanese sovereignty, including demonstrating its capability to blockade Taiwan after a state visit by then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Since then, in addition to weapons sales, several steps have been taken to bolster Taiwanese deterrence and capability. The US Navy and Air Force remain active in the Taiwan Strait, conducting several freedom-of-navigation operations every calendar year. There are also ongoing discussions about Taiwanese troops coming to the United States to gain additional training and expertise. However, all these steps stop short of a Reforger-style exercise in the region that could strengthen collective security for American allies and partners.
The US military should socialize and then introduce a Reforger-style exercise in the Indo-Pacific region to assess and improve its own ability to rapidly deploy theater-level military capabilities in the event of a major conflict and to serve as a form of strategic messaging. The US military already has a massive presence in the region—with 20 to 25 percent of the Army’s total active duty strength aligned within the US Army Pacific’s formation, US Army Pacific is twice the size of any other of the service’s theater armies. This is itself a strong message. Yet, a conflict in the region would undoubtedly require substantially more manpower and other resources. Rather than wait for China to build the combat power to match its rhetoric, the United States and its allies should embark on the planning and coordination of a Reforger-style exercise. Eighth Army in Korea hinges its mission on the “Fight Tonight” ethos; a Reforger for the Indo-Pacific will export this idea throughout the Pacific formation.
Major Michael Greenberg is a strategic intelligence officer and Council on Foreign Relations Term Member assigned to the United States Military Academy at West Point as an assistant professor of history. He is a Northwestern University graduate and earned an MA in terrorism, security, and society in the War Studies Department at King’s College London and an MA in history at New York University. His most recent operational assignment was in the Pacific where he served with 1-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team as a military intelligence company commander and infantry S-2.
Second Lieutenant Ben Phocas graduated from the United States Military Academy where he studied Defense and Strategic Studies. He was an intern for the National Center for Urban Operations and commissioned as an armor officer in May 2024.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.
Image credit: Cpl. Kyle Chan, US Marine Corps
Share on LinkedIn
Send email
mwi.westpoint.edu · by Michael Greenberg, Benjamin Phocas · May 28, 2024
17. Is the Quad becoming a Potemkin alliance?
Conclusion:
To maintain security in the Indo-Pacific, there is no substitute for a strong Quad with a clear strategic mission. Rather than unravelling years of efforts to build a coherent and credible regional strategy, thereby enabling yet more Chinese expansionism, Biden and his fellow Quad leaders must get to work defining such a mission and then commit to pursuing it. Otherwise, the Quad risks becoming a kind of Potemkin grouping. The facade of an alliance will not fool China.
Is the Quad becoming a Potemkin alliance? | The Strategist
aspistrategist.org.au · by Brahma Chellaney · May 28, 2024
When four of the Indo-Pacific’s leading democracies—Australia, India, Japan and the United States—revived the long-dormant Quad in 2017, their objective was clear: to create a strategic bulwark against Chinese expansionism and reinforce a stable regional balance of power. But the coalition is now adrift, and the security risks this poses should not be underestimated.
The Quad’s resurrection reflected a paradigm shift in US foreign policy. After decades of engagement with China, including aiding its economic rise, US policymakers—Democrats and Republicans alike—realised that America’s biggest trade partner had become its biggest strategic adversary, bent on replacing it as global hegemon. As US President Joe Biden indicated in his 2022 National Security Strategy, China is ‘the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to advance that objective.’
Biden, like his predecessor, Donald Trump, viewed the Quad as an essential instrument to uphold a free and open Indo-Pacific, a concept formulated by the late Japanese Prime Minister Abe Shinzo. So, Biden elevated Quad discussions from the level of foreign ministers, who had been meeting annually since 2019, to heads of state or government, initiating a flurry of leaders’ summits in 2021–23. But it has been more than a year since the Quad leaders last met, and with the US focused on the upcoming presidential election, their next summit is unlikely to be held before 2025.
The reason for this drop-off is simple: America’s priorities have changed. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the hybrid war the West is waging in response, not to mention renewed conflict in the Middle East, have stymied US efforts to position the Indo-Pacific at the ‘heart’ of its grand strategy. It is striking that the latest US foreign-assistance package provides $60.8 billion for Ukraine but only $8.1 billion for security in the Indo-Pacific, including Taiwan, on which China has set its sights.
With limited resources to dedicate to the Indo-Pacific, Biden seems to hope that he can prevent a war over Taiwan through personal diplomacy with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Last month, in a telephone call with his Chinese counterpart, he stressed the importance of maintaining peace across the Taiwan Strait.
Biden seems to believe that a more conciliatory approach towards China can also forestall the emergence of a comprehensive Sino-Russian alliance. The ‘no-limits partnership’ between China and Russia, reaffirmed during Russian President Vladmir Putin’s visit to Beijing this month, is problematic enough; China already has undercut Western sanctions by providing an economic lifeline to Russia in exchange for cheap energy and some of Russia’s most advanced military technologies, including air-defense and early-warning systems. A full military alliance, with China supporting the Kremlin’s war machine directly, would be the United States’ worst geopolitical nightmare.
The problem for Biden is that appeasing China and strengthening the Quad, which Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has decried as the ‘Indo-Pacific version of NATO’,are fundamentally incompatible. It might not be a coincidence that the Quad leaders have not met since Biden sent a series of cabinet officials to Beijing and met with Xi in California last November.
In fact, Biden has lately shifted his focus to less provocative initiatives like the ‘Squad’, an emerging unofficial regional grouping involving Australia, Japan, and the Philippines – countries that already have mutual defense treaties with the US. But what good is an anti-China alliance without India? It is, after all, the only power that has truly locked horns with the People’s Liberation Army this century: the tense military standoff along the disputed Himalayan border, triggered by China’s stealthy territorial encroachments, has just entered its fifth year. Moreover, as the leading maritime power in the Indian Ocean, India must play a central role in checking China’s westward naval march from its new citadel, the South China Sea.
The US has also been touting its AUKUS security partnership with Australia and Britain. But this grouping will not be able to play a meaningful role in Indo-Pacific security until Australia is equipped with nuclear-powered submarines, and that will not happen for another decade.
So far, Biden’s overtures to China have yielded few positive results. On the contrary, Xi has lately intensified coercive pressure on Taiwan, and Chinese provocations in the South China Sea have been increasing. Unless the US changes its approach, it may well fail to deter China from attacking Taiwan or cementing a strategic axis with Russia, just as it failed to deter Russia from invading Ukraine.
To maintain security in the Indo-Pacific, there is no substitute for a strong Quad with a clear strategic mission. Rather than unravelling years of efforts to build a coherent and credible regional strategy, thereby enabling yet more Chinese expansionism, Biden and his fellow Quad leaders must get to work defining such a mission and then commit to pursuing it. Otherwise, the Quad risks becoming a kind of Potemkin grouping. The facade of an alliance will not fool China.
aspistrategist.org.au · by Brahma Chellaney · May 28, 2024
18. What Do I Owe the Dead of My Generation’s Mismanaged Wars?
OPINION
GUEST ESSAY
What Do I Owe the Dead of My Generation’s Mismanaged Wars?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/26/opinion/memorial-day-faiiled-wars.html?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru
May 26, 2024
Rawa, Iraq, 2006Credit...Peter van Agtmael/Magnum Photos
By Phil Klay
Mr. Klay is a novelist and a Marine Corps veteran of the Iraq War. His most recent book is the essay collection “Uncertain Ground: Citizenship in an Age of Endless, Invisible War.”
About 10 years ago, as the war in Afghanistan was slowly, painfully winding down, I walked through Arlington National Cemetery with a fellow Marine veteran and a relative of mine visiting from Ireland. We passed row after row of pristine white tombs, the dead of all the just wars and unjust wars that made and remade this country, and my relative told us he found it quite moving; he hadn’t been expecting that. Perhaps he thought it’d be more bombastic, or obviously militaristic, and he was taken by the beauty and serenity and quiet dignity of the place.
So we brought him to Section 60 to see some of the newest graves, of kids born in the ’90s, and I told him the sight filled me with rage, these young lives thrown into a mismanaged war, where even their deaths, at that late stage, were mostly ignored. Just the background hum of a global superpower.
A couple of years later, in 2021, the Afghan war finally ended, taking with it a few American children of the 2000s, and, in a moral failure laid on top of the military failure, leaving tens of thousands of Afghans who worked with us at risk in the now completely Taliban-controlled country. The last Marines to fall died in a suicide bombing at a gate to Kabul’s airport, a blast that killed 11 Marines, one Navy medic, one soldier and about 170 Afghan civilians. The Marines were trying to manage the chaos of the poorly planned evacuation of Afghans from Kabul — a humanitarian mission at heart, trying to help those we were abandoning. A week before she died, one of the Marines, Sgt. Nicole Gee, posted a photo of her cradling a baby in Kabul and captioned it, “I love my job.”
America responded to those deaths with a drone strike against a Kabul vehicle the military claimed was transporting ISIS members who were about to carry out another attack, but that, in a twist that felt grotesquely emblematic of so many of our failures, turned out to carry an Afghan aid worker. The blast killed the aid worker and his relatives, seven of whom were children. The sort of people those Marines died trying to help.
How do you memorialize the dead of a failed war? At Arlington, it’s easy to let your heart swell with pride as you pass certain graves. Here are the heroes that ended slavery. Here are the patriots who defeated fascism. We think of them as inextricably bound up with the cause they gave their life to. The same can’t be said for more morally troubling wars, from the Philippines to Vietnam. And for the dead of my generation’s wars, for the dead I knew, the reasons they died sit awkwardly alongside the honor I owe them.
Image
Mian Poshteh, Afghanistan, 2009Credit...Peter van Agtmael/Magnum Photos
I watched a lot of Marines go off to Afghanistan, a war that I could have gone to but that I chose to avoid. Mostly, they were young. That’s the thing Hollywood most often gets wrong about war when they cast grown men to portray America’s finest killers. Look at a Marine infantry platoon, so many of whose members joined at 17 or 18, and you see boys. Boys who haven’t grown into cynicism yet. Some find it in the middle of their tours. Some keep that idealistic flame burning through multiple deployments. And some die before it can be extinguished.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
For so many of the kids I saw, their mission mattered to them, and so their mission should matter to all of us when we remember their deaths. And the mission was a catastrophe. Memorial Day should come with sorrow and patriotic pride, yes, but also with a sense of shame. And, though it has faded for me over the years, with anger.
A few months after Kabul fell I went to the Bronx to see a war photographer I admire, Peter van Agtmael, taking a group of adult learners through a display of his photography from 9/11 to the present at the Bronx Documentary Center, photographs now collected in the book “Look at the U.S.A.”
“I just got back from Afghanistan, and it’s controversial to say, but it’s beautiful,” he told the group. “It’s beautiful to see Afghanistan at peace.”
Beautiful. I thought of a Marine in 2009, just back from Afghanistan, hollow-eyed, telling us in a monotone about his best friend taking a bullet to the head in these beautiful regions of the country, now at peace. What would he make of such a claim? Around me on the walls I saw a burned soldier in a combat hospital, the arm of a Trump supporter climbing over a wall by the Capitol on Jan. 6, the dust cloud of an improvised bomb detonation in Iraq.
Toward the end of the gallery, there was a huge print hung high up. You craned your neck and saw a homeless encampment in Las Vegas, and then, craning further, you saw an F-16 fighter jet, an aircraft that costs tens of millions of dollars, flying above. Amid our national forgetting of the wars, there was something powerful about seeing this accounting of America in the South Bronx, in a community whose struggles have so often been subject to forgetting, effacing, indifference. And, God, it was painful.
Image
Las Vegas, 2018Credit...Peter van Agtmael/Magnum Photos
In the past when I’ve thought about the recent dead, I’ve told myself that service to country, service unto the point of death, is a momentous enough sacrifice to overshadow all other questions. The cause doesn’t matter so much if the fallen I knew served courageously, looked after their fellow Marines and kept their honor clean. But I’ve come to feel that airbrushing out the complexities of their wars is, ultimately, disrespectful to the dead. We owe it to the dead to remember what mattered to them, the ideals they held, as well as how those ideals were betrayed or failed to match reality.
This Memorial Day, as I get ready to take my sons to march in our local Memorial Day parade, our country is in the midst of the most divisive antiwar protests since the early days of the Iraq war, protests my friends characterize as either “objectively pro-Hamas” or as “opposing undeniable genocide.” Questions long dormant, about how we use our might and whom we help kill, feel like live political questions once again (even if we’re not talking much about actual American military deployments, or the troops who have most recently died at the hands of Iranian proxies). The debate is raw and angry.
Good. What a good, uncomfortable, painful national mood for remembering the dead. This year, when I remember them, I will not just remember who they were, the shreds of memory dredged up from past decades. I will remember why they died. All the reasons they died. Because they believed in America. Because America forgot about them. Because they were trying to force-feed a different way of life to people from a different country and culture. Because they wanted to look after their Marines. Because the mission was always hopeless. Because America could be a force for good in the world. Because Presidents Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden didn’t have much of a plan. Because it’s a dangerous world, and somebody’s got to do the killing. Because of college money. Because the Marine Corps is cool as hell. Because they saw “Full Metal Jacket” and wanted to be Joker. Or Animal Mother. Because the war might offer a new hope for Iraq, for Afghanistan. Because we earned others’ hatred, with our cruelty and indifference and carelessness and hubris. Because America was still worth dying for.
Phil Klay is a novelist and a Marine Corps veteran of the Iraq War. His most recent book is the essay collection “Uncertain Ground: Citizenship in an Age of Endless, Invisible War.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, X and Threads.
19. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, May 27, 2024
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-27-2024
Key Takeaways:
- The NATO Parliamentary Assembly called on member states to lift their prohibitions against Ukraine using Western-provided weapons to strike within Russian territory.
- Spain signed a 10-year bilateral security agreement with Ukraine on May 27.
- Ukrainian forces continued to target Russian long-range early warning radar systems and oil and gas infrastructure within Russia on May 26 and 27.
- Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly told German Chancellor Olaf Scholz before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine that Ukraine is not an independent state and that Russia can unilaterally and forcibly change Ukraine's borders.
- The New York Times (NYT) reported on May 26 that Western intelligence officials stated that the Russian General Staff's Main Directorate (GRU) are behind a series of low-level sabotage operations throughout Europe that aim to disrupt Western arms supplies to Ukraine and create the appearance of a European movement opposing support for Ukraine.
- Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on May 27 that he signed documents that will allow French military instructors to visit training centers in Ukraine.
- The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) offered to help Armenia mitigate the effects of flooding in northern Armenia, although Armenia has not publicly requested help from Russia.
- Russian officials are considering delisting the Taliban as a prohibited organization in Russia and will likely do so in the near term.
- Russia may sign an agreement with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) exchanging weapons for a Russian logistics hub at Port Sudan on the Red Sea.
- Ukrainian forces recently made confirmed advances near Lyptsi and Russian forces advanced near Svatove and northwest of Avdiivka.
- Russian forces continue formalization efforts for irregular units.
RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, MAY 27, 2024
May 27, 2024 - ISW Press
Download the PDF
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, May 27, 2024
Christina Harward, Riley Bailey, Grace Mappes, Nicole Wolkov, and Frederick W. Kagan
May 27, 2024, 6:30pm ET
Click here to see ISW’s interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.
Click here to see ISW’s 3D control of terrain topographic map of Ukraine. Use of a computer (not a mobile device) is strongly recommended for using this data-heavy tool.
Click here to access ISW’s archive of interactive time-lapse maps of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. These maps complement the static control-of-terrain map that ISW produces daily by showing a dynamic frontline. ISW will update this time-lapse map archive monthly.
Note: The data cut-off for this product was 1:00pm ET on May 27. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the May 28 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.
The NATO Parliamentary Assembly called on member states to lift their prohibitions against Ukraine using Western-provided weapons to strike within Russian territory. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly adopted a declaration on May 27 calling for NATO states to support Ukraine's "international right" to defend itself by lifting "some restrictions" on Ukraine's use of Western weapons to strike Russian territory.[1] The declaration also calls for member states to accelerate their deliveries of critical weapons to Ukraine, and more than 200 representatives of NATO member states supported the declaration. Some NATO states, including the UK, have already lifted such restrictions on weapons they provide to Ukraine, but not enough Western states have done so to allow Ukraine to challenge Russia's sanctuary from which it can freely conduct airstrikes or stage ground operations against Ukraine.[2] Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson told Swedish outlet Hallandsposten on May 26 in response to a question about Ukraine using Swedish-provided weapons against Russian territory that Sweden supports Ukraine's right under international law to defend itself through combat operations against Russian territory so long as these operations comply with international laws on combat.[3]
Spain signed a 10-year bilateral security agreement with Ukraine on May 27.[4] The agreement stipulates that Spain will provide Ukraine with one billion euros (about $1.08 billion) worth of military aid in 2024 and another five billion euros (about $5.4 billion) worth of aid before 2027.[5] El Pais reported on May 27 that the new military aid package will include 19 restored Leopard tanks (likely referring to 19 previously-announced Leopards), Patriot air defense missiles, a "large batch" of 155mm artillery ammunition, and other Spanish-produced weapons.[6] El Pais reported that Spain intends to send 10 refurbished Leopard tanks to Ukraine before June 30.[7]
Ukrainian forces continued to target Russian long-range early warning radar systems and oil and gas infrastructure within Russia on May 26 and 27. Ukrainian outlet Suspilne reported on May 27 citing its sources in Ukrainian special services that the Ukranian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) flew drones a record 1,800 kilometers to strike a Voronezh-M long-range early warning radar system in Orsk, Orenburg Oblast on May 26.[8] Satellite imagery dated May 26 and 27 shows new burn marks near the radar system, but the extent of damage to the system is unclear.[9] Oryol Oblast Governor Andrey Klychkov claimed on May 27 that Ukrainian drone strikes damaged an administrative building at a Rosneft fuel station in Livny, Oryol Oblast, and images of the aftermath show extensive damage to the building.[10] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian forces also intercepted a drone over Bryansk Oblast, another drone over Belgorod Oblast, six drones over Oryol Oblast, and four drones over Krasnodar Krai overnight.[11] Krasnodar Krai Governor Veniamin Kondratyev claimed that falling drones caused fires in Krinitsa and Dzhankhot, Krasnodar Krai.[12]
Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly told German Chancellor Olaf Scholz before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine that Ukraine is not an independent state and that Russia can unilaterally and forcibly change Ukraine's borders. Ukrainian media reported that Scholz stated at the Freedom for Democracy Festival in Berlin on May 26 that Putin stated that "Ukraine and Belarus are parts of Russia" and that Scholz's discussion with Putin demonstrated that Putin thinks that one can change borders "with the help of force."[13] Putin has consistently demonstrated that he does not consider Ukraine an independent state with its own history, identity, and culture separate from Russia, as evidenced by his 2021 essay, "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians”; that his war aims include the total defeat of Ukraine; and that he has expansive territorial ambitions in Ukraine.[14]
The New York Times (NYT) reported on May 26 that Western intelligence officials stated that the Russian General Staff's Main Directorate (GRU) are behind a series of low-level sabotage operations throughout Europe that aim to disrupt Western arms supplies to Ukraine and create the appearance of a European movement opposing support for Ukraine.[15] The NYT stated that the GRU often recruits locals to conduct arsons and noted that the concerted Russian effort has targeted a paint factory in Poland, homes in Latvia, an IKEA store in Lithuania, and a warehouse in the United Kingdom connected with arms supplies to Ukraine. Western officials have recently reported on widespread Russian sabotage efforts throughout Europe, and NATO reported on May 2 that Russia is intensifying its hybrid activities in Europe.[16] Russian investigative outlet The Insider reported on April 29 that GRU agents established a long-term presence in the Czech Republic and Greece and have been conducting operations, including attacks on ammunition depots and assassination attempts, since 2014.[17]
Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on May 27 that he signed documents that will allow French military instructors to visit training centers in Ukraine.[18] Syrskyi stated that he and Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov had a video call with French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu, and Syrskyi welcomed France's initiative to send French military instructors to Ukraine. Syrskyi also expressed optimism that France's determination would encourage other Ukrainian partners to join this "ambitious project." The French Defense Ministry told French outlet Agence France-Presse (AFP) on May 27 that France has been discussing sending French military instructors to Ukraine since French President Emmanuel Maron met with European leaders on February 26 to discuss European support for Ukraine but did not explicitly confirm that France would send French military instructors to Ukraine.[19]
The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) offered to help Armenia mitigate the effects of flooding in northern Armenia, although Armenia has not publicly requested help from Russia. The Russian MoD claimed on May 27 that it commanded the 102nd Military Base in Gyumri, Armenia to allocate personnel and equipment to help Armenia mitigate the effects of floods and mudflows.[20] The Russian MoD stated that it will send Russian military personnel to the disaster areas at Armenia's request. The Russian MoD's phrasing obscures whether Armenia has actually requested help from Russia, however. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova claimed on May 26 that the Russian-Armenian Center for Humanitarian Response (RACHR) (an organization under the Russian Ministry for Emergency Situations) gave portable motor pumps to the Armenian Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) to assist with rescue operations in flooded areas and that the RACHR is in "constant contact" with the Armenian MVD's Center for Crisis Management.[21] ISW has not observed reports from Armenian officials or Armenian media that Armenia specifically requested assistance from Russia. Armenian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Ani Badalyan stated on May 27 that Armenia would coordinate measures for mitigating the impacts of the floods with international partners after assessing the overall damage.[22] Russian officials are likely publicizing Russian offers to help Armenia mitigate the effects of a natural disaster to portray Russia as a reliable ally amid Armenia's ongoing attempts to distance itself from political and security relations with Russia.[23]
Russian officials are considering delisting the Taliban as a prohibited organization in Russia and will likely do so in the near term. Russian Special Representative to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov stated on May 27 that the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and Ministry of Justice reported to Russian President Vladimir Putin that Russia can remove the Taliban from its list of prohibited organizations.[24] Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that the Taliban is the "real power" in Afghanistan and that the initiative to remove the Taliban from the prohibited organization list "reflects objective reality."[25] Russian officials have yet to delist the Taliban as a prohibited organization, but Kabulov's and Lavrov's comments suggest that Russia will do so in the near term. Kabulov added that Taliban representatives will attend the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in early June 2024.[26] Putin met with Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev in Tashkent on May 27 and signed a statement on bilateral commitments, which included intentions to promote peace and stability in Afghanistan.[27] The Kremlin has maintained contacts with the Taliban since the Taliban deposed the Afghan government in 2021, although more outright Russian recognition of the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan will likely portend increased Russian-Taliban cooperation. Russia likely hopes to leverage its relationship with the Taliban to degrade the operations of Afghan-based Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP), which organized and conducted the March 22 Crocus City Hall terrorist attack in Moscow, among other things.[28] The Taliban continue efforts to repress anti-Taliban groups throughout Afghanistan, including ISKP, and Russia may hope to help the Taliban intensify its anti-ISKP activities.[29] Kazakhstan delisted the Taliban as a terrorist organization in December 2023, and Uzbekistan has expanded agreements with the Taliban in recent years.[30] Russia may view direct engagement with the Taliban as an increasingly normalized trend among Central Asian states.
Russia may sign an agreement with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) exchanging weapons for a Russian logistics hub at Port Sudan on the Red Sea. SAF Assistant Commander-in-Chief Yasser Al-Atta stated on May 25 that a SAF delegation will travel to Russia in the near future to conclude an agreement exchanging "vital weapons and munitions" for a Russian logistics hub at Port Sudan.[31] Al-Atta described the planned Russian hub as "not exactly a military base."[32] A prominent, Kremlin-awarded Russian milblogger also claimed on May 27 that the SAF was able to recapture several areas of Khartoum due to supplies of Iranian drones.[33] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister and Special Representative for the Russian President in Africa and the Middle East Mikhail Bogdanov met with SAF head Abdel Fattah al Burhan and several other Sudanese officials during a two-day visit to Sudan on April 28 and 29.[34] ISW previously assessed that Russia may be switching sides in the Sudanese civil war to support the SAF in pursuit of acquiring a Red Sea naval base and that Russian backing of the SAF would greatly benefit Iran by aligning Russian and Iranian policy and strategy in the region.[35]
Key Takeaways:
- The NATO Parliamentary Assembly called on member states to lift their prohibitions against Ukraine using Western-provided weapons to strike within Russian territory.
- Spain signed a 10-year bilateral security agreement with Ukraine on May 27.
- Ukrainian forces continued to target Russian long-range early warning radar systems and oil and gas infrastructure within Russia on May 26 and 27.
- Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly told German Chancellor Olaf Scholz before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine that Ukraine is not an independent state and that Russia can unilaterally and forcibly change Ukraine's borders.
- The New York Times (NYT) reported on May 26 that Western intelligence officials stated that the Russian General Staff's Main Directorate (GRU) are behind a series of low-level sabotage operations throughout Europe that aim to disrupt Western arms supplies to Ukraine and create the appearance of a European movement opposing support for Ukraine.
- Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi stated on May 27 that he signed documents that will allow French military instructors to visit training centers in Ukraine.
- The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) offered to help Armenia mitigate the effects of flooding in northern Armenia, although Armenia has not publicly requested help from Russia.
- Russian officials are considering delisting the Taliban as a prohibited organization in Russia and will likely do so in the near term.
- Russia may sign an agreement with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) exchanging weapons for a Russian logistics hub at Port Sudan on the Red Sea.
- Ukrainian forces recently made confirmed advances near Lyptsi and Russian forces advanced near Svatove and northwest of Avdiivka.
- Russian forces continue formalization efforts for irregular units.
We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because these activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We will continue to evaluate and report on the effects of these criminal activities on the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict and the Geneva Conventions and crimes against humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.
- Russian Main Effort – Eastern Ukraine (comprised of three subordinate main efforts)
- Russian Subordinate Main Effort #1 – Push Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City
- Russian Subordinate Main Effort #2 – Capture the remainder of Luhansk Oblast and push westward into eastern Kharkiv Oblast and encircle northern Donetsk Oblast
- Russian Subordinate Main Effort #3 – Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast
- Russian Supporting Effort – Southern Axis
- Russian Air, Missile, and Drone Campaign
- Russian Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts
- Russian Technological Adaptations
- Activities in Russian-occupied areas
- Ukrainian Defense Industrial Base Efforts
- Russian Information Operations and Narratives
- Significant Activity in Belarus
Russian Main Effort – Eastern Ukraine
Russian Subordinate Main Effort #1 – Kharkiv Oblast (Russian objective: Push Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City)
Ukrainian forces recently made marginal advances north of Kharkiv City in the Lyptsi direction amid continued Russian attacks on May 27. Geolocated footage published on May 27 shows that Ukrainian forces recently recaptured some territory in fields north of Lyptsi.[36] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced up to 500 meters in depth north of Lyptsi, but ISW has not observed confirmation of this claim.[37] Russian forces continued ground attacks near Lyptsi and Ternova (on the international border between Lyptsi and Vovchansk).[38] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian forces repelled a Ukrainian ground attack near Hlyboke (immediately north of Lyptsi).[39] Elements of the newly formed Russian 245th Guards Motorized Rifle Regiment (47th Tank Division, 1st Guards Tank Army [GTA], Moscow Military District [MMD]), the "Anvar Spetsnaz" detachment (possibly referring to the BARS-25 "Anvar" volunteer detachment), and elements of the Russian Africa Corps are reportedly fighting in northern Kharkiv Oblast.[40]
Russian forces continued attacks northeast of Kharkiv City near Vovchansk on May 27, but there were no confirmed changes to the frontline. Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces marginally advanced on Lenina Street in central Vovchansk, where heavy fighting continues.[41] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces maintain a presence in the Vovchansk Aggregate Plant in central Vovchansk on the northern bank of the Vovcha River.[42] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces also continued ground attacks near Starytsya (southwest of Vovchansk).[43]
Russian Subordinate Main Effort #2 – Luhansk Oblast (Russian objective: Capture the remainder of Luhansk Oblast and push westward into eastern Kharkiv Oblast and northern Donetsk Oblast)
Russian forces recently made confirmed advances along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line amid continued Russian offensive operations in the area on May 27. Geolocated footage published on May 26 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced east of Myasozharivka (west of Svatove).[44] Additional geolocated footage published on May 26 and 27 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced west of Novovodyane (southwest of Svatove).[45] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian forces seized Ivanivka (southeast of Kupyansk).[46] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced towards Stelmakhivka (northwest of Svatove), northwest of Novoselivske (northwest of Svatove), 300 meters within Berestove (northwest of Svatove), and within Bilohorivka (south of Kreminna).[47] ISW has not observed confirmation of these Russian claims, however.[48] A prominent Russian milblogger claimed that available footage only partially corroborates the Russian MoD's claim on May 26 that Russian forces seized Berestove but that the village is so small that it is possible that Russian forces seized the whole settlement.[49] Russian forces continued offensive operations northeast of Kupyansk near Synkivka; east of Kupyansk near Petropavlivka and Kyslivka; northwest of Svatove near Ivanivka, Stepova Novoselivka, and Berestove; west of Svatove near Myasozharivka; southwest of Svatove near Hrekivka, Druzhelyubivka, Novoyehorivka, and Novovodyane; northwest of Kreminna near Nevske; west of Kreminna near Terny; and south of Kreminna near Hryhorivka and Bilohorivka.[50]
Russian Subordinate Main Effort #3 – Donetsk Oblast (Russian objective: Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)
The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces continued ground assaults southeast of Siversk near Vyimka, Verkhnokamyanske, and Spirne on May 27.[51] Elements of the Russian 106th Airborne (VDV) Division reportedly continue operating near Rozdolivka (south of Siversk).[52]
Russian forces continued offensive operations near Chasiv Yar on May 27, but there were no confirmed changes to the frontline in the area. A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced along a front up to 720 meters wide on the eastern and southern outskirts of the Kanal Microraion (easternmost Chasiv Yar), although ISW has not observed visual evidence of this claim.[53] Russian forces also continued ground attacks near the Novyi Microraion (eastern Chasiv Yar), east of Chasiv Yar near Ivanivske, and southeast of Chasiv Yar near Klishchiivka and Andriivka.[54] Elements of the Russian 85th Motorized Rifle Brigade (2nd Luhansk People's Republic Army Corps [LNR AC]) are reportedly operating in the Bakhmut (Chasiv Yar) direction.[55]
Russian forces recently made confirmed advances northwest of Avdiivka amid continued Russian offensive operations in the area on May 27. Geolocated footage published on May 25, 26, and 27 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced west of Ocheretyne (northwest of Avdiivka), northeast of Sokil (northwest of Avdiivka), and west of Solovyove (northwest of Avdiivka).[56] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian forces seized Netaylove (west of Avdiivka), and Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced northwest and south of the settlement.[57] Russian forces likely seized Netaylove as of May 26.[58] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced up to 800 meters wide and 550 meters deep north of Ocheretyne.[59] Fighting also continued north of Avdiivka near Kalynove; northwest of Avdiivka near Novooleksandrivka and Novoselivka Persha; west of Avdiivka near Umanske and Yasnobrodivka; and southwest of Avdiivka near Nevelske.[60]
Russian forces reportedly advanced southwest of Donetsk City on May 27, but there were no confirmed changes to the frontline in the area. Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced in an area up to 1.1 kilometers wide and 600 meters deep west of Novomykhailivka (southwest of Donetsk City) and advanced up to 200 meters deep near Paraskoviivka (southwest of Donetsk City).[61] Fighting also continued west of Donetsk City near Krasnohorivka and southwest of Donetsk City near Pobieda, Kostyantynivka, and Solodke.[62] Elements of the Russian 5th Motorized Rifle Brigade (1st Donetsk People's Republic [DNR] AC) reportedly continue operating near Krasnohorivka.[63]
Russian forces reportedly advanced in the Donetsk-Zaporizhia Oblast border area on May 27, but there were no confirmed changes to the frontline in the area. Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced in northwestern Staromayorske (south of Velyka Novosilka).[64] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced up to 700 meters wide and 700 meters deep west of Urozhaine (south of Velyka Novosilka).[65] ISW has not observed visual evidence of these claims. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian assaults near Staromayorske and Urozhaine.[66] Elements of the Russian 5th Tank Brigade (36th Combined Arms Army [CAA], Eastern Military District [EMD]) are reportedly operating in the Velyka Novosilka direction, and elements of the 11th Air Force and Air Defense Army (Russian Aerospace Forces [VKS] and EMD) are reportedly operating near Urozhaine.[67]
Russian Supporting Effort – Southern Axis (Russian objective: Maintain frontline positions and secure rear areas against Ukrainian strikes)
Positional engagements continued in western Zaporizhia Oblast near Robotyne and Verbove (east of Robotyne) on May 27.[68] Elements of the Russian 291st Motorized Rifle Regiment (42nd Motorized Rifle Division, 58th Combined Arms Army [CAA], Southern Military District [SMD]) are reportedly operating near Robotyne.[69]
Positional engagements continued in left (east) bank Kherson Oblast, including near Krynky, on May 27.[70] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled four Russian attacks near Krynky and "other left-bank bridgeheads," suggesting that Ukrainian forces may have positions on the east bank elsewhere.[71] It is unclear to which area the Ukrainian General Staff may be referring, however.
Russian Air, Missile, and Drone Campaign (Russian Objective: Target Ukrainian military and civilian infrastructure in the rear and on the frontline)
Ukraine's Southern Operational Command reported on May 27 that Russian forces struck the airport in Zaporizhzhia City with a Kh-59 missile on May 26.[72]
Russian forces continued intense glide bomb strikes against Kharkiv City and elsewhere in northern Kharkiv Oblast on May 27. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces fired 25 guided glide bombs against northern Kharkiv Oblast during the day on May 27, including two glide bombs against Kharkiv City.[73] Ukrainian officials reported that Russian glide bombs struck an industrial facility and residential area in Kharkiv City, killing one and injuring 11.[74]
Russian Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts (Russian objective: Expand combat power without conducting general mobilization)
Russian forces continue formalization efforts for irregular units. The Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) Vostok Battalion, which has been subsumed into Rosgvardia as part of Russian formalization efforts, claimed on May 27 that Rosgvardia is creating a special rapid response (SOBR) detachment and a riot police (OMON) battalion on the basis of the Vostok battalion.[75] Deputy Head of the DNR Main Directorate of Rosgvardia and DNR OMON and SOBR commander Alexander Khodakovsky was previously the commander of the Vostok battalion, and he may be trying to keep elements of the battalion under his command.
The United Kingdom Ministry of Defense (MoD) reported on May 27 that the Russian MoD is issuing a new journal for political instruction that aims to indoctrinate Russian soldiers into the Kremlin's justifications for the war in Ukraine. The UK MoD reported that the Russian MoD began issuing the new journal on May 22 and are calling it Politruk.[76] Head of the Russian MoD's Main Military-Political Directorate Colonel General Viktor Goremykin reportedly states in a forward to the journal that the journal will draw heavily from the Soviet legacy of political education publications for military personnel.[77] The UK MoD reported that the journal emphasizes that Russian forces are fighting "Nazis" in Ukraine, casts doubt on the idea of Ukrainian statehood, and promotes other justifications for the full-scale invasion.[78]
Russian Technological Adaptations (Russian objective: Introduce technological innovations to optimize systems for use in Ukraine)
Nothing significant to report.
Ukrainian Defense Industrial Efforts (Ukrainian objective: Develop its defense industrial base to become more self-sufficient in cooperation with US, European, and international partners)
Ukraine's Western partners continue to support Ukraine's war effort. Sweden announced on May 22 a military aid package for Ukraine worth 75 billion Swedish kroner (about $7 billion) over three years.[79] The German government announced on May 22 that German transferred 10 Leopard tanks and 8,500 rounds of 155mm artillery ammunition to Ukraine.[80] Germany also delivered an IRIS-T air defense system to Ukraine on May 24.[81] The UK-led International Fund for Ukraine announced on May 24 a new package worth 150 million GBP (about $191 million) to support Ukraine's air defense and maritime capabilities.[82]
Ukraine's Western partners continue to support the buildup of Ukraine's defense industrial base (DIB). The defense ministers of Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and the Netherlands sent a letter to the European Commission, the EU's common Foreign Service, the European Defense Agency, and other European countries on May 26 outlining the importance of strengthening Ukraine's DIB.[83] The letter called for the creation of long-term and strategic industrial partnerships between Ukrainian and European companies.
Ukraine continues efforts to domestically produce weapons for use on the battlefield. The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense (MoD) stated on May 22 that the Ukrainian MoD registered 13 samples of new weapons and military equipment and adopted one new anti-aircraft missile system model in the past week.[84] Ukrainian Digital Transformation Minister Mykhailo Fedorov and Ukrainian State Security Service (SBU) Head Vasyl Malyuk stated on May 22 and 23 that Ukrainian forces have used "Sea Baby" naval drones equipped with Grad MLRS systems in combat recently.[85]
Activities in Russian-occupied areas (Russian objective: Consolidate administrative control of annexed areas; forcibly integrate Ukrainian citizens into Russian sociocultural, economic, military, and governance systems)
ISW is not publishing coverage of Russian-occupied areas today.
Russian Information Operations and Narratives
The Kremlin continues to use Kremlin-affiliated Ukrainian actors to support information operations to discredit Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the Ukrainian government. Kremlin-affiliated former Ukrainian MP Viktor Medvedchuk stated on May 27 that Ukrainian forces must stop following Zelensky's orders because he lost his legitimacy as Ukraine's president and cannot be Ukraine's Supreme Commander-in-Chief.[86] The Kremlin is currently intensifying information operations alleging that Zelensky is illegitimate following May 20, which would have been the end of Zelensky's first term as president had Russian not launched the full-scale invasion.[87] The Ukrainian law defining martial law, which Ukraine has been under since Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022, clearly states that "conducting elections of the President of Ukraine" is "prohibited in the conditions of martial law."[88] Zelensky's decision to postpone the March 2024 elections is in full accordance with the Ukrainian constitution. Russian officials' focus on Zelensky's presidential term is only the latest talking point in the Kremlin's longstanding effort to discredit Zelensky and label any pro-Western Ukrainian government as illegitimate.[89] Medvedchuk is a key ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin and was rumored to be a candidate for the head of the Russian-controlled Ukrainian government that the Kremlin sought to establish following the envisioned quick regime change in Ukraine in 2022.[90] The Kremlin may be setting informational conditions to eventually declare a Kremlin-backed actor as Ukrainian president instead of Zelensky and will likely increasingly use Kremlin-affiliated actors to further informational efforts to discredit the Ukrainian government.[91]
Russian media is heavily covering ongoing protests in Armenia, likely to present Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan as unpopular and punish him for Armenia's recent efforts to distance itself from Russia. Kremlin newswire TASS published extensive coverage of protests in Yerevan on May 27 calling for Pashinyan's resignation for his decision to transfer control of four border villages in Tavush Province to Azerbaijan in the wake of Armenia's loss of Nagorno-Karabakh.[92] A prominent, Kremlin-awarded Russian milblogger continues to closely follow the protest movement calling for Pashinyan's resignation and frequently spreads information operations accusing Pashinyan of "weakness" and incompetence for ceding territory to Azerbaijan after Russia failed to prevent the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh.[93] Pro-Kremlin actors may amplify reports of discontent or perpetuate ongoing Kremlin information operations alongside Armenian opposition protests to further pressure Pashinyan into mending relations with Russia.
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) announced on May 27 that it will start offering a program for specialists in information warfare from September 1, 2024, and that the Russian presidential administration is supporting the program.[94] The program illustrates that the Kremlin and wider Russian society view information operations as a legitimate and specialized element of statecraft.
Significant activity in Belarus (Russian efforts to increase its military presence in Belarus and further integrate Belarus into Russian-favorable frameworks and Wagner Group activity in Belarus)
Russia deployed fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft to Belarus for joint military exercises with the Belarusian Air Force. The Belarusian Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced on May 27 that the Belarusian Air Force will conduct joint flight exercises with the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) from May 27-31 to improve the unified regional air defense system.[95] The Belarusian MoD stated that Russian VKS army aviation crews and Belarusian aviation, air defense, and radio-technical units will participate in the joint exercises.[96] The Belarusian Haijun project reported that a Russian Mi-24 and Mi-8 helicopter arrived at Baranovichi airfield, Brest Oblast on May 25, which the project described as the first Russian helicopters to deploy to Belarus since August 2023.[97] The Belarusian Haijun project reported on May 27 that Russia deployed eight Mi-24 and Mi-8 helicopters in total to Baranovichi and that at least two Russian Su-24MR reconnaissance aircraft and at least four Su-30SM fighter aircraft are also at the airbase.[98]
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko met with Altai Krai Govenor Viktor Tomenko in Minsk on May 27 to discuss strengthening cooperation in agriculture and other fields.[99] Tomenko met with Gomel Oblast Executive Committee Chairperson Ivan Krupko on May 26 about strengthening cooperation.[100]
Note: ISW does not receive any classified material from any source, uses only publicly available information, and draws extensively on Russian, Ukrainian, and Western reporting and social media as well as commercially available satellite imagery and other geospatial data as the basis for these reports. References to all sources used are provided in the endnotes of each update.
20. Israel–Hamas War (Iran) Update, May 27, 2024
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-may-27-2024
Key Takeaways:
- Iranian Elections: The Iranian supreme leader reportedly appointed his policy adviser, Rear Adm. Ali Shamkhani, in March 2024 to leader nuclear negotiations with the United States. The publication of this information now may be meant to boost Shamkhani’s political position ahead of Iran’s presidential election.
- Iranian Presidential Candidates: Prominent Iranian hardliner Saeed Jalili announced his candidacy for the Iranian presidential elections in June 2024. Iranian journalists reported that several other prominent political figures are planning to run.
- Iranian-backed Militias in Iraq: Several Iranian-backed Iraqi militias are reportedly considering resuming attacks on US forces days after a meeting between Iranian-backed militia leaders from throughout the region and the IRGC in Tehran.
- Northern Gaza Strip: The IDF is fighting three Hamas battalions that are defending Jabalia camp. Two of the battalions were previously “dismantled,” which underscores the requirement for a sustainable political and military end state in the Gaza Strip.
- Israeli Strike in Rafah: An IDF airstrike killed two Hamas officials in Rafah on May 26, but the strike also caused a fire that killed 35 Palestinian civilians.
- Rafah Border Crossing: Israeli and Egyptian forces exchanged small arms fire at the Rafah border crossing.
- Lebanon: A Likud minister said that Israel will conduct a military operation targeting Hezbollah to return displaced residents from northern Israeli if political efforts to stop Hezbollah attacks into northern Israel fail. This statement echoes previous Israeli statements about the possibility of operations into Lebanon.
IRAN UPDATE, MAY 27, 2024
May 27, 2024 - ISW Press
Download the PDF
Iran Update, May 27, 2024
Andie Parry, Annika Ganzeveld, Kitaneh Fitzpatrick, Kathryn Tyson, Kelly Campa, and Brian Carter
Information Cutoff: 2:00pm ET
The Iran Update provides insights into Iranian and Iranian-sponsored activities abroad that undermine regional stability and threaten US forces and interests. It also covers events and trends that affect the stability and decision-making of the Iranian regime. The Critical Threats Project (CTP) at the American Enterprise Institute and the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) provides these updates regularly based on regional events. Click here to see CTP and ISW’s interactive map of Israeli ground operations. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.
CTP-ISW defines the “Axis of Resistance” as the unconventional alliance that Iran has cultivated in the Middle East since the Islamic Republic came to power in 1979. This transnational coalition is comprised of state, semi-state, and non-state actors that cooperate to secure their collective interests. Tehran considers itself to be both part of the alliance and its leader. Iran furnishes these groups with varying levels of financial, military, and political support in exchange for some degree of influence or control over their actions. Some are traditional proxies that are highly responsive to Iranian direction, while others are partners over which Iran exerts more limited influence. Members of the Axis of Resistance are united by their grand strategic objectives, which include eroding and eventually expelling American influence from the Middle East, destroying the Israeli state, or both. Pursuing these objectives and supporting the Axis of Resistance to those ends have become cornerstones of Iranian regional strategy.
We do not report in detail on war crimes because these activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We utterly condemn violations of the laws of armed conflict and the Geneva Conventions and crimes against humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.
Iranian journalists reported that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei appointed his policy adviser, Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani, in March 2024 to lead nuclear negotiations with the United States.[1] The publication of this information could be meant to boost the political standing of Shamkhani ahead of the Iranian presidential election in June 2024. Shamkhani assumed responsibility of negotiations from the Foreign Affairs Ministry, which had led negotiations under the Ebrahim Raisi administration. Shamkhani is a trusted adviser to Khamenei and a seasoned diplomat, who served as secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council from 2013 to 2023.[2] Shamkhani in this capacity played a prominent role in negotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and Iran-Saudi Arabia rapprochement.[3] Khamenei has previously delegated responsibility for international talks to his inner circle, making it unsurprising that Khamenei has involved Shamkhani in nuclear negotiations again. The publication of this news could be meant to position Shamkhani to run for president or receive a position in the next presidential administration by framing him as a capable and trusted diplomat.
Iranian politicians are continuing to maneuver and prepare for the Iranian presidential election in June 2024. Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi announced the official start of Iranian presidential campaign season on May 26.[4] Registration for presidential candidates will open on May 30 and close on June 3. Iran will hold elections on June 28.[5]
Prominent hardliner Saeed Jalili has since announced his candidacy.[6] The Guardian Council—a regime body responsible for reviewing presidential candidates before candidates are permitted to run—previously approved Jalili’s candidacy in the 2013 and 2021 presidential elections, which suggests that the council will likely approve his candidacy in this election. Jalili withdrew from the 2021 race to back Ebrahim Raisi.[7] Jalili’s candidacy is particularly noteworthy following reports from an anti-regime outlet that some Iranian officials warned Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei against allowing Jalili to run. These officials included moderates like Ali Larijani and several hardliners such as Expediency Discernment Council Chairman Sadegh Amoli Larijani, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, and adviser to the supreme leader Rear Adm. Ali Shamkhani.[8]
Jalili currently serves as Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s representative to the SNSC and previously served as the SNSC secretary from 2007 to 2013.[9] Jalili also holds roles within Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council (EDC)—a board that advises Khamenei on policy decisions and mediates conflicts between Parliament and the Guardian Council—and a foreign relations council that advises Khamenei.[10] Jalili’s prominence within the regime suggests that he continues to hold Khamenei's trust. Jalili has criticized the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action for abandoning “a hundred (of Iran’s) inalienable rights.” He has made similar remarks about subsequent nuclear negotiations, making such negotiations less likely under a potential Jalili administration.[11]
Other rumored presidential candidates include:
- Mehrdad Barzpash:[12] Roads and Urban Development Minister in the hardline Raisi administration. Barzpash previously served as a parliamentarian from 2012 to 2016 and was the CEO of well-known Iranian automakers SAIPA and Pars Khodrow.[13]
- Parviz Fattah:[14] Head of the Execution of Imam Khomeini’s Order (EIKO), a parastatal organization directly controlled by the supreme leader. Fattah’s role within the EIKO underscores his loyalty to Khamenei. Loyalty to Khamenei is a critical metric of whether a presidential candidate is permitted to run.[15]
- Ali Larijani:[16] Prominent moderate politician and current EDC member. Larijani formerly served as parliament speaker from 2008 to 2020 and was SNSC Secretary from 2005 to 2007.[17] Khamenei has increasingly marginalized Larijani since 2019 and the Guardian Council notably denied his presidential candidacy in 2021.[18] A freelance journalist claimed on May 26 that Khamenei greenlit Larijani’s candidacy in the upcoming elections and that Larijani‘s team is “assessing the situation.”[19]Approval of Larijani would be noteworthy and may indicate that Khamenei is attempting to make Iranian presidential elections appear politically diverse.
- Mohammad Mokhber:[20] Interim President and hardline member of Raisi’s cabinet. Mokhber formerly served as the EIKO and Mostazafan Foundation head, a separate regime business conglomerate that contributes to regime self-enrichment.
- Ali Reza Zakani:[21] Tehran Mayor and hardline politician. Zakani previously ran in the 2021 presidential elections before withdrawing to support Ebrahim Raisi.[22] The Guardian Council denied Zakani’s candidacy in the 2013 and 2017 election cycles.[23]
Several Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, including Kataib Hezbollah, are reportedly considering resuming attacks targeting US forces.[24] A Lebanese outlet close to Hezbollah reported on May 25 that unspecified sources close to the Iraqi militias said that the militias have “begun reconsidering their agreement with the [Iraqi federal] government to halt their military operations against US military bases.”[25] The sources said that the militias were considering resuming attacks because the militias believe that the Iraqi government is “procrastinating” a decision to remove US forces from Iraq. Senior Iraqi militia leaders met with IRGC Quds Force Commander Brig. Gen. Esmail Ghaani, IRGC Commander Maj. Gen. Hossein Salami, and other Axis of Resistance (AoR) leaders in Tehran on May 23 on the sidelines of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s funeral.[26] Iranian-backed Iraqi militia Harkat Hezbollah al Nujaba’s spokesperson said that the AoR factions at the meeting discussed “collective resolve” to maintain pressure on Israel.[27] The spokesperson highlighted that the meeting on May 23 was part of the Joint Operations Room that Iran founded in summer 2023 to counter the United States and Israel.[28] Iran and its partners have used the Joint Operations to coordinate operations during the current war. It is notable that Iranian-backed groups discussed the war and their military operations two days before the Lebanese report that some Iraqi groups are considering resuming attacks against US forces.
IRGC Quds Force Commander Brig. Gen. Esmail Ghaani ordered Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, including Kataib Hezbollah and Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba, to suspend attacks targeting US forces in January 2024 after a one-way drone attack killed three US personnel in northeastern Jordan.[29] Kataib Hezbollah and Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba “fiercely resisted” Ghaani’s order to stop attacks but ultimately complied.[30]
The Iranian-backed Iraqi militias have not altered their long-standing strategic objective to remove US forces from Iraq and these militias retain the capabilities to resume attacks at any time and for any reason. Iranian-backed Iraqi militias could use Israeli operations in Rafah as an excuse to resume their attack campaign targeting US forces. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq—a coalition of Iranian-backed Iraqi militias—established a joint operations room and claimed its first attack targeting US forces during the Israel-Hamas war on October 18, 2023, one day after the explosion at the al Ahli hospital in the Gaza Strip.[31] The Islamic Resistance in Iraq could similarly use Israeli operations in Rafah to justify resuming attacks targeting US forces.
Iraqi officials are continuing to promote greater cooperation with Russia. Shia cleric Ammar al Hakim met with Russian Ambassador to Iraq Elbrus Kutrashev on May 26 to discuss Iraqi political affairs and stability.[32] Hakim previously called for greater foreign investment in Iraq during a meeting with Kutrashev in late January 2024.[33] The Iraqi federal government granted Russian state-owned oil company Gazprom a contract to develop the Nasiriyah oil field in Dhi Qar Province in early February 2024, days after a member of Hakim’s political party became the governor of Dhi Qar Province.[34]
Iraqi Federal Supreme Court President Jassim Mohammad Abboud and Russian Constitutional Court President Valery Zorkin separately signed a memorandum of understanding in St. Petersburg, Russia, on May 27 to increase judicial cooperation.[35] Iraqi Federal Integrity Commission Chairman Haider Hanoun, who is affiliated with the Badr Organization, and Russian Prosecutor General Igor Krasnov previously signed a memorandum of understanding for anti-corruption coordination and training in February 2024.[36] The Iraqi Federal Integrity Commission is the judicial body responsible for investigating corruption cases and drafting appropriate legislation. CTP-ISW assessed that the Federal Integrity Commission weaponized corruption legislation under Hanoun’s chairmanship to bar candidates from running for office in the Iraqi provincial elections in December 2023.[37]
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) struck and killed two Hamas West Bank senior officials in Tel al Sultan, Rafah on May 26.[38] The strike targeted the Hamas West Bank chief of staff Yassin Rabia and his deputy Khaled Najjar.[39] The IDF said that the Hamas headquarters was “responsible for directing, financing and supporting” militia attacks in the West Bank.[40] Rabia managed all Hamas West Bank militias, directed attacks, and financed operations.[41] Najjar similarly directed small arms attacks against Israeli targets in the West Bank.[42] Both men conducted attacks that killed Israeli soldiers in the early 2000s.[43]
The Tel al Sultan strike caused a fire that also killed 35 Palestinian civilians, according to Palestinian health and civil emergency service officials.[44] An independent IDF body is conducting a review of the strike, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the strike a “tragic mishap.”[45] The IDF acknowledged that the strike caused a fire and injured “a number of non-involved people” but noted that the attack complied with international law.[46] The IDF also said that it had called for Palestinians to evacuate the strike area and that it had not struck inside of the al Mawasi humanitarian zone.[47] The IDF Arabic spokesperson said on May 22 that the “humanitarian services zone” extended to the numbered block where the strike occurred, however.[48] Hamas claimed that the IDF had declared the strike location “a safe area.”[49]
The IDF 98th Division assesses that it is fighting three Hamas battalions in Jabalia camp, which is an indicator of Hamas reconstitution in the northern Gaza Strip.[50] IDF officials previously anticipated that Israeli forces would have to defeat a single Hamas battalion in previously uncleared areas of Jabalia camp, according to Israeli media.[51] The IDF realized as it began operating in Jabalia in mid-May that two additional Hamas battalions had reconstituted and would participate in the defense of Jabalia.[52] The IDF assessed two weeks into the current Jabalia operation that it has dismantled one of three Hamas battalions. Israeli War Cabinet members have said repeatedly that the IDF has “dismantled” all 12 Hamas Battalions in Gaza City and the northern Gaza Strip.[53]
The requirement to re-“dismantle” some Hamas battalions underscores the requirement for a sustainable political and military end state in the Gaza Strip that results in the defeat of Hamas’ military and political wings. The IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi said in mid-May that current Israeli re-clearing operations are a “Sisyphean task” unless the political echelon established a political end state.[54] CTP-ISW has reported extensively on how Hamas and other Palestinian militias have exploited the withdrawal of Israeli forces in the northern Gaza Strip to infiltrate and rebuild their networks there.[55] Hamas infiltrated and began reconstituting itself in the northern Gaza Strip after the Israeli drawdown in the strip that began in December 2023, as CTP-ISW has previously reported.[56]
Israeli and Egyptian forces exchanged small arms fire at the Rafah border crossing on May 27.[57] A spokesperson for Egypt’s military said that a “shooting incident” killed one Egyptian soldier.[58]Unspecified Egyptian and Israeli officials have blamed the opposing side for opening firing first.[59] CTP-ISW cannot verify what prompted the clash. Senior Egyptian and Israeli officials are conducting a joint investigation into the incident.[60] Egypt–Israel relations have been strained over the last several weeks after the IDF began clearing operations in Rafah and seized the Rafah border crossing.[61]
Key Takeaways:
- Iranian Elections: The Iranian supreme leader reportedly appointed his policy adviser, Rear Adm. Ali Shamkhani, in March 2024 to leader nuclear negotiations with the United States. The publication of this information now may be meant to boost Shamkhani’s political position ahead of Iran’s presidential election.
- Iranian Presidential Candidates: Prominent Iranian hardliner Saeed Jalili announced his candidacy for the Iranian presidential elections in June 2024. Iranian journalists reported that several other prominent political figures are planning to run.
- Iranian-backed Militias in Iraq: Several Iranian-backed Iraqi militias are reportedly considering resuming attacks on US forces days after a meeting between Iranian-backed militia leaders from throughout the region and the IRGC in Tehran.
- Northern Gaza Strip: The IDF is fighting three Hamas battalions that are defending Jabalia camp. Two of the battalions were previously “dismantled,” which underscores the requirement for a sustainable political and military end state in the Gaza Strip.
- Israeli Strike in Rafah: An IDF airstrike killed two Hamas officials in Rafah on May 26, but the strike also caused a fire that killed 35 Palestinian civilians.
- Rafah Border Crossing: Israeli and Egyptian forces exchanged small arms fire at the Rafah border crossing.
- Lebanon: A Likud minister said that Israel will conduct a military operation targeting Hezbollah to return displaced residents from northern Israeli if political efforts to stop Hezbollah attacks into northern Israel fail. This statement echoes previous Israeli statements about the possibility of operations into Lebanon.
Gaza Strip
Axis of Resistance objectives:
- Erode the will of the Israeli political establishment and public to sustain clearing operations in the Gaza Strip
- Reestablish Hamas as the governing authority in the Gaza Strip
The IDF 98th Division continued clearing operations in the “heart of Jabalia” on May 27.[62] The IDF 460th Armored Brigade seized a weapons cache in Jabalia based on intelligence from a detained Palestinian fighter.[63] The fighter had previously surrendered to the IDF and an Israeli military intelligence interrogator questioned him.[64] The IDF 460th Brigade have located and destroyed over one hundred Palestinian militia positions, including an improvised explosive device (IED) factory, fighting compounds, and tunnel shafts.[65] The IDF 7th Brigade engaged Palestinian fighters at close range and located mortars, small arms and explosives in eastern Jabalia.[66] The IDF reported that Palestinian fighters fired anti-tank guided missiles from a school in central Jabalia.[67] Several Palestinian militias targeted Israeli forces with mortar, rocket, small arms fire, and rocket-propelled grenades in Jabalia.[68]
The IDF 99th Division continued operations along the Netzarim corridor in southern Gaza City on May 27.[69] The IDF 679th Armored Brigade (Res.) has "significantly damaged” Hamas capabilities in the central Gaza Strip and the Sabra neighborhood and has “deepened [IDF] control” over the areas.[70] The IDF 679th Brigade has operated in Sabra neighborhood since mid-May to kill Palestinian fighters and destroy militia infrastructure above and below ground.[71] The Yahalom engineering unit and 679th Brigade detonated an 800-meter-long, 18-meter-deep tunnel in Sabra.[72] Israeli forces also killed several Palestinian fighters with tank fire along the Netzarim corridor.[73] The IDF Air Force also struck a rocket launcher that Palestinian militias had prepared to fire from the central strip.[74] Several Palestinian militias targeted Israeli forces along the Netzarim corridor and east of Maghazi camp with rocket and mortar fire.[75]
A Palestinian journalist reported that the IDF 162nd Division continued clearing operations in Rafah on May 27. The IDF has not released a summary of the division’s operations in Rafah at the time of writing. A Palestinian journalist reported that Israeli armor remains active in Salam, Geneina, Tanour, Qeshta, and Brazil neighborhoods of eastern Rafah, however.[76] Palestinian militias continued to mortar Israeli forces at Salah Din border crossing on May 27.[77] Palestinian fighters also targeted Israeli forces with IEDs and rocket-propelled grenades in eastern Rafah.[78]
The IDF Air Force struck over 75 targets across the Gaza Strip over the past day, including military buildings and warehouses, rocket launch positions, observation posts, and Palestinian fighter cells.[79] The IDF Air Force struck rocket launchers in Rafah that Hamas used to fire eight rockets at central Israel on May 26.[80]
Palestinian militias have conducted two rocket attacks into Israel since CTP-ISW's data cutoff on May 26. The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DLFP), which is a leftist Palestinian militia aligned with Hamas in the war, targeted an IDF site and an Israeli town near the Gaza Strip.[81]
Recorded reports of attacks; CTP-ISW cannot independently verify impact.
West Bank
Axis of Resistance objectives:
- Establish the West Bank as a viable front against Israel
Israeli forces have engaged Palestinian fighters in at least eight locations in the West Bank since CTP-ISW's last data cutoff on May 26.[82] The al Quds Brigades fired small arms targeting three Israeli settlements near Jenin in the West Bank.[83]
This map is not an exhaustive depiction of clashes and demonstrations in the West Bank.
Southern Lebanon and Golan Heights
Axis of Resistance objectives:
- Deter Israel from conducting a ground operation into Lebanon
- Prepare for an expanded and protracted conflict with Israel in the near term
- Expel the United States from Syria
Iranian-backed militias, including Lebanese Hezbollah, have conducted at least 16 attacks from southern Lebanon into northern Israel since CTP-ISW's last data cutoff on May 26.[84]
The IDF conducted military exercises in northern Israel on May 27 to simulate a potential conflict in Lebanon.[85] The IDF 146th Division and 205th Reserve Armored Brigade participated in a training exercise for rapid deployment in challenging terrain.[86] The IDF also said that the 551st Reserve Brigade is training on the Israel-Lebanon border for operations in difficult terrain “deep in Lebanon.”[87] The IDF withdrew the 551st Brigade from the Gaza Strip in December 2023.[88]
Israeli Minister of Innovation, Science, and Technology and Likud Knesset Member Gila Gamliel said on May 27 that Israel will conduct a military operation targeting Hezbollah to return displaced residents from northern Israeli if political efforts to stop Hezbollah attacks into northern Israel fail.[89] Gamliel added that there is no date for residents to return to the north. Israeli residents protested in mid-May against the Israeli government for its failure to enable northern Israeli residents to return to their homes.[90] Hezbollah attacks have prevented the return of Israelis to northern Israel.
Recorded reports of attacks; CTP-ISW cannot independently verify impact.
Iran and Axis of Resistance
Iranian officials continued to stress that Ebrahim Raisi’s death will not alter its foreign policy calculus. Interim President Mohammad Mokhber emphasized that Iran’s policy of supporting Palestinian militias will not change during a phone call with PIJ Secretary General Ziyad al Nakhalah on May 25.[91] Foreign Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Nasser Kanani echoed Mokhber’s statements in a weekly press conference on May 27.[92] Interim Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Bagheri Kani separately expressed support for Raisi’s neighborhood policy on May 25 and called for expanding relations with Arab nations like Bahrain, Jordan, and Egypt.[93] Mokhber held a call with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman and met with Iraqi President Abdul Latif al Rashid to discuss expanding ties on May 24 and 25th respectively.[94]
Bagheri Kani met with Omani Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad al Busaidi in Tehran on May 27.[95] Busaidi’s visit coincides with reports that Oman facilitated indirect talks between US and Iranian officials in mid-May. These talks reportedly centered on avoiding escalation amid regional attacks.[96]
Iran’s 12th parliament held its inaugural session on May 27.[97] Mokhber gave his first public speech as acting president in the session and praised Raisi’s time in office.[98] Parliament is the primary legislative body in the Iranian regime and it is currently controlled by hardliners, though it is a relatively weak institution in the Iranian political landscape. One of Parliament’s most important roles is selecting a parliament speaker, who will serve ex officio on other more prominent regime policymaking bodies, such as the Supreme National Security Council, Supreme Economic Coordination Council, and Supreme Cultural Revolution Council. Iran’s 12th parliament will select a speaker in the coming days.
Some Iraqi parliamentarians accused acting Parliament Speaker Mohsen al Mandalawi of deliberately obstructing and delaying the election of a new parliament speaker.[99] Mandalawi—a Shia Kurd allied with the Iranian-backed Shia Coordination Framework—has served as parliament speaker since the Iraqi Federal Supreme Court dismissed former speaker Mohammad al Halbousi in November 2023.[100] Mandalawi has remained in the position for over six months despite the fact that the parliament speaker position in Iraq is reserved for Sunnis.[101] Mandalawi adjourned two previous parliament sessions to select a new parliament speaker in January and May 2024 after no candidate attained the 165 votes required to become parliament speaker.[102] A member of the Sovereignty Alliance accused Mandalawi on May 24 of deliberately delaying the election of a new parliament speaker due to his “bias towards one party over another.”[103] The Sovereignty Alliance is headed by US-sanctioned businessman Khamis al Khanjar.[104] The Sovereignty Alliance candidate for speaker, Salem al Issawi, received 158 votes during the May 2024 speaker election, seven votes short of the 165 votes required to become parliament speaker.[105] The Shia Coordination Framework-backed candidate Mahmoud al Mashhadani came in second place with 137 votes.[106]
US Central Command (CENTCOM) intercepted a Houthi one-way attack drone over the Red Sea on May 26.[107] CENTCOM assessed that the drone was targeting merchant vessels in the area.
The Houthis claimed on May 27 five separate attacks targeting vessels in the Indian Ocean and Red Sea on unspecified dates.[108] The Houthis said that they targeted Marshall Islands-flagged tanker Largo Desert and the Panamanian-flagged container ship MSC Mechela in two separate attacks in the Indian Ocean. The Houthi movement also targeted the Liberia-flagged tanker Minerva Lisa in the Red Sea for planning to enter Israeli ports.[109] The Houthis claimed on May 27 that they conducted two attacks targeting two US Navy destroyers in the Red Sea.[110] CTP-ISW cannot verify if or when these attacks occurred.
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
| 
